City Council - Regular Meeting

Okay. Um, the Bend Urban Renewal Agency will meet in executive session pursuant to OS. Listen.

All those in favor? I I And uh we have four groups to accept the proclamation today. Uh from Save Bend Greenspace, we have Robbie Silverman. We have the City of Bend urban forester, Ian Gray. And we have a teacher from Pacific Crest Middle School and the National Junior Honor Society adviser, Jane Shine. And we have students from Pacific Crest Middle School, Dash, Fiona, Kira, and Tyler. I would love Let's see. Can we invite all of them up or Well, we don't have enough chairs.

We don't have enough chairs. If if there was anyone that wanted to make a statement. Yeah, we'll take a picture after we're done with this. But if there was anyone who wanted to say anything in in accepting the proclamation, um, come on up and sit down. Is Is Robbie here? Robbie, you're here. Robbie, you want to say anything or come up to the chair? You know, I know you, but I don't know if wants to make remarks, but why don't you come up, Bobby, and you come on up and we'll start with you, too. Yeah, please go ahead. Oh, okay. Chair,

I would just say the um fortuitously we now have a planting event on the 24th at Pacific Middle School and we have what we have about 60 seventh and eighth graders that plant 31 trees along with some uh residents from the local community. So yeah, really excited to to make that ahead.

All right, I'll be super quick. We have about 150 students at Pacific Restrest that are involved in our National Junior Honor Society. Um, last year they completed over 4,000 community service hours. And so we're really excited to participate with Ian and our school's green team as well. Um, within 24 hours we had 60 volunteers and 12 parent volunteers um, ready to roll. And so we're really excited to participate. Thank you.

All right. Great. Well, um, Save Ben Greenspace is honored to be, uh, part of this Arbor Day proclamation. Um, we are a 501c3 nonprofit that advocates for the protection of green spaces and bend that connect people with each other and nature. Our vision is a bend that balances growth with saving trees and green spaces for the health of our community. As we celebrate Arbor Day this year, we want to take the opportunity to commend city council for enacting Ben's tree protection code, establishing the new urban forestry program, and appointing Ian Gray as our first urban forester. These are all very important steps in helping to achieve that vision of Ben with a thriving tree canopy across all areas of the city. To put it another way, healthy trees, healthy bend, which happens to be the slogan of the volunteer-based community effort to inventory and assess the condition of trees on city property launching this spring. Kudos to you, Ian, for developing and leading this um vital project. Um, I have to take the opportunity also to say um, in the face of all this pro progress um, a huge percentage of Ben's trees are under attack. As council reassesses the protection of juniper trees under the tree code, we ask that you recognize that juniper trees make up most of the tree canopy on the east side of Ben, where major development is slated. If juniper trees are not inventoried for preservation and/or mitigation, Ben risks a dangerous drop in overall tree canopy, one that will be extremely difficult to reverse. So, thank you once again, mayor and counselors, for commemorating Arbor Day and supporting efforts to plant and protect trees in. Thanks, Robbie. All right, can you take a photo?

Yeah, you go right here. Okay. And squeeze in here. Okay. Squeeze in a little bit.

Thank you. Thanks everybody.

All right. Next is our Dark Sky Week proclamation.

Well, great. Thank you. Uh it's it's my honor to uh be doing the dark skies uh proclamation once again this week. Uh particularly this evening when we have four brave astronauts that are that are on their way into those dark skies uh right now. Boy, we wish them uh uh fair solar winds and following uh telemetry, I guess, as they as they go there. Um but yes, I'm'll start out with the uh proclamation. We'll have some folks come up afterwards. So um whereas international dark sky week is observed in April on the week of the new moon and the experience of standing beneath the starry sky and night inspires feelings of wonder and awe and encourages stewardship of our shared environment and our magnificent skies and the dark skies are an integral aspect of the sustainability of Oregon's wild ecos ecosystems as a key environmental factor in bird migration, insect pollination, and human sleep patterns and Oregon's dark skies are a significant natural resource with seven accredited international dark sky places to date. Sun River, Pineville Reservoir State Park, Oregon Caves National Monument, City of Antelopee, Oregon Outback Sanctuary, the Cottonwood Canyon State Park, this and the city of Sisters. And the eastern Oregon holds the world's largest dark sky sanctuary and an area of the largest pristine night sky in the contiguous 48 states. And astroourism, including stargazing, astronomy, star parties, and dark sky photography is an evolving facet of outdoor recreation with real economic benefits for communities across Oregon and which promotes the mitigation of light pollution. Now therefore, the city council of Bend, Oregon, does hereby proclaim April 13th to the 20th, 2026 to be International Dark Sky Week in Bend,

Oregon, and encourage all Oregonians to join in this observance. I move acceptance of the proclamation. Second by Council Riley, second by Council Mendes. All those in favor? I.

Well, great. and and we've got some folks that that are going to be able to come up and and talk a little bit out about this. We've got Brandon Matthews and Janine Dagustinino from Dark Skies, Oregon here. And is Taylor here? Mchuan here. Yeah, Taylor as well. I thought maybe you could talk about the field when you come up there as well. So, so Taylor Mchuan from the Bend Elks. So, uh yeah, come on up. Come on up. Can you put the all field slide up? So, Taylor, can you tell us a little bit about what we're looking at right now?

Yeah, so those are uh two aerial views u to the drone of the stadium um at night. The one on the left is the before and then the one is after. Um it's kind of hard to notice at first, but the more you stare at it, you can kind of see the difference um especially in the light overspill in the roads um on the other side because we are inside of a neighborhood practically. Um and that practically um brought down the light over spill to zero. Um and it was quite substantial um all around the stadium down Roosevelt, down Fifth and down Wilson. Um so that's um helped the neighbors a lot um with lights during their um anytime they're in use. And then also on flip side of that on the field as well, made it a lot brighter. Um they're LED lights and they're more efficient. Um, I think it's about 60% more efficient in terms of energy and um, just a lot safer for all the community members using the fields, especially with our team and other like little leagues and high school teams, too.

Great. Thank you. Thank you for that. Just happened to be happening during this time. So, thanks very much for going through that process, Taylor. Go ahead, Brandon.

Yep. Uh, I'd like to thank the city of Bend and this council for recognizing dark skies as something worth protecting. Uh, this kind of official recognition matters and helps to establish precedent for central Oregon and beyond. Most people alive have never seen the Milky Way from where they live. Light pollution has quietly erased something humans have looked up to for all of our history. And this is not only a human loss. Harsh artificial lighting disrupts wildlife migration, nesting, and feeding patterns. Affecting the very ecosystems that make central Oregon such a special place. Responsible lighting isn't about living in pitch black. It's about being intentional and prudent. This means shielding lights downward, lighting only what needs to be lit, and most importantly, using warmer toned lighting. The Midnight Sky Alliance is dedicated to helping promote these ideas of responsible lighting in order to protect a wonderful and unique natural resource. We are a fledgling group that is looking to collaborate with government and local businesses to advocate for these responsible lighting practices. And to that end, this proclamation means a great deal to the community. But this proclamation is only the beginning. We hope that this is the start of Bend and all of central Oregon becoming a place where residents can step outside on a clear night, look up and see what humans have always seen, a sky full of stars. Thank you.

Thank you. You take a quick picture. Now

good good.

Okay. the official one. The official one, right? Thank you.

All right. So that will bring us into our council action and reports. Um there was one letter that um has been put together based on a template that was forwarded to council all to support um the bend total lake wildlife passage proposal. Just wanted to officially get council's head nods on that and we'll get that submitted. Okay. Um and then we're into council reports. Councelor Frenzo.

Thanks. Um not too many meetings, official meetings in the past two weeks, but um lots of conversations including with the Old Bend neighborhood and the Southern Crossing neighborhood um and also some conversations with folks who are invested in the core area urban renewal area um and eager to work with the city to um get that plan moving. So that's all I have. Council Mendes.

Uh yes, thank you. On uh March 26th, the city of Bend Accessibility Advisory Committee met to approve their draft work plan. This is a committee that is very ambitious. It's two-year work plan and they have plans to members are participating in all kinds of events across the city, uh film festivals, lunches, um other exhibitions and um it's uh they're very ambitious and it's I think it's fantastic. Um the Bend Metropolitan Planning Organization Policy Board met uh yesterday an irregularly scheduled um off cycle meeting to accommodate uh schedules and uh basically just covered normal business updates um to the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Plan and other um unified working plan. I forget what it I forget the acronym so excuse me but uh it was a it was a busy meeting.

Okay, so many and that's all. Okay, council ready

and Q I I unfortunately missed the MO meeting yesterday and I thought I was going to get um like hazed but you didn't do it so you have to be quiet now. Um, so I wanted to express um, gratitude for people who organized the No Kings rally this past weekend um, for just for making that happen and for the thousands of people who showed up and for having a peaceful event here in downtown Ben. Um, and at Drake Park, I attended an Edco pub talk at OpenSpace. Um, and those are always great opportunities to just engage with the business community, meet some new folks, and hear a whole bunch of business stories about what people are doing in the community, both big and small. And I just wanted to give a shout out to um Amy Stall at Matius T. She's the founder there and her talk was just super inspirational for me personally and I think for many in the audience around her company's commitment to a triple bottom line and how she's making that happen right here in Bend, Oregon. Um so it was just really inspiring. And then I know the mayor is going to talk a lot more about this, but I just wanted to acknowledge the passing of Warm Springs Chief Delvis Heath Senior um earlier this week. Um, and I wanted to just let him and his people know, his family and the and the rest of the members of the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, that they're in my thoughts right now um, with his passing.

Thank you. All right. Um, Councelor Norris. Yeah, I attended the city club um, meeting last week, which is always a it's a great organization, just really good dialogue, always interesting issues. Um it was on the mapping process for the Dutes uh county commission and our mayor was on the panel. She did a great job. Thank you.

Um and standing up for Bend and um just appreciated those that conversation. And then I attended a League of Training on community engagement. So it was just interesting to hear from different cities across Oregon and how they're engaging in their community and showing up and um swapping stories and just uh learning different ways to engage. It's very informative. That's it. Great. Councelor Flatt,

spring break was last week for the teachers in the crowd. So, that was that was nice. Um, I did go to the affordable housing advisory uh committee and I tell you, I'm just always amazed at what our committees are doing uh for us. And here was another example of just working hard to get community development brock grants uh out in a in a really meaningful way to get food to food banks to just get uh to get access and and resources to folks here locally. So I really appreciate what they're doing and all the folks who are involved uh and contributing to their city on a purely volunteer basis. And that's it.

Great. Thank you. Um all right, a few things to announce on my end. Um the committee applications are open if you want to try to join a city committee. We have um some openings. Some of them are a little limited but you may qualify but um affordable housing advisory committee um the Ben economic development advisory committee the accessible advisory committee that council men just uh mentioned and the human rights and equity commission all have openings so anyone who's interested can go to our website to find out more there. You can apply up through the end of this month. Um I had sent a note to council that I'd like to do our flower basket sponsorship for DBBA again. and just want to make sure that's okay with everyone and we'll get that done. Okay, seeing head nods. Um I had a request um from um someone who works with our National Guard to just recognize and make a statement that April is the month of the military child and that is just um a recognition of the the the families and especially the children of our members of our military and what they go through. Steve is nodding his head. Um, so they are um encouraging people to um participate in Purple Update, which is a statewide event to visibly show support by wearing purple on April 9th, 2026. Um, they have an actual teen panel of teens that are military children that are part of the organization with the National Guard. Um, and the quote from this particular teen, whose name was Grace, was, "Here in Oregon, we don't really have a military base. So military kids and teens don't often have as much of a voice or get as much recognition. this day is a way to honor and celebrate military kids and show support for the difficult experiences they've been through. Um so, um just wanted to mention that. And then I also wanted to mention there's a lot of stuff that goes on this time of year, but um some important important things. Um yesterday was transgender day of visibility, which I'm going to read a little information that's from the um GLAD website about that. It is a day to raise awareness about transgender people. is a day to celebrate the lives and contributions of trans people while also drawing attention to the disproportionate levels of poverty, discrimination, and violence that they face compared to

non-transgender people. Um, this day was created in 2010 by trans advocate Rachelrandle. Crannle, the head of transgender Michigan, created the day in response to the overwhelming majority of media stories about transgender people that were focused on violence. She hoped to create a day where people could celebrate the lives of transgender people while simultaneously acknowledging that due to discrimination, not every trans person can or wants to be visible. Um so with the increasing um attacks on our trans community across the country, um I just want to make sure that we are saying to our trans community, we see you. Um we value your important part of this community and um we hope that if you are um able that you can be visible and be yourself in Bend. Um, finally, as um, Councelor Riley mentioned, um, we want to send our condolences to the Warm Springs Tribes on the passing of Chief Delvis Heath, Senior. Um, he died Sunday and he was, uh, buried at Sunrise this morning. He was 87. I'm going to read some information from an OPB article about him. As chief, he played an important dual role to uphold and remind members of his tribe of their traditional ways and values and to educate the outside world what it meant to be a sovereign nation. Um, Heath was instrumental in helping the outside world, including politicians in Salem, understand the Treaty of 1855 and what it meant to be a sovereign nation. The treaty created the Warmstreams Reservation on a small portion of what would have been the trib's 10 million acre territory. Oregon became a state three years later using that land. In his early days as chief, Heath became friends with Republican Governor Vicata and later Democratic Governor Ted Kulangovski. On one trip to Salem in the 1990s, Heath told the Oregonian he was visiting the state capital for a straightforward reason, to remind people, we are a nation within a nation. Kulangowski remembered Heath on Tuesday as someone who wanted to make sure the state understood what it meant to be sovereign, that the tribes have their own government, judges, court systems, and are independent of state government. He educated all of us. Kungosowski said, "He educated me." So, there's more information in that article on OPB if people want to learn more about the

chief. Um the the tribal chiefs um serve for life. So he's been serving for quite a long time and it will be um difficult to fill his shoes. I know um we are still with have our relationship with the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs and are working on when our next joint meeting will be. Um but just wanted to acknowledge that and if folks see the flags at half mass today, that is why. So acknowledge the passing of uh the Warm Springs Chief. Okay. Uh I think that's all I have for tonight. So we will move into our visitor sections. We have one person online and a few people in person. Um so we'll start with our online person. We can get that set up. This is the time to talk to council directly about the issues. Um please address council as a body and not as individuals. Please keep comments respectful and non-disruptive so that we um don't have to ask you to stop or leave if we become disruptive. I don't think we'll have any issues with that tonight. So we've got Jonathan Westerlin online. So we'll get that set up and then he can kick us off. then you can unmute.

I'm not on the Zoom actually, so I can't see if he's

Good evening, mayor and counselors. Uh, for the record, my name is Jonathan West Morland, and uh, I hope after my last public comment, you guys see me as an ally and not an adversary. Earlier today, I sent you four related documents. the latest issues of signals and safeguards, a proposed BIN surveillance procurement framework, a companion memo, and a staff tools appendix. I'm not asking you to adopt these materials tonight. I'm asking for a practical first step. At the last public contract subcommittee meeting, one of the slides stated that the purpose of the public procurement is to foster public trust, fairness, honesty, and best value. I think that's exactly why these materials deserve staff review. At a neighborhood district meeting last month, the city emphasized that Ben plans decades ahead for growth, land use, transportation, sewer, and water. I would like to see that same long range thinking applied to privacy and surveillance, too, because those decisions also shape the future Bend is building for residents. Because the public contracts committee meets on April 10th and does not meet very often, I'm asking you to direct staff to review these materials in advance and begin a discussion there about whether BIN should develop a more consistent surveillance procurement framework. My request is simple. Please have staff review the documents I sent this morning and start the conversation on April 10th. Thank you.

Thank you, Jonathan. All right, we will go to um in person comment next. So, you can come on when I call your name, come on up to the chair here and start by telling us your name and whether you live in the city of Ben. And then you'll have two minutes to give your comment. We'll get the timer up here, which is this big box here. It will flash yellow at you when you have about 30 seconds left. Um so, keep an eye on that and we'll start with Ben Leech. Great.

Come on up. Um, uh, my name is Ben Leech and I split time between Walaw Wala and Bend with hopes of moving here full-time in the future. Um, but I own a small business down on Wall Street um, called Cascade Cotton. It's a old t-shirt shop. Um, and I sorry it's very personal. This has nothing to do with any I waste I'm wasting all your time. I apologize, but we want to hear it. Go ahead. I have two water manes into my very small business. And I might be the only person that has to suffer from this because the building used to be split,

but it's been combined into one building for like 40 plus years at least through the three businesses I could talk to before me. I called the city water department. They said there's no way we can combine your bill. It seems ridiculous. I'm paying for 40 cents worth of water on my last bill. I'm paying $157. So, like the bar Rio next to me that uses a hundred times the water I use, I I have four girls who go to the bathroom and wash their hands once a day. Um, so I mean, just on this one bill alone, it's like $1,885 a year that I'm paying more than other people. And the the city engineer, uh, I think his name is Mike. I apologize. He said, "You got to go to city council. They're the only ones that can untie my hands and combine your two bills. So, you're paying one sewer fee because you're not using it, but just simply because we have two meters. The other option is for me to remove the meter, but that's unsafe for the 6 to 12t line that would be going to the meter. So, I have to dig up the road all the way back to the city water man and put a copper plug in there. So, we're talking about closing down part of Main Street for 40 cents worth of water each month. and he's like, "If you could just get the city council, they're the only ones that can change the policy for me to be able to change your bill." Um, so I don't know if I'm doing that right here or if that's something in private I can write you guys. I don't know how to do that.

Well, I think our city manager can probably Yeah. So, can I I'm our public works director is here. So, I'm going to ask the talk with you out in the hall and see if we can give a little more information and see what we can do. I just we probably need a little more information than we have. Okay. Totally cool. He just said you got to talk with city councils. That's okay. You're on the right track. We'll get we'll get some more information and we'll see what we can bring down the hall and I'll see if we can Yeah. Awesome. Thank you guys. Appreciate it. All right. Next is Brennan Breen.

Excellent. Staff, thank you for the opportunity to comment. Also, thank you for the breadth of work that you do. I appreciate public service. Um, as you know, I'm an organizer with Energized Ben and a chemical engineer in the RNG industry. I just wanted to make two quick points about the round table coming up next week on the climate impact fee. First, please don't carve out any exemptions for RNG. Just from my time working in the industry, I don't see any way that Cascade could make a cost-effective program for rate payers uh for RNG exemptions. The public utility commission finds that Cascade has quote insufficient assumptions about the cost of RNG. The city should align with our public utility commission, our state energy strategy, and with just the entire lowcarbon fuel market, save RNG for the hard to decarbonize sectors. We don't have a lot of it. We shouldn't be using it in buildings. Second, ask, implement the policy starting in April 2027. That would be aligned with our building code update, which is already pushing builders towards heat pump adoption whenever they're putting AC in new houses, which frankly we we need in central Oregon. Um, this policy is the biggest opportunity for Ben to reduce greenhouse gas pollution. Um, we we didn't have a winter this year. We had the worst snow drought of any western state. There is a significant opportunity cost to any more waiting. Um, staff's recommendation to push out implementation another 20 months based on speculation about the next legislative session. um and speculation about how Pacific or RFP process is going to pan out. In my opinion, is not a sound basis to make policy decisions on. Um so again, we we can't afford to wait anymore. Try something you're building in checkpoints to update the policy. Rely on that, but don't keep pushing out. We we can't kick the bucket anymore. Thank you.

Thanks, Brandon. All right, Priscilla. Good evening, council and staff. I am Priscilla, a she her pronouns. I'm a Ben resident and the events and outreach manager at the environmental center. I work in the environmental center in the environmental center space to serve my community. It is always easier for people to sit back and say it's not my problem. But we need people to have community and connections to the place that we all live, work, and play. You all have the opportunity to help protect this community with a climate impact fee. New residential buildings are the best opportunity that Ben has today to make progress on climate and ensure clean, affordable energy. I have two requests for you as you go into conversations next week at your round table. do not carve out any exemptions from the policy. We need strong climate action and can't afford for the impact fee to get any weaker. Number two, implement the fee starting in April 2027 to align with the latest building code update. Thank you, Christy Milum. Hi, Mayor Keebler and counselors and staff. Thank you for the opportunity to comment today. My name is Christine Melm. I'm a Ben resident and I'm urging you to pass a strong climate impact fee as soon as possible. Um I'm concerned that the current proposal has been watered down at a time when federal climate protections are being rolled back. Um, local leadership matters more than ever right now. Um, this is a moment for courage, not compromise. Um,

in Ben buildings account for about half of our carbon emissions. Um, transitioning to all electric homes is one of the most impactful steps we can take. It also helps lower cost for residents over time. Um, a stronger climate impact fee is a practical first step and we can also generate revenue to support energy efficiency and a more equitable transition. As a young person, I really feel the weight of what's ahead. All fires smoke summers extreme heat a snowless winter um are really shaping our lives. I care deeply about this place and its rivers, forest, mountains, and community. And I want future generations to be able to thrive here, too. um a 20% fee just isn't enough to meet this moment. Please take meaningful action and pass a strong policy without delay. Thank you.

Thank you, Chissy. All right, that concludes our public comment for this evening. Thanks everyone for coming in to give us your comments. That will move us on to the consent agenda. I move to approve the consent agenda. Second. Right. Move by council Norris, second by council. All in favor? I um Okay. Before we get into the meat of our agenda, I did want to ask council's consent to just move one item around. Um council Norris has to make some recusals tonight. So we're trying to combine um have item 12 just move up a little bit to be right after item nine. It would just be in change of the order. So unless anyone has a problem with that, we'll go ahead and do that. Okay. So item 11 too or just 12?

Just just 12 needs to move up to under item nine because you're recused on both 10 and 11. Okay. All right. So that will um get us to items five, six, and seven. Why don't you go ahead, council Norris, before we read the captions. Okay. I am going to be recusing on items five through eight because I am an employee of Hayden Holmes and these items would have a financial impact on my employer. So I'll be leaving the dis.

All right. Thank you. And then Ashley, if you want to read, we're going to do five, six, and seven together. This is a quasi judicial public hearing and first reading of an ordinance to amend vend comprehensive plan policies pertaining to the Stevens Road fact urban growth boundary expansion area. This is a quasi judicial public hearing and first reading of an ordinance to amend the bend development code chapter 2.7 special planned districts refinement plan area plans and master plans to create legacy village planned development an approximately 260 acre major community master plan. And this is a quasi judicial public hearing and first reading of an ordinance to NX265.7 acres of land in Stevens Road tract urban growth growth boundary expansion area. All right. So I'm going to open the public hearing for items five, six, and seven and turn it over to Ian. Okay. U I'm going to read uh a procedural statement that is going to apply to all three of these items. We're going to do one combined public hearing. Um the first element of the process is to give decision makers an opportunity to declare any exarty contacts or site visits related to these applications. Council plat.

Yes. U part of my part of my role just getting up to speed on the council since I've since I've got on I've and learning more about the home building industry in the city. I've spent time talking with most of the major builders uh in the in the city um and and talked about the challenges of of of building um in our city specifically with Hayden Holmes. The conversations that I've had have revolved around what's the impact of a tree code on building generically? What's the impact of our proposed electrification fee generically on on building homes? how hard is it in fact to get commercial um into neighborhoods? And so I' I've leaned on them and other builders as expertise. I still feel as though I can be very um uh uh um non-biased in this discussion, but I want to acknowledge that I've had those discussions with Hayden Holmes.

Thank you. Sounds like these were general conversations and not about these particular applications. That's correct.

Okay. Anything else? Seeing none, does anyone have any actual or potential conflicts of interest or other personal interests that would interfere with the ability to serve as an impartial decision maker in any of these items? Seeing shaking of heads, hearing none, is there anyone present who wishes to challenge uh any of the decision makers on the basis of bias or personal interest? Looking around the room, seeing a few shaking heads, hearing no challenges. Uh the next step is to read a statement explaining state law. All testimony, argument, and evidence must be directed to the applicable criteria in the Ben Development Code and comprehensive plan that the party believes are applicable to this matter. The failure to raise an issue with sufficient specificity for the decision maker or other parties to respond to the issue will preclude an appeal to the land use court of appeals on that issue. The failure of the applicant to raise a constitutional issue or other issue regarding a condition of approval with sufficient specificity to allow the decision maker or other parties to respond to that issue will preclude a claim for damages in certain court related to that issue or condition. Then finally, if prior to the end of the public hearing tonight, any party requests additional time to present testimony, argument, or evidence, the decision, or that's the council, may allow either a continuence or additional time in its discretion for parties to submit additional testimony, argument for evidence to the record or to resume a continued hearing at a date certain. That's it.

Thank you. So, how this is going to go is we're going to have a presentation from staff. We're going to have a presentation from the applicant. Um, I am going to be a little more formal tonight. I'd like folks on the DAS to raise your hand um and be acknowledged before speaking so we're not having too much cross talk and we are being very clear on the record. We are um going to askformational questions during these presentations. Let's avoid deliberation until we get to that point. We also have to take public comment if there is any. I will tell people there's nobody signed up at the moment, but just in case there is, we will ask for that as we get done with the presentations. So we will start with um you Karen.

Yep. So there, as Ian mentioned, this is one public hearing, but there are three applications that require three separate motions. Uh we have in front of us tonight, um for the Stevens Road Track property, a comprehensive plan text amendment, a master plan, and an annexation. So, uh, the background on this property, uh, it, as I mentioned, was mentioned was, um, labeled the Stevens Road Track property by the Department of State Lands. Uh, and that is what all the submittal, uh, information is in the record. Uh, right before the planning commission uh, hearing, the applicant renamed this area Legacy Village. So, all the adopting um, documents have the name uh, Legacy Village in it. This property is immediately east of Stevens Ranch. Um it is approximately 260 acres. Um and it is um on the edge of the urban both growth boundary with the not landfill to the south. This property was acquired by the state of Oregon um from the Federal Bureau of Land Management, BLM, in the 1990s and managed by the Department of State Lands to benefit the state's common school fund. In 2021, the Oregon Legislature passed House Bill 3318 specifically for this property to allow the city of Ben to expand um our urban growth boundary with very specific requirements. uh that there was a minimum residential density and all of these I'll get into in future slides, a housing mix um that exceeds the proportions in the city housing needs analysis. Um a minimum acreage for affordable housing and development of concept plan and subsequent comprehensive plan policies. Uh so those housing requirements that I mentioned uh that there it must exceed an overall

density of nine units per gross residential acres uh which is the highest um in any community master plan in Bend. Uh the housing best mix must exceed the uh needs in the 2016 housing needs analysis which is uh 10% of the units um housing units must be town homes and 35% of those units must be duplex, triplex, quadplex or multi-unit or apartment style um units. And uh that 2016 housing needs analysis um update is underway by the growth management um uh division. But um the this data is um based on that 2016 analysis. House Bill 3318 also had very specific housing uh affordable housing requirements. At least 20 acres of the residential land must be for deed restricted affordable housing and broken down as such. 12 of the acres must be available for up to for households earning up to 60% of the area median income. Six acres must be available for up to 80% of the area median income. And two acres within um the area available that that 80% of those units must be affordable uh for for up to 80% of the area median income. And those 20 acres would be conveyed to the city to then go forth um with the process of how that would be developed in the um the tracks that are available for 80% um area median income priority would be given to households and at least with in which at least one individual is employed by education provider to the extent permitted by the law under the power housing laws. Uh so back in uh so the this house bill 3318 and hold on one second we have a

question just go back I just want to make sure let me just to confirm this so the process that went through this because this happened some of this happened before I joined the council these basic criteria were um adopted into our code through the steps that we had to go through defined in the law right so they become part of the criteria that we're using tonight to evaluate if the applicant meets the criteria or not okay good yep I'm getting to So these are straight straight comm the law itself. Yeah.

Um and then subsequently um in 2022 the next year um as directed by the state law uh the city developed a concept plan for this property. It um hired a consultant to evaluate site conditions um looked at land needs and a market analysis particularly for the commercial areas. um engaged the public in a process that developed certain uh guiding principles um and developed three alternative con concepts which varied by unit count, the housing mix, how much commercial land and the open space uh or park size. Um then of those three um one was selected um and uh then I believe um I think only the mayor was um on council at that time. um in terms of who's here tonight. Uh and so um this was adopted by resolution and um it did include a graphical representation of how that um how that concept plan uh the preferred alternative looked like. It involved uh 2,487 total dwelling units of include medium and high density along the community park in the central area. uh um also along Wilderness Way that east west collector street and near Stevens Road to the north. It included multiple areas of market rate high density housing um specifically 5 acres of main street commercial on wilderness way, an additional seven acres of mixed employment um land destinations at the south end and a large uh community park. Um and so then um these were all uh preliminary locations um and a graphical representation of that concept plan. So

then the f following year was actually adopted by the council in 2023 and we had a few more council members on um who were aware of this. Uh so that all of that um once the concept plan was adopted or approved by the department of land and community conservation development um because we kind of had to do check-ins with the state along the way. Um the next step was to develop comprehensive plan policies. Those specific numerical requirements that I just mentioned directly from House Bill 3318 were incorporated into specific comprehensive p plan policies with the city. uh the uh language from the bill that required areas designated for adequate employment lands. Based on that market analysis um that um was shown to be 5 acres of commercial and 7 acres of mixed employment um land uh based on um that specific policy 160. The language in 383, House Bill 3318 that um required areas designated for recreational and open space was reflected in the policy that required 39 acres of recreational and open space designated uh public facilities specifically that included a community park. Um the bill also required that there's adequate infrastructure to support walking and biking which is reflected in the two policies that required seven acres of trail corridors and a green green loop of multi-use trails around the perimeter and a centrally located path. Um and then just a few more from the bill. um required land use regulations that comply with applicable wildfire planning and development. Um and that uh policy um required that the master plan must

show that wildfire risk can be mitigated which was fulfilled with the applicant submitt of um uh homeowners um HOA uh CCNRs um which are very reflective of um uh the um existing um rules and regulations that the city is looking at both for building and for landscaping. And finally, adequate capacity for sewer analysis which is very standard for our own process um which requires a sewer analysis and um in this case coordination with a water company. So just to give a big um timeline of everything that I just discussed again we started back in 2021 adoption of House Bill 3318. We adopted the concept plan in June 2022. in in 2023 uh this property was added to the urban growth boundary. Uh the following February that compens uh policy um all those policies were added um as well as the com plan map designations. Um, and then in September, the Department of State Lands selected Hayden Holmes to purchase the site. And in November, Hayden Homes submitted these three applications. And we're here this spring with these birds. And again, Department of Land Conservation and Development, DLCD, um, approved the concept plan and the subsequent conference of plan, text, and policy amendments along the way. and uh we have been in u contact um with them with all of these legislative steps. So to first um uh the first of these applications is a conference of plan policy amendments and I'm bringing these forth first because the master plan is based on the adoption of these comprehensive plan policy amendments. The first is uh it would remove that con uh concept plan image that I shared

earlier um and references to that concept plan because that is a basically old representation. We now have the master plan submitted by the applicant. And so then the next one is um an amendment to allow flexibility in the location of affordable housing. Um there were several um in this concept plan uh restrictions on uh uh um adjacency to the park and the commercial areas. Um but also there needs to be distribution of these affordable housing areas. And so in order to work allow all of those concepts to work together, um it does um a conference of plan policy amendment is proposed to allow um affordable law housing within one half mile instead of one quarter mile of the commercial land or wilderness way and that but um multi-use path that connects to the community park because that was really key in that public engagement process that the affordable housing part parcels could um partake partake in that um enjoyment of that park. And so all of those would have a multi-use path connection to that park. And then um the more numerical uh amendment to one of the policies is um well, first I'll kind of start with the overall policy. The overall policy, as I mentioned, um required that minimum number, 2,487 units. It also then broke it down to how many acres we got in each residential designation and then how many units within each of those zones. And so all of that will remain the same. The the overall number of the units, the overall um number of acres um with each in each of those zones, the amendment acorage for affordable housing, everything remains the same. But the part of that policy that's changing uh

or is proposed to be amended is reducing the market rate dwelling units um from 480 to 300 in those 12 acres of uh RH um designated lands for market rate housing. All of the requirements in that policy would remain the same. Uh the um the amendment to the policy 11158. Um it currently requires 18 acres of affordable housing within the RH zone. And it says each of them must be six acres. And this um amendment would allow some flexibility. There would still be one lot six acres in size. The others would be 2 and a half to 10 acres in size um to allow some different potential layouts um and um flexibility and development. But again the overall acreage would remain the same. And so this is the um the uh criteria for these comprehensive plan um policy amendments. Uh and you'll see um all of these applications have very consistent or or or similar um criteria. First it's consistent with the statewide planning goals as you'll see in the um in the staff report. uh that it's consistent with applicable comprehensive plan policies and yes, these are our conference of plan policy amendments, but that it's consistent otherwise with all of the other policies. Uh that there's adequate public facilities concurrent with development and that kind of goes with the um concurrent master plan that there's evidence of change in neighborhood or community or misty in the planning um regarding the property. Part of this is again this was a visual representation back in 2022. Um and things have been fine-tuned over time in terms of utility availability and um topography and everything else.

And so um there's obviously some moving around of some designations. Um there was uh in terms of just mapping variability um the acreage slightly changed but it was the composite plan policies are the dictating factor in terms of the number of acres. Um and then consistent with the uh transportation planning rule and again this kind of goes more with the master plan and the annexation and I'll get to that in a moment. So again the master plan is now called legacy village. that will include um that minimum 2487 units. Uh as you may recall 10% of those housing units must be town homes and um the applicant is using 11%. Uh there is um a requirement for 35% of um those uh the overall housing units to be plexes or multi-unit um uh residential units. and um that the applicant is proposing 58%. Um there as you remember before there's 20 acres um that are required by House Bill 3318 that must be uh for ordeed restrictive affordable housing and the applicant is proposing almost 24. It's 23.8 um acres. Um so there's 3.8 eight acres more than required um in this proposal than is required in the house bill. Um there is uh um I the master plan includes 39.5 acres of permanent open space um which includes a 23 acre community park. This was developed in tandem with the with the Ben Parks and Recreation District in terms of the size that they needed as well as the location. Um it includes 10 acres um of uh trail um align with the BPRD high

desert trail alignment along the western boundary and 6.5 acres of additional open space throughout the community resulting in this graphical representation um and you can see along the left boundary um the pink line is that um trail system and then there's also trails along each of the arterial roadways Stevens road, Ward Road, and Ferguson Road, as well as Wilderness Way that cuts east west um and as well as a local street that bisects the property north south local street. Um this uh this middle um north south multi-use pathway connects all of those uh uh affordable housing um parcels to the uh central uh park as well as the central main street area. The areas outlined in dashed blue are the um 23.8 8 acres of um affordable housing um that will be conveyed to the city. Um this also includes Thank you. This also includes um uh that five acres um in pink that you see just north of Wilderness Way uh for commercial lands and then the purple um that's in this north of Wilderness Way near Ward Road as well as near Ferguson Road for mixed employment. And that's the seven acres that are required by um the policies. Um and then that the lighter green that you see will be um uh platted open space. Um that will be um managed by a homeowners association. Uh this is the street circulation plan. As I mentioned, there's three arterials bounding this uh property as well as essentially a collector street um

through the middle Wilderness Way and then kind of a um enhanced uh local street um north south um and so um and then all the local streets within there are some off-site transportation re improvements um uh working with ODOT there is an off-site um requirement on Highway 20 and Ward Road or Hamry road um in terms of adding some capacity to that roundabout. Um uh providing a contribution for uh in intersection improvements um to the county for uh Ward Road and Bear Creek Road. um expansions of uh the Wilderness Way roundabout that was currently constructed and then also the 27th and Ferguson Road roundabout that is currently in design um by the developer of Stevens Ranch and uh then there was um is also going to be a movement restriction at Reed Market and Pedigrew Road. Um, in terms of immediately abuing the site or as part of this development, there will be a roundabout at the intersection of Stevens Road and Ward Road and dedication of right of way for future um a roundabout at Wilderness Way and Ward Road and Ferguson Road and Ward Road. But those two last two um would not be the construction of those roundabouts at this time because they're not warranted at yet. So the um master plan approval criteria requires a consistency with relevant statewide planning goals addressed in the planning um or in the staff report um that is consistent with the Ben conference of plan map. Again this uh rearranged the placeholder designations but keeps with the um acreage requirements in the policies. Um that is consistent with the relevant policies in chapter 11 as amended by that previous application. um that there's adequate wa

sewer and water capacity with development. Um and uh there was a utility analysis memo or analysis submitted by the applicant with a subsequent met memo written to the file for um by the city um in terms of sewer capacity and working with Avon on water capacity and the applicants can speak more to those um conversations. Uh and then finally um compliance with the um the transportation analysis requirements in the code. Um and this um results in the transportation mitigation table that is in the um legacy village master plan code uh uh which is exhibit A of that um that application um ordinance. The there are al also are community master plan standards um that um all properties must have um access to commercial goods and services within one half mile um and um that includes the areas designated um general commercial and mixed employment and all of the properties are within a half mile of that um central main street commercial area um not including either of the me zones but we're also including those as well And so um this is definitely um met the standard is definitely met. Uh there's multimodal connections um including bike lanes, trails, and paths. Um the bike lanes uh on each of those arterios um the multi-use paths along each of those arterials as well as um wilderness way, the major trail offsite trail along the western boundary. Um which provides that green loop of multi-use paths that are required by um the policies. And then um for the housing density mix um this is superseded by the comprehensive plan policies um for this

property which as I mentioned was 10% town homes and 35% either milit housing or multi-unit development which they are exceeding both um and the 20 acres um which must be provided to the city for deed restricted affordable h uh units which again they're they're exceeding that by 3.8 acres. Um in a community master plan anywhere in the city uh there's a minimum 10% of the gross area that must be public or private open space and uh there is approximately 15% land um of this um property but that's also to meet those comprehensive policies that I mentioned earlier and that includes the 23 um acre community park which is larger than neighborhood park is a different standard um for BPRD And as this is a major community master plan, um the applicant has requested some deviations to um the underlying code. Uh there are uh um some proposed um deviations to the residential lot sizes, setbacks, and lot coverage. Um these are smaller proposed lot sizes in the RS zone. um 2500 square ft² compared to Stevens Ranch the minimum lot size is 2800 square ft² Caraway a recently adopted master plan 2700 ft² and the city standard is 4,000 square ft um for uh the setbacks essentially the setbacks that um this applicant is proposing is uh similar to what's been adopted in Petrosa Easton Stevens Ranch and the Carowway master plans so there is some precedent for that. Um and um back to the residential lot sizes, I want to mention that those lot sizes um that the applicant is proposing um for the RS

zone is essentially to match the lot sizes and dimensions in the RM zone, medium density residential. And so, um, there's different, um, unit types that are large in the RM zone, but this is essentially, um, making those lot size and dimensions equal, um, between those two zones. And then uh in terms of block length on block parameter um the uh underlying code um in chapter 3.1 of the Ben development code um h indicates that uh there's a numerical standard and that if you exceed it you must provide a midblock quarter but it doesn't say how much you can exceed it or um when where you need the midblock quarter and this applicant submitted some clear and objective standards for um for legacy village um and I can go into more depth on that if you are curious about that um but uh there is underlying code um the block parameter maximum block parameter is 2,00 lineal feet in the residential zone and 2,640 ft in the non-residential zones and making this a blanket 3,000 um lineal feet across the master plan and it these do include specific um uh um requirements of when that to midblock um pathway would need to um be provided. Uh moving on to the commercial uses and the development standards as um we mentioned that um policy for the commercial area really called it a main street area. In order to kind of uh facilitate that um there is a prohibition on um auto oriented and auto dependent uses in that uh CG zone there on wilderness way as well as a maximum

front setback. So the building has to be closer to the street. um it wouldn't be like a strip mall with parking in front uh to kind of um uh create that main street feel. And then finally um generally there's uh um in the code there's non allowance for double frontage lots, streets on both sides, front and back. Uh that this would allow double frontage load lots on Ferguson Road so the people's front doors wouldn't have to face views of the land. So finally moving on to the annexation. Um all of the criteria pretty much we've talked about to this point. Um in terms of consistency with policies um that the annexation is consistent with the master plan. We're talking about them currently tonight that they have public facilities. I do want to mention um there is um documentation in the file of um correspondence with the school district. um school district does have a need for an elementary school in this area. However, um and so there is not um a partial for such a school on this property because there is one already shown on the Stevens Ranch property and plus they have access uh property at the high desert middle school site too. Uh so um and then parks as I mentioned they've worked closely with uh both the city and the applicant has worked closely with CPRD on the park needs in this area as well as trails. There's no irrigation water rights or facilities on this property. Um in terms of consistency with the transportation planning rule as I mentioned that requires um impacts on other agency infrastructure. So, there is in the annexation agreement a letter from uh Oregon Department of Transportation and Dashes County of what those off-site improvements um are needed um which I mentioned previously and all of the

rights of way um will be improved to city standards as required with any application. Um and that all of the those transportation improvements are um will be codified or are is part of the ordinance exhibits. um a transportation mitigation plan and the application of city standards at the time of development. Um so there was a substantial amount of uh public participation. The applicant held their required neighborhood public meeting last fall. There was public notices mailed and posted sent to the neighborhood districts. um as I mentioned or um notice to DLCD uh all the affected agencies and providers as well as the ODOT and county coordination on the transportation analysis. In response to all of that, we received um a letter from um Department of Stands and State Lands in support and one letter of concern from the neighboring um developer. And uh there was a planning commission hearing held on February 9th. The planning commission recommended approval voting for yes and two no. And we do have a planning commissioner here tonight. I haven't touched base with her yet, but uh and uh can tell you about those deliberations.

Okay, great. Um who's here from the planning commission? Do you want to come on up and just let us any summary anything you want to add to Karen's presentation about the deliberations of the planning commission? Please introduce yourself too.

Hello, I'm Katie Schneer. I currently serve on on the planning commission. Um with the comprehensive plan policies for Steven Droct, planning commission unan unanimously voted to recommend that city council adopt the ordinance um as proposed by the applicant with the draft finding by staff. We also voted as stated here 42 to recommend to adopt an ordinance to amend the Ben development code to add the Stevens road tract master plan. Um we haven't touched base.

Go ahead. Um we discussed density requirements, fire safety, the layout of various housing types and how development was phased as well as traffic impacts to the surrounding areas and how streets will connect to existing roads. Um as well as surrounding as well as pedestrian and bike trail systems throughout the proposed master plan. Okay. Can I ask a question?

Sure. Was there anything um from the two who voted against it? Was there anything um in terms of their reasoning for voting against it that were grounded in the criteria that we have to use to evaluate this plan? I mean, it sounds like some of the discussion may have not been directly relevant um to all the criteria necessarily, but was there some that was directly relevant to the criteria, some of the descent? Um I don't recall actually, but

if there's any staff can answer that question. There was some discussion about the commercial area as has been a concern in and many of the uh community master plans with the adoption of Senate Bill 8 which is now adopted into the city and code in compliance with state law that allows affordable housing on um commercial property. So there was concern um that this commercial property would remain um or be available for commercial uses and uh so that was part of the discussion. Um and the um in terms of the acreage of the uh the commercial property that was dictated by a market analysis that led to the concept plan that led to this master plan. Uh and there is not as much of a danger in um in um this becoming affordable housing like we have in other master plans because there's 23.8 acres of affordable um uh housing acreage for in this master plan itself required by the house bill. Uh so that was a concern but um is not necessarily um one that would be applicable to this master

because it's that's not relevant to the criteria for our evaluation of this application. Right. The concern I understand the concern. It's valid concern and we've been working hard to try to address that concern including the bill that was just passed which I assume doesn't apply here. Yes. As proposed, it is compliant with the conference upon policies and the house bill itself. Yes. Karen, can you say again when the planning commission meeting was? February 9th. Okay. So, that was before the end of the session when the bill passed to to make changes to the SB8 bill. Correct. Okay. Great. Any other questions before our planning commissioner steps back?

Um, it's related. I don't know if it's for the planning commissioner though. Karen, can you just remind me? So, it's five acres for commercial general and the other two parcels that are mixed employment, those look even smaller than five acres. Is that right? Uh, together I they're seven acres. Seven acres total. Total.

Um, and about Mike's question regarding sorry, councelor Riley's question regarding um the criteria. I mean how the the comprehensive plan and the ben development code um the specific master plans for this area all refer to complete communities um and those are defined as mixed use. So um how uh so so it would seem that commercial and mixed employment zoned properties or parcels would actually and whether or not those stay consistent with those uses. That seems like it would actually be very relevant to those criteria.

Yes, it is compliant with that criteria that it has 5 acres of commercial land and 7 acres of mixed employment land. Okay. Yes. That it has the acres but not necessarily that they actually are developed in that way. That's it was like a a state ordinance or statute that says that they can do that with the land. So, it is still compliant. We do urge Hayden to maybe work with developers if they can to make sure that that the commercial stays commercial and is developed as such. So I think the nearest commercial is a mile away on 27.

I guess I'm trying to just understand though with respect to the criteria what we are supposed to when we've got evidence on the ground that previous master plans have councelor. Is this deliberation or a question? I'm sorry. I'm just trying to keep us tight. Yeah. I mean, I'm I'm I'm guess I'm trying to formulate a question to try to get an answer. Um it it I if they're if they're if they're just showing a square on a map, that's all that we have to Yes. Yes, that is available for development. Okay. Okay. Any other questions for staff? I have a question for staff and not for Thank you.

Okay. Yeah. Thank you. if you want to hop back. Thank you for that insight. Yeah, thank you for coming and and keep in mind we have the applicant to present too, so we'll be able to ask some questions directly. But yeah, go ahead.

Okay, I'm going to try to get as many questions as I can in in four minutes. Um, the master plan code has a transportation mitigation element that requires coordination with Cascad's transit of when and where a transit stop will be constructed. Is the developer required to build a mobility hub or how is how is transit access being met? Yeah, that is simply coordination with C. This one as opposed to like Timber Yards that has a specific modability hub. Um, this master plan doesn't specifically require that it it maybe who knows in the future, but it it's all about what CCT Okay. Um, thank you. Sorry to pay off. I'm just trying to be efficient. You We have plenty of time. I'm just

I feel it. I feel the heat. No, I just I just want to make sure we're focused for staff and we're not delivering, but you can ask um how much discretion do we have in deciding whether to grant the reduction of the minimum number of market rate dwelling units in the highdensity residential uh zones? Is that I mean that's not grounded in code. So is it 100% discretion or

correct? That number did not come from the house bill. um that came from development of the concept plan and the subsequent conference of plan um amendments. There there are other um belts and suspenders to all of this in terms of there's a minimum number of acres and a total number of of units and so um there there are other boundaries of uh of how much um needs to be and the applicant I think the question was probably for the developer which is one of the consequences of refusing that that sounds like that's a developer for the applicant

is there anything in our code that regulates ownership type like homes to rent versus homes to own? No. Okay. No, it's all based area median income and the peries. Yeah, I don't think so. Um, but thanks for clarifying that. And then what is it in our code that requires the wider roundabout at 27th in Ferguson? I didn't catch the first part of that question. What what is it in our code that requires the wider roundabout at 27th and Ferguson? And I can uh allow um our assistant city engineer to talk about that, but that came from the transportation analysis.

Okay. Um can we just ask the developer to conform to our current multi-use path standard, which would be 10 ft wide instead of 8t wide? I know they're only bound by 8t, but can we just ask them to do 10 instead?

We could ask whatever we want. Well, we can require them to do our standards, but maybe that's a question for the applicant. In terms of local streets, um there is no multi use path requirement. Six feet sidewalks on each side. Um on collector streets and um and arterial streets, there is that wider path. However, um because there is the requirement to connect these affordable housing parcels to the the community park, um that local street is being expanded. That's why I said kind of an enhance. That's not a bubble word, but local street to expand that um six feet sidewalk into an eight 8 foot multi east the the spine.

The spine north south spine. Yes. Thank you so much. Yeah. Any other questions for Karen? Well, I'm going to have staff questions, but I wanted some questions first. Yeah, we can have Yeah, we can we can bring Karen back up. So, let's have the applicants come up and present.

Grab yourself an extra chair if you need it. plug in just expecting a long conversation during You know, okay, Mayor Council, thank you for your your patience here. Let me get the presentation shared. So, uh, thank you for your time and attention this evening. My name is Joey Sher, a planner with AKS Engineering and Forestry here in Bend. We are a consultant for the applicant and the developer Hayden Holmes. And I'm going to try and keep the presentation relatively short. Karen did a very good job as usual kind of going through in detail um all of the kind of key criteria that these applications are required to be reviewed against. We also have you know 500 pages of uh material that we have in the record and um a team of folks here to try and answer questions. So, I have about a dozen slides. Um, and then I would just request that if there are any questions about this project and we've we've heard some of those already, please give us a chance to answer those before the record is closed so we have a chance to try and communicate our position, why plans are the way they are, and answer any questions that you would have.

So, the application that is before you this evening, the applications are the product of uh a team effort. We've been working for over a year um with Hayden Holmes, the other consultants, with the city uh with the Department of State Lands, Ben Parks and Recre, ODOT, Dashes County, the school district uh among many others in order to kind of put together what we think is an approvable uh major community master plan. As I mentioned, several members of our team are are present here this evening to to try and answer any questions. Uh but before we launch into the meat of uh the the application, I'm going to turn things over to Jen Kovitz to do a little intro for Hayden Homes and give a little more background about the the property.

Yeah, absolutely. So, good evening, Mayor Counselors. Jen Kovitz, she her community engagement and government affairs manager for Hayden Homes. Uh first and foremost, I just want to thank council and city staff and state staff for the literal years of work that you have put in to bring us to this milestone. We Joey mentioned we've been working for over a year. This house bill passed in 2021. So we we we really stand on the shoulders of a lot of work that have led us to today. So thank you. Um Hayden Holmes, uh I'll spare you a long introduction. We are proud to have built uh over 2100 homes in Bend since we began uh just up the road in Redmond in 1989. And um next Tuesday, I think as many of you know, we are going to celebrate the ribbon cutting at Parkside Place, the um affordable housing in UGB pilot uh project made possible by House Bill 4079. And as you consider the next milestone for this the Stevens Road Track uh public private housing project, I want to just uh shout out what Hayden Homes and the city of Ben have been able to accomplish at Parkside Place. Um so we exceeded the uh legislative requirement of 30% affordable units and we are delivering 40% deed restricted affordable units. Um we are delivering 108 of those as rental units in the first phase. Um they're going up right now. The market rate that we're achieving without subsidy begins uh at homes priced at $434,000 which is $294,000 below Ben's current median sales price. And that means that these market rate unsubsidized homes are priced so that uh Dashes County householders earning 81% area median income and above can purchase that without being housing cost

burdened. So we did this together and we want to thank you. Next slide, please. Um we Hayden Holmes is really honored to have been selected for the opportunity to purchase the Stevens Road tract which as you've heard we've we've proposed the rename of Legacy Village and when uh DSL selected Hayden Homes um they cited both our housing nonprofit Firsttory and our uh ability to deliver that housing that our local workforce can afford as some of the the reasons that we were chosen. I also want to say that for our nonprofit first story, 15% of those homeowners are educators. And that really aligns with the the spirit of this bill dedicating um or prioritizing, excuse me, a percentage of that affordable housing to educators. So, there's a natural alignment here for us. And I just want to say that, you know, at Hayden Homes, we really take seriously the House Bill's stated purpose to address, as you see in this highlighted section, um, what they stated as an acute housing crisis, and we really feel like we are, um, prepared to help, uh, bring to life the plan that the city and state work so hard to put together.

Back to you, Joey.

Thank you. Um, so as Karen mentioned, this property is at the southeastern edge of the city. The subject property is here on the slide outlined in yellow. It's east of 27th Street, uh, and between Reed Market and Stevens Road to the north and and Ferguson Road to the south. It's 261 acres and butts the east side of the Stevens Ranch master plan, um, which was annexed into the city back in 2021. As we all know, there's a lot happening in Southeast Bend and the Southeast Area Plan and Stevens Ranch Master Plan. And and what that means is that there are a number of kind of existing and planned destinations for future residents. So, commercial, recreation, schools, and that's all within relatively close proximity to Legacy Village. Uh, and on top of that, and we'll get into this a little bit more, Legacy Village lays the framework for this mix of uses within this new community to to supplement everything that's happening around it. So, quick uh couple slides here, just a closer look at the 261 acre property. You see how it abuts uh Steven Stevens Ranch, Stevens Road there forms the northern boundary, and you can see Ferguson Road on the the southern boundary. uh topography and vegetation is um pretty standard for the east side of Bend. Here is the conceptual layout kind of there with uh Stevens Ranch. See how we extending streets from Stevens Ranch to the west. Um we're kind of this consistent coherent development pattern. And this is a summary of Stevens Road Track Legacy Village. By the numbers, uh the concept plan and comp plan policies adopted by the city require a minimum of 2,487 homes. All of the infrastructure planning that we've done, coordination with the city for sewer water

transportation, um is is planned around approximately 2500 homes. So, a little bit above that that minimum requirement. less than onethird of the homes are planned to be detached single family, meaning more than twothirds will be middle housing or multifamily housing. And this is consistent with the bill and and also the city's housing needs analysis as as Karen had summarized. And then we have also been coordinating with BPRD uh on the location and size of the community park. That moved around a little bit from the concept plan originally adopted by the city. Uh, we moved it to the south side of Wilderness Way, so it was more centrally located and further away from the plan park that BPRD believes is going to be constructed um soonest in in Stevens Ranch. And then this location also helps preserve um what's probably the most significant rock outcrop within this larger property. We mapped it out for BPRD, gave them a map that they could kind of put on their phones to kind of geollocate in real time. and we got a email back from their um their planner that their landscape architects gave our new location two thumbs up. So, we are we are proud about that one. Um and so this is a closer look at Legacy Village. It's a a complete community of residential, commercial, and recreational uses providing kind of this range of housing types for households of different sizes, ages, and incomes. The original concept plan had most of the multi multifamily and affordable housing kind of more centralized around wilderness way concentrated in the middle and northern parts of the property. What we've done with this plan is try to disperse the range of housing types across the community and then kind of tie them together with this network of these wider multi-use paths um that ring around the perimeter uh but also

east west and and north south uh on the spine that was that was mentioned earlier. The blue dashed areas uh show the land plan to accommodate the deed restricted affordable housing. uh the dash pink lines show the network of these multi-use paths. And then this approach is really trying to take land and transportation planning to help connect neighbors together and connect homes with these commercial areas, the the the parks, the recreation areas, and kind of the the broader amenities that are beyond this property. Commercial lands are just one element of a complete community, but one that we certainly understand has received a lot of attention uh here recently in Bend. While Legacy Village is fulfilling its requirements under the comprehensive plan uh to provide certain acreages of commercial and mixed employment, this slide also shows that Stevens Ranch is planned to provide more than 43 acres of commercial land. So, what this means for for future legacy village residents is that there's going to be more than 50 acres of commercial land within a relatively easy walking, biking distance. And these connections are going to be made not just on regular city sidewalks, but on these these wider multi-use paths um and and portions of these paths are part of the city's low stress network. Another critical element of a complete community is housing that is affordable to a wide range of incomes. As Karen mentioned, the bill requires 20 net acres to be conveyed to the city for affordable housing, including at least 6 acres for households at 80% AMI or less, 12 acres for households at incomes of 60% AMI or less, and then another two acres um at 80% AMI for housing

prioritizing uh employees of the school district. So, while the bill and the comp plan required kind of this this 20 net acres as has been mentioned and what Hayden is very proud about is consistent with the the work at um Parkside Place is that this plan actually provides more. So, this plan provides nearly four additional acres to the city specifically for affordable housing. So, the the key takeaways, House Bill 3318 intended to address the acute housing crisis. That is the legislation that set in motion all the steps, all the planning work that the city's already done. Um, and kind of where where we are here today. Consistent with the bill and the comprehensive plan, Legacy Village provides this complete community with commercial opportunities, at least that that 22,487 homes, the required amounts of market rate housing and affordable housing. we can get into the questions about the the number of units on the RH land um recreational opportunities, multimodal transportation system and regional transportation and other infrastructure improvements and and equally as important making sure that this project is mitigating its impacts on these larger infrastructure systems. And and so that's what's included in the transportation mitigation plan. And so that is the end of our formal presentation. We anticipate there's plenty of questions and we welcome the opportunity to try and answer them.

Right. Council, let me know if you want to start with any questions. Anyone? Ariel, you want to go first?

Sure. Um, okay. So, what would the consequence of refusing to grant a reduction of the number of minimum market rate units be? So the reason for that change is that under the assumed density adopted with the original concept plan that that came out to be residential development in the RH zone about 40 units an acre for the market rate housing to put housing on the ground today. We don't think that's viable at the edge of the city. there there are no other examples at the edge of the city of that level of density um being built. So what we have proposed to do in order to be able to achieve housing near-term is reduce the density to essentially 25 an average of 25 units an acre for the RH zone but make sure that we're still providing the same number of units by kind of blending those units across multiple zones. So while the density is decreasing in the RH zone, we're providing the same number of units and we think we're doing it in a way where it's actually the market can accommodate it and that housing will be built sooner.

That's a clarifying question. Can you describe so 25 units to an acre versus 40 units is 40 units to an acre like a five-story building of condos versus 25 is town homes or like what is the form? Yeah. So, if you're at 25 units an acre, you're looking at probably three or four story kind of walk up apartments. Um, going to 40 units an acre. Yeah. You're you'd be looking at five, six, seventory potential buildings.

So, Joey, can you just follow up a little bit more? Can you say when you say they're being dispersed, so we're not saying they have those units are now going to be in other RH zones? What is how is Hayden accommodating the other units that are going to go into different places? Is that that that larger plex number or where is that? Yeah, so we're we're assuming a slightly probably higher than minimum required density for the RS and RM zones in order to meet that that total unit count and we're we're also with the multivariable equation we're trying to to meet here. We're we're still providing the mix of housing, right? And we're actually exceeding by quite a bit the the um minimum amounts of the the Plexes and the multifamily.

Got it. Is that what drove the reduction in the lot sizes also is the need I mean in order to be able to place the number of units across the whole development. Yes, these lot sizes are pretty small. So, right, relative to what we see in the community. Hopefully, when we do these presentations, we make this look pretty easy. Uh I can tell you that it's not. And so, the map,

you know, taking the concept plan which reflected a lot of work that the city had done. um we need to look at that now like how how can this actually be be buildable? Uh what part of that effort was kind of looking well is there really a difference for the for this master plan to have some very clear distinction between the RS and the RM zones. And what we decided is for the types of communities that Hayden Holmes is building there that's kind of an artificial cleavage. And so what we're doing is basically kind of blending the RS and the RM together to create gentle density. Um, and we think that that is going to make this project more viable and get housing on the ground faster.

And what's what's viable mean? I mean, tell me more about why put your mean when you use that word. It means that they can build a product that people are going to want to purchase and live in. Does it mean desirable essentially demand? Well, and that it can be financed, right? Um, I, you know, I don't know without a clear proof of concept that they're going to be, you know, financing readily available to build five, six, seventory you're going to financing at the edge of city of Bend.

But with recent middle housing law changes, we know that smaller lots are selling. We're selling them right now. Karen listed a couple of other communities that have dropped their um minimum lot size that have been approved in other master plans. And so that those middle housing laws are showing us what is viable and we're doing that right now. And so this helps align with more of that middle housing reality that we're in now. So, I guess I'm I'm still kind of hearing both the combination of sell, you know, they're selling, meaning they're desirable. People want to live in them, but there's also a concern about financing, right, upfront, whether you're whether you're whoever you're getting your your financing from, like you're not that's risky. We're not going to and they're making that financial decision based on whether or not they think it will sell,

right? Yeah. So it's that and so the the the point I would also make is you know reducing that the RH count to 300 in the RH zone that's a minimum. I think if market conditions change, there's a proof of concept here. This this is huge project. It's going to be built out over 10 15 plus years and say in the future 40 units an acre is viable and and attractive in this area that what we're proposing doesn't preclude that, but it does allow us to get going today. All right, other questions. Steve,

Joey, two questions. the the park flipping to the south end of Wilderness Way right there. Is that what drove the you need a half mile waiver now because that north that north unit of of of highdensity housing is now greater than a/4 mile away um for the proximity to the southside. Is that why you needed that?

Correct. So it's a little bit more it's actually a little bit more centralized. Um, and it, like I said, it's there's a BPRD's the park that they BPRD thinks is going to be built soonest in in Stevens Ranch is kind of on the north side of that project, but it's also kind of moving that to equally more equally distribute their their parklands in the open space. But that's the group that's kind of a little above a quarter mile away, right? That RH at the north end. At the north end. Yeah. Okay. Um, and then secondly, um, I I don't know if it's going to come up later, but can you describe the phasing plan as you envision it?

Uh, so that's a very good question. We do have a conceptual phasing plan. Right now, we we think the project is going to be built from south to north. So, left to right on the screen.

Left to right on the screen. Um, and that's basically kind of due to the availability of of sewers really driving that sewer water. Um, and so we've tried to as part of part of this again multivariable equation we're trying to solve here, you know, and the RS and the RM zoning, we're trying to kind of create a good mix of housing along the way, which will help the project be successful because there's a more of a variety of housing with each phase, not not huge phases of uniform housing type. Uh, but that that is feeding into the phasing plan. when we get to tentative subdivision, we will have a much more defined phasing plan. Um, but yeah, conceptually we're moving from from south to north.

And so you envision some of that mixed employment kind of being developed at the same time the houses going or I mean that's the other thing. So we we also did distribute some of the non-residential lands and and some of the multif family kind of across the site a little bit more. Um here we're going to have infrastructure available in the early phases for the me. Um the the challenge really at the edge of town is like can the market um kind of absorb that that commercial land and is there that demand? We recognize it's a an amenity for this community. Uh so we want it to be successful but ultimately we don't necessarily control the the market conditions to make it so.

Thank you. Thank you. Um, I had a question. We received a letter from um, the Department of State Lands in favor of approving this project tonight. I just wanted to ask where you were at in the in the scheme of closing the sale on this land. I know that the money that goes from this sale will go into the common school fund, which I I know they would really like to have. So, what is the status of that? And is it predicated on land use approval? And if you can share that, if you can't, that's okay, but I wanted to ask. Yeah. So, the we have not closed. Um, and obviously land use approval is an important condition of a sale being finalized. So, yeah, that the we're well on our way, but we have not closed yet. Okay, great. Ask one other question. Yeah, sure.

To see you're agreeing with me. If I'm understanding the sort of the math on all this stuff, 240 247 units are required, right, under under that's driven by that minimum density of nine units per net residential acre. So, if you subtract out the numbers, I think I've seen you all put up there, that leaves about 760 units that the city has to that have to be built on the affordable housing. Is that amount within the ballpark there? Under 800. I think it's I think it's maybe a little bit higher than that, but right around that number, but it might be closer to 800 800 is the ballpark that would have been.

All right. And I'm going to ask staff the same question, but my understanding from a prior concept plan before we have this amended plan before us is that that number that the city was going to be responsible for on that number of acres was a lower number a lower number of units. Um so therefore the relative density on that the total number of acres would also been smaller. So am I am I understanding the math on this correct? Maybe this is a better question for staff, but I wanted to see if you all are basically and I'd be uh happy to have staff answer that. We have not changed any sort of assumptions looking at the concept plan that was adopted as far as density

across the the affordable lands that will be dedicated to the city. Now, we're giving four additional acres and so that's going to increase the overall number. But as far as density or assumed units per acre for these affordable lands because we are not developing that we have not changed any of those assumptions. But even if the number if it's closer to 800 and this would be higher but if that 760 it sounds like it's a bigger number on that 23.8 acres I got 32 units per acre just doing the math before. So at 800 it's going to be higher number. That's quite a bit higher than the 25 you're saying is viable. So I just um frankly a little concerned about what this sets us up.

Keep it as a question Mike. So in order to frame the question I need to be

that's an important distinction. So that was the when the city originally went through the concept planning process. Those were the assumptions that the city thought would be viable for the lands that they received as part of this project. From the market rate housing we see challenges in financing for that higher density. I don't know that we're seeing the same challenge in financing because of significant subsidies um or that higher density for deed restricted affordable housing, the programs available to kind of bridge the gap between the the financing. So, we're looking at projects around town that are closer to that that density for the affordable housing. So, the number is different. Um, again, we're not we're not proposing to change the the the city's number for the affordable housing lands that they're taking. Anecdotally, recent uh affordable housing projects in Bend are are very close to that density, but from the market rate, um, RH lands, we're trying to achieve a density that again to use the term viable, we think is more viable.

All right. Um, is there anything else staff wants to add to that? And maybe just to help you. Yeah, I'm gonna have staff answer and I saw Ariel and I will call on him. Don't worry. Go ahead. When this was proposed, we reached out to Housing Works and asked just to be like, okay, if there was something that you wanted to build, what could you build like per acre density wise? And and they said between 33 and 35. So, um we're we're in that sweet spot. Okay. Thank you, Rachel. are your question.

Um, yes. So, the city is asking you to contribute to this expanded roundabout on 27th in Ferguson. Hasn't even been built yet. It's planned to be single lane and then it's apparently going to be closed down and built again. My question is, uh, will kids be able to get to High Desert Middle School walking and biking? Because currently there's no sidewalk facilities and no bike facilities there. Would you are you going to be contributing to that as an off-site improvement or so we'll let Joe answer the transportation?

Yeah, for for the record, Joe Binman, traffic traffic engineer, Transside Consulting. So, there's a number of different efforts going on here. If if you've been out here recently, you see the new multi-use sidewalks that Stevens Ranch is building. There's now that that roundabout being designed at 27th and and Ferguson. It doesn't just provide a vehicular connection, but it provides pedestrian crossings back to the SEAP lands that are all south and and west of there. SEAP is also working to form a local improvement district of sorts or a supplemental SDC methodology to finish constructing a whole pathway that goes down to high high desert middle school and beyond that all the way over to Caldera High School that connects to the 15th Street sidewalks that build into Russ's planned 15th Street and Ferguson roundabout. Bottom line is we're going to have a really really well-connected grid of of of 10 foot wide multi-use pads throughout this whole entire area, just not immediately. You know, they're they're they're going to happen sequentially in pieces.

Thank you. Last last two questions. Can we just ask you to conform to the current multi-use path standards and build them to 10 feet instead of 8 ft? Yes. I I believe you're referring to the local north south street and as as Karen mentioned, that's a that's a non-desated low stress route. It's a local street. The standard there is 6 foot. For roads that are designated local streets that are designated as a low stress network, the standard is 8 ft.

While we're not designated for a low stress network, we're still providing that 8 foot. And I I think more importantly, there's no driveways that directly access onto that that pathway system. Our our thought is if you're a cyclist and you're not 8 years old or or or have some other, you know, mobility issue that you're going to be on the street and that this the speed of the street is going to be low enough to to support that. Okay. And and the last one is, are you planning to build a mobility hub or transit stop?

We're we're well ahead of CCT's plans for this area right now. There's no transit supportive density out here, obviously. And so what what they want us to do is just be flexible and and we've told them we we'll check in as we build these phases and say do you need a transit stop here? If you if you do we're going to put that in. We have a lot of excess ride ofway along especially along the east side of the Ward Road corridor. We're we're dedicating the full 100 ft of rideway even more in certain places. So there's there's definitely space. We just don't know where to place those yet.

And would you build it or would Casiji Transit have to pay pay for it or the city? I guess I I think we've made it clear to them we're we're willing to build the transit pads that's in our mitigation table. If it's a mobility hub or something larger that takes a lot more infrastructure and costs like we were looking at over on Kulie Road, I assume we would have them in for that. Great. Thank you. Yes, Prrenza.

Thanks. Um thanks for the presentation. Um and this looks like a really cool community. Um, so I uh want to try to just get a better understanding of what um Hayden Holmes intends to actually build versus what you'll work with partners to build. Um, so the the commercial and the mixed employment, is that something Hayden Holmes plans to build or is that something that a developer partner would build?

Yeah, so we um we are a home builder. That's what we're experts at and we are not experts at um master plan communities like Brooks Resources for example. So we would as we do in all the states we build with commercial components uh work with developer partners. You know, I I recognize council that there is um there's there's a valid community concern about commercial and I know that um with the the amendment that passed to House Bill 4037 that got some of the way, but there's still concerns and we totally understand and and you know, I I am here Hayden Holmes is here to say that we have absolutely no intention of reszoning the five commercial or the or the seven mixed uh employment. We are committed to delivering this and a community of this size with this much housing. You know, we we feel confident that it can support those things and and we I'm I I want to verbally reassure that.

I do. I do too. And I and I think honestly I I think the likelihood of that land getting converted is is minimal because of the change that was passed because the parcels are so small. I I agree.

If you were to take 20% of a five acre parcel, you don't have enough to do affordable housing. Um, so but my my concern more is that, you know, we we put these master plans together, we put bike paths, we put roads, we put locations for different housing, and we would never dream of not building all of that. But what ne ever what gets on the plan but never seems to get built in Bend is the commercial and the mixed employment. Um, and so I I I do think that there's there's a real difference there and and I don't understand why um why we're not treating the the commercial in the same way. Um, so I guess my question to you is um my question to you is how would you how would you propose um you know the city go about holding a developer accountable just like we do? um hold developers account accountable to build the bike paths that they plan for and the sidewalks that they plan for and the roads that they plan for and the housing that they plan for.

Pardon? I can correct. Oh yeah, sure.

So I think that's a good question. I and it's something having worked on a number of master plans, having been before council and planning commission. That's a concern we hear. I I would make a slightly different analogy. I think it's more analogous to the challenge to provide affordable housing. Um, and the only way you do that is with a bunch of incentives and subsidy. Like that's how you bridge the the gap between something that a community recognizes that it needs but something that can't be provided under normal market conditions, right? And so, uh, I think every conversation we've had with Hayden Holmes, you know, they're already looking for for partners to be doing this type of work, to be doing this kind of development that they they don't necessarily specialize in. Um, but under market conditions, we've got to allow for the market to to do it. And the the key thing in in all the projects that I've been involved in is making sure there are enough rooftops um for those commercial users to be able to to justify the the cost um to be successful.

Thank you. It's a good answer. Okay. But you've given a you've given us a market study that says that it can support it. So um which we don't get from a lot of developers. So the market study was done by the city and done six to decide how much to make the squares. And so I I would also point out that Compass Commercial Compass commercial when you look at precoid when I think this market study was done to today the vacancy rate among commercial across the entire city has doubled. So it's there's just a a change in just postco this study was. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you.

All right. Other questions? for the applicant. This is your chance, folks. All right. Anything else that you want to add? Um Karen mentioned there's been very light public comment on this. We have the DSL letter. Um anything else you want to address before? There's been a lot of public involvement around this property over the last um four years, so not not entirely surprising. Yeah. Okay, great. Thank you very much. Thanks for your work to help make this deal. Yeah, we're excited. Any other questions for staff?

Yeah, I just wanted to follow up on the the what in our code requires them to build something at 27th in Ferguson in terms of a wider roundabout, but it sounds like we have a less robust requirement for walking and biking. What is your what is your question? Oh, okay. My question that requires a wider roundabout at 27th in Ferguson for drivers who don't live here yet, who don't even exist yet, but we don't have a plan for getting people to the places they want to go without driving.

So, uh, 27th in Ferguson is being designed now based on the Stevens Ranch master plan, which only required a single lane roundabout for the amount of trips going through it. Um there's a second analysis done by Joe's team looking at the number of trips that are going to go through 27th and Ferguson and Joe determined that u partway through the buildout of Stevens Ranch and partway through the buildout of Stevens Road Track Legacy Village, they're going to need additional lanes on the west side of both Wilderness Way and then also 27th and Ferguson. So, do we have any discretion over I mean I I feel like these kids have dealt with no no sidewalks and no bike paths for decades. Now they're finally going to get it maybe in some long drawn out phase, but then we're also going to ask them to cross four or six lanes of traffic on what are currently the highest crash roundabouts in our city at other places. So, I feel like to me this is there's so much to like about this project. and then the really ugly parts that are small. I feel like you hold up a mirror to us and you're like, "Well, that's actually part of your code." So, I'm just trying to get a better sense of like where this comes from and what we need to do to change it because this is the one thing that's like ah we're we're not we're falling short here. Well, we we are still getting uh you know welllit connections across those roundabouts. There'll be crosswalks, north,s, south, east, west, uh wide sidewalks in those areas with on-ramps and off-ramps for bicycles per our roundabout design manual. Um the applicant also just because of uh complications with phasing and how things are going to work on the construction of Ferguson, they don't know that they'll get the north portion of the um the land dedicated to build the full width of Ferguson. They're going to put in a two-lane road and then build a multi-use pathway that they're

not required to build on the south side of Ferguson to make sure that we have that connection. So, one of the first things that's happening before that uh well, it it will go in with the roundabout is a large multi-use pathway along the south side of Ferguson that'll connect to those initial phases of the development. It's not our quote our code. It's just the transportation impact analysis that says you need a wider roundabout here. Uh the additional Yes, the additional vehicle lanes. Yes. Karen, is this part of the transportation planning rule? No, that has to do with the coordination with

I think just to name something, I think these are the kinds of things that come up in these these docu these documents and these processes that are almost like they're not related to the criteria for approval. I think we all understand that, right? But they're the kinds of stuff as counselors we're trying to probe to be able to understand in different settings in a different venue how how do we start to address this kind of stuff. So So one and sorry go ahead council.

No just I think that's the point it's come up it came up recently and it's probably going to continue to come up in these kinds of settings. It's almost like you know you've done facilitated group things. That's a parking lot we're going to talk about another time. This is some of that kind of stuff that it's not related to the approval criteria tonight really, but but it's a concern about how do we ensure that all those kids are going to walk to that middle school ideally and not be driven by their parents because it's going to feel safe to get there. So a a portion of our code and and part of the required transportation analysis whether it's you know for a single building on a site or something larger like a master plan like this we do have requirements that they look at key destinations like schools in the area and make sure that there's a continuous connected pathway there.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I'd like to ask a follow-up question if Karen Sure. and and maybe Ian and we are drifting into deliberation here a little bit council so let's try to keep the the questions as questions thank you

you're welcome um I'm looking at the comp plan Karen and you know trying to apply this criteria around complete communities and the comp plan in the same chapter as this criteria for speeding it defines complete communities um as having amenities needed for daily living um parks open spaces shops and services So, um I guess I I guess again my question to you is why do we have to determine the criteria met based on the plan when we're seeing the evidence on the ground isn't actually delivering like all the other criteria around bike paths and sidewalks and roads and water and sewer and everything that gets delivered in every project that we approve. It always gets delivered. But the commercial and the all the commercial uses don't get delivered. And so I guess like how I don't feel good about saying yes to that criteria. So can you maybe help me understand why why you found the finding to be in your finding you found it to be met?

And the requirement for uh um compliance with the comprehensive plan policy specifically have to do with chapter 11 for the this property. And so uh it has very specific items that must be addressed. The word complete community is flushed out in all of those other uh policies which includes all of those minimum acreages as um indicated by the applicant that you can set the table but you just can't make people eat in terms of uh when that when that uh commercial development would occur. Yeah. And I guess you can plat the lots. Um but in terms of when a business owner is interested

part of the reason I'd like us to keep it to questions is that I don't um agree that we have not delivered complete communities or that we have not delivered commercial when we have neighborhoods that are still developing and lots that are ready to be developed right so but I think the question is good on what are the criteria and how does that fit with the the comprehensive plan and just to be clear council friends that the part that you quoted is not from the section that is on this area right it's from the chapter as a this term chapter 11. Yeah. Right. So the chap, you know, starting at figure 11117 and then moving on is the is the comp plan uh that we're talking about today, right? That applies to this tract of land. Is that correct, Karen?

So there is a policy in um this the Stevens Road tract uh that says a new complete community that accommodates dense development focused primarily on providing affordable and market rate housing in a mixeduse multimodal community. Right. That's what's in the comp plan for this area. Correct. Okay. Great. Did you have a question? See? No. Okay. All right. Any other questions for staff? And I wanted to clarify what asked the about compliance of transportation planning rule. Um the uh transportation mitigation plan is compliance with the transportation planning rule. It's just through the avenue of chapter 4.7 of the Ben development code. Got it. Thank you for that clarification.

I just want to ask one more question. I don't know if it's for Karen or Fitzpar. So, I don't know if it's for now or if it's for deliberation, but um if council uh wanted to embed in here into the development of this land a criteria to actually develop the commercial in concert with the residential. Um how would what are some options for us to to do that?

Uh I can I can at least try to address that. Um Karen was talking about these specific comprehensive plan policies that apply to this property and the the first one 1153 says focusing on the master plan. It has to be consistent with the policies 11154 through 1170 which outline um coming from the concept plan what has to happen next. Those policies, they do touch on complete communities a few times, but what those policies say is that there's an overall planning concept and the complete community aspect of that planning concept is met by establishing these zoning designations. So on certain property and it says there's got to be five acres of commercial, there's got to be seven acres I think of mixed use and industrial. Those policies describe where that commercial has to go. um they don't say anything about what specific allowed uses have to be developed and they don't say anything about when that has to be developed or who has to do it. So um right now what council is doing is considering whether these applications are consistent with the applicable policies. The applicable policies don't at this point say anything about when something has to be be developed. So that's that's kind of what you're looking at. um that is obviously a product of legislation at the state level which didn't say anything about commercial um development other than in the preamble. Then that led to the concept plan. Then that led to the comprehensive plan policies all of which have been approved by the state. So um that's those are the rules that council has to apply to these applications. If the question I mean the question seems to be can council change the rules. I mean is that

that's not the question. The question is when development applications come before council, they include roads and they include water and they include sewer and they include bike lanes and they include the locations for housing and that always gets built and it's without almost without question. We would never dream of allowing a developer to go forward with housing without putting in certain bike paths and things like that. But we're letting that happen without realizing the complete community goal. And I know it means something because it's in the code and it's in master plans. I know it means something. So I'm trying to figure out how we take it from words into action on the ground in this city.

Yeah. I think you know one if you're talking about a couple of fairly recent master plans th those are still developing. I think we actually have an active application for commercial development in on one of them. So I think have they delivered as soon as some people might have hoped? Maybe not. But is it accurate to say they haven't delivered? I I don't think it is because time will tell. Can we just answer my question though? Is I didn't hear a question counselor. So maybe we can rephrase a little bit and and try to say what are the legal pathway because I think I can answer your question but one one thing you've mentioned is is that

the the plans that have been approved haven't delivered on or developers haven't been held to what they are required to do. What they are required to do under the policies that issue is designate certain property for certain uses. they are not required to build those uses or develop those uses on a particular timeline. So it's the designation that is required by the policies and the approvals. So to say that somebody hasn't done it or that they haven't been held accountable um I don't know that that's actually accurate one because time will tell but two the accountability is in designated designating certain properties for certain uses. is not to build, it's not to develop or on a certain timeline, at least not the way the policies are written.

Right. We're in a land use setting here. Did you have another question? No. Okay. I mean, any other questions for staff um applicants hearing this conversation. Is there anything else you would like to put on the record before we close the public hearing? And we are going to close the public hearing unless there's an objection to that. Okay. Yeah.

Okay. Final chance for questions before we go to close. and um ask for public comment. Okay, we will close the public hearing on these three items. Um no one has signed up to comment on these items. I'm just going to ask the room if anyone here is here to comment on these items. Five, six, and seven around Legacy Village. I'm seeing none. Um so we will move on to deliberation or yes, deliberation next, right? Yeah. I mean, if if there was somebody here to speak, we'd reopen the public hearing.

Yeah, I just remembered that, but I knew that there wasn't anyone. Sorry about that. That was a little bit out of order. Okay, we are on to deliberation. Um, reminder that we have three motions in front of us for these items. Um, and that we are in a land use setting, quasi judicial land use setting, and we are talking about whether this application meets the criteria for all three of these motions. So I'll just say um I I don't believe that the criteria is met um because I don't believe that the previous standard that under which all the previous applications has been approve have been approved that a box on paper means that we're actually going to get the plan that's being put forward. Um I do believe the developers come forward with master plans and comp plan amendments um with an intent um to build what they're showing on those plans. Um and everything gets built except for the commercial. So um there is there is something is wrong um because we're not we're not achieving complete communities. So um well I I love the way that this plan looks. This is great. This is what our community needs. We've seen many of these that that also defeat. Um, and I that is where I stand on these.

Council, can I ask you to be a little more specific? Which criteria you think is not met? Because you said the standard the 11 1154 um is the one referring to the um complete community. Thank you. Okay. I just had a question about council Franos's. Sure. Um, so I mean I'm sympathetic to wanting commercial amenities sooner than later. Um, but I don't understand what you are saying isn't happening because if if if we were to ask or require, which I don't think the code does, require this developer not just to build homes but to build commercial ready buildings or something like that. Is that is that what you're asking for?

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I mean we see other developers in Bend and in other cities um come forward with plans like this that have commercial and residential and they actually you know have you know the plan behind the scenes that we don't have to review and and they execute it and they actually build the commercial along with the residential along with the bike pass along with the roads and everything like that and so um so we we you know some of them come forward and it works and others come forward and it doesn't work and so I'm yeah I guess I guess I I mean, our our code doesn't can't require them to build something in the same way that we can for a transportation facility. Um, we can designate it, but we can't.

Well, that's what I believe we can. Yeah, I think that is I think that is what we've promised everyone by putting complete communities in our code. I mean, that's we put parks in the code. Like, I think that is the promise that um we as an agency, a public agency are making to people. And so, that's why I believe that we should stand behind it. Mike,

I would just say that I think I'm I'm sympathetic to your concern. Um I think the criteria before us for this development are basically is there a box that's designated on the land, you know, on the property and that that's what we have to make our decision on. I think the question of the question for the community largely is about how quickly we get this stuff delivered to right and how does it show up and many people are feeling like it's we're not delivering on the complete community promise because it doesn't happen fast enough and this whole discussion just it emphasizes for me the importance of us needing to spend as a council some focused time with staff support and eventually engagement from the development community and looking at what's done in other places in two parts. We heard from the applicants say incentives are really important. I have heard from other parts of our development community that there might be some policy tools that we could use and you know there's some that have been suggested that are sort of performance standard somewhat analogous to transportation. You hit X number of homes you have to do Y and you do and that's related to commercial. That's not currently in our policies. So we don't have the ability to hold these folks or others to that and I think we need to think through the implications of it. And I think that is what I'm frustrated. We're not it's not clear to me when we're going to be doing especially the policy discussion portion of it. There's some um time that we're going to spend I hope on incentives. So and maybe that's scheduled and I'm forgetting. So okay well that it's good to know but I think we we need to get to that because I think that's what's coming up over and over again here on the dis and also out in the community. So um you know I I'm comfortable with this. I'm pleased to hear that Housing Works is comfortable with that density number that we're talking about because with at 800 units across 23.8 acres that's about um looks my math says about 33 units per acre that they feel like they can do that and it's viable and it works. It does concern me a little bit that I hear private sector say it's not viable and

viable means a combination of both people want to live in it and people are willing to finance it and it's some sort of virtuous or not virtuous snowball effect there. um cycle and and that we're applying we're we're we're we're having people who have live in affordable housing a different standard there than what others might find desirable. So, it just it worries me a little bit, but I'm I'm pleased to hear that one of our important partners in the community thinks that that they can do good projects with that kind of density.

All right. Thank you, Steve. Anything else? you know, I I ran for this job because because because teachers and firefighters and cops were not able to afford based on their AMI levels here. And so the thing that drives me to a yes on this on this project right here is that affordable component. And when I look at what we've got set for our five-year plan right now, our incentive incentives, we're we're over we we we've met above 80%. This is going to help. This is what I'm looking for to help us build out over time those 60 and below and 80 and below AMI projects. And yes, I councelor Franosza, I I acknowledge the concerns and and and councelor Riley as well. And at the same time, my northstar is building out these uh these AMIs that are going to that are going to really serve our whole community. Um, so that's what's driving me to a yes on here in along with the fact that it meets all the criteria outlined by staff that we can vote on tonight.

Thank you. Yeah. Um, I'll just wrap up by saying as the only person on the dis here that was on council in 2021 when we ran the HB3318 bill, this is an incredible moment to see that our efforts to try to accelerate and bring housing to the city um and to bring affordable housing and affordable housing for educators, which is really cool. Um, has now reached the point where we're going to start seeing shovels in the ground um sooner rather than later. And it is going to be in a community that um is is going to a lot of people are going to want to live in because of the concept plan and the work that Brian's team and the community did together on the concept plan. um because of the work we've continued here through your efforts to master plan um and the work that was put in the bill in the first place that's really trickled all the way down to this moment and said here's what we want um and here's what we're getting um which is great and the the millions of dollars that are going to go in the common school fund is it almost feels like a bonus even though that was one of the driving factors in in getting the state legislature to approve this um because there it is a win-win. It is a win for our community. It is a win for um schools. It is a win for educators. Um so um I am definitely in support. I think um the I just wrote a list here of the ways that we're sort of exceeding a lot of the things that we we thought we would get more land for affordable housing, more open space is required, more middle housing that's required. Um, I really appreciated the conversation, the discussion of spreading those units around so that we can have things that we can build and and then are viable to um to sell in the market, which is important when you are building a housing um uh economy like we are trying to do in Bend. Um I think just to speak to the the commercial um side of it, um I I would really urge you um council friends that to take this energy and the the land use setting is is not the place for this energy. It feels like we're trying to hammer a a nail with a hot dog, right? It's just it's the wrong tool. Um, not that your concerns are not valid, but this is not

the venue to um to do the the type of work that I think you want to do. To me, to me, that is around what council talked about. If we are giving incentives, we have a lot more control about how we can ask people to develop and when um or if we're changing policies, you know, we can look at that. But when we're talking about a land use, it is really it's about um what the land use is going to be designated on. It is not about um I don't think it's legal to require people to build spec commercial um through the land use process. There may be some other ways that we can that we can subsidize or incentivize or um regulate in a way that makes that happen more often. Um but um it's not that I don't share the concern. I just don't think that is an appropriate criteria for for tonight. And I think this application does meet the criteria and I'm happy to vote yes on it. So

So I move for the first reading of the ordinance to amend Ben comprehensive plan policies pertaining to the Stevens Road tractor to career growth boundary expansion area. Second. All right. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? The last thing I just want to say is the transportation impact analysis not for the for the approval. That's that's the really ugly part that I I still feel like we need to work on. But otherwise, I I agree with what the mayor said. There's a lot to like in this project. So much work for years that went into it. Um really appreciate all all of your effort. So thank you. Thanks. All right. All those in favor of the motion? I. Any opposed? Nay. All right. Next motion.

I move for the first reading of the ordinance to amend Ben Development Code Chapter 2.7 special plan districts refinement plans area plans and master plans to create the legacy village master plan development. Second. All right. Moved by councelor Riley. Second by councelor Platt. All in favor? I. Any and opposed? No. And I move for the first reading of the ordinance enexing 265.7 acres in the Stevens Road tract urban growth boundary expansion area assigning sign districts and requesting jurisdictional transfer of the abuing rights of way. Second. What was that? Second. Okay, there we go. Second. Councelor Riley moved. Councelor Clap was a second. All those in favor? I I and the oppos.

All right. Thank you everyone for being here. Thank you for all the work that went into these presentations. Thank you to the staff. We're going to take like a five minute stretch break and then we will get back into the agenda.

All right. Yeah, I think that we're gonna reconvene here. Are we online, Ashley? Great. Okay. So, we're going to reconvene on and we are on to item number eight. Now,

this is the first reading of an ordinance amending Ben Code Title 9 buildings to adopt discretionary section R 327 wildfire hazard mitigation residential building code standards. Good evening, mayor, counselors. Uh Sarah Hudson, senior management analyst in the city manager's office. Tonight, we're bringing forward the ordinance to adopt section R327. Uh we talked about this at length during the February 25th work session. Um just a kind of a highle overview of this is the optional section of the Oregon residential specialty code um that cities can choose to opt into locally that establishes home parking standards for new residential development. This is aligned with council goals for the bienium of building wildfire resilience um evaluating and updating code to reflect best practices. Um, worth noting is that this would as drafted apply citywide. When we were um, drafting the code change, we identified that um, council declared the entire city a wildfire hazard zone in 2003. So applying R327 citywide is consistent with that previous declaration. Um, so this would just kind of preserve that. Um the biggest question um before council tonight is just kind of when this new code should take effect. I think that was um the idea was to kind of have some more discussion.

Okay. So yeah, this is coming out of that work session where we had agreed to move forward in this manner. So questions or thoughts from council? Why wouldn't we do it as soon as possible? I mean, that's I'm I'm supportive of that and we've had a couple of development groups or at least one write in and say that they support this and I don't think we heard any concerns about getting this on the books in the normal course. So, any other thoughts? I mean, I would align it with um the new building code that's um it's for some reason there's a fall date that the new building October something but it's not actually enforced until January. Is that right?

Correct. It'll be October 1st. It will be adopted and then can you if you're talking to us, can you come up to the mic and introduce it? Yeah. Um it's adopt yourself. Oh yeah, sorry J Daniel D. It's a building official. Thanks. Yeah, absolutely. Um yeah, it'll be adopted in October and then there's a grace uh a grace period for it to April 1st of next year. Yeah, that's pretty far. It's a big race. Yeah. Yeah. Do that. Not excited about going through another another summer uh right now where we're where we are. I'd like sooner rather than later.

Okay. So, I think the motion as written would just have it apply in a normal course right now. Um, unless there's something different, maybe someone can make that motion. Well, what's the soonest thing to do? The soonest you could do is if you did by emergency, which was which means you have it has to be unanimous. So, still first reading and then second reading and then it would be in effect immed. So, I guess if someone wants to propose that just add um by emergency at the end of the motion. Is there support? I mean, would there would would people support that?

I actually don't. And I I I may I feel like I should have my decision made by now, but I'm I'm uh considering voting no on this just because um I I don't feel that it's consistent. I I do understand that we have a council goal to look at um codes and policies. But um in legitimately my heart of hearts and memory of memories, I um was hoping and thinking that we were um starting with the new fire department employees role is more of an outreach um and to work on working with our neighborhoods and um working on firewise certifications and and things like that. Um and so and this the building code um update is is probably something that we should do at some point in time. I just feel like there's there's a higher priority right now. And so I I feel like a von Novo kind of sends a message that there's a higher priority and that's to really educate people on what protects their houses and that's um removing vegetation from around the zero to 5 foot area, keeping all the junk that you have around your house out of that zero to 5 foot area and things like that. So that's why I'm really um kind of conflicted on this um how quickly we're moving on this um if I may just

Yes. I mean in all fairness I think um we're doing the education front too. I mean, we have uh Melissa's going to neighborhood district meetings and we, you know, talk about it at um the you know, the town hall and so I I mean, I don't feel like it's a binary choice. I feel like we're doing both. Does that I mean is but you feel like we're this signals priority. I guess it Yeah, exactly. Yeah. And um Well, I'm not going to impose an emergency, but Oh, we can't if Gina votes no. So, we can't do it emergency. Ask a question.

Yeah. So my understanding that the research shows that um generally it's a combination of both home hardening as well as defensible space but home hardening is one of the essential first steps right and that that that the data shows that that actually is what really um prevents fire from spreading from home to home or if fires coming in um a home to be better able and more likely to to withstand ignition into something.

Yes. Good evening mayor and counselors. U Melissa Steel, deputy fire marshal for Benfire. Um so home hardening also goes handinhand with defensible space and um I understand that there's the educational component but with all the research that we have been doing in in lots of different studies shows that education does not inspire action and so when education we can educate all that we want but people are still have barriers to performing some of these uh defensible space and home hardening techniques that we're asking them to do. Um we also can't fire code our way out of anything, right? But at least we have something in code that would be written that could say something like um for our future generations we need to build houses the right way and we need to start as soon as possible. So they work hand in hand.

Thank you Melissa. That's the key for me is this is new homes. This is and you know we're adding 80% I keep quoting that over the next 20 years and these homes will be built to that standard for future generations for their defensibility and their insurability as they go forward because I think that's going to be a key component and having this code I think bolsters our argument that we make when we go to broader insurance providers and say this is something we're looking to help you help us with in terms of affordability and we also have most of the community I mean if we adopt this and we've joining sisters has already adopted it. Dashes counties is about to go into effect today.

Yeah. Okay. So, it's in effect and then um Redmond I know is considering it. It's they they are going to be a little farther out but our whole region so builders if they're doing more than just building a home here having to kind of adapt to these new set of standards. So, all right. Ready for a motion? I move for the first reading of the ordinance amending ban municipal code title nine buildings. Second. All right. Moved by councelor Platt, second by councelor Mendes. All in favor? I. Any opposed? No. Okay, we are going to move on to item nine. So, we'll have council Norris come back out. 9 and 12, right? And then 12.

Council has asked to authorize a contract amendment with Cascadia Partners LLC with the city of Ben growth plan for phase one services in the 2025 202.7 benium. bedtime.

I just saw many of you are fueled by cookies tonight. So, I'm Brian Raiken, senior strategist, uh, and here to talk with you tonight about the growth plan contract amendment.

I'm with the community development department in the growth management division. Um council, you've been briefed fairly extensively over the past two months on the growth plan and uh this is uh one of the major steps that you can take towards advancing that work. So tonight we're going to be focusing on contract amendment. Uh and this contract amendment and the growth plan will advance almost every goal. I would say every goal will be advanced. Some clearly more than others. um in particular housing, economic prosperity, accessible effective governance, transportation, infrastructure, climate resiliency. I think those are main stays and major elements of this project. Public safety will get attention in the first phase and more so later. Um so the process of procurement began this summer where we issued requests for proposals. We we had a competitive open process. We selected Cascadia Partners. Uh the first contractor approval uh from uh city manager uh was for $159,177 to begin setup work and there are a lot of times sensitive tasks because we have a pretty compressed schedule. So, we started that work um early um and so now we're bringing a larger contract amendment to you uh for a not to exceed amount of $2,739 $282, excuse me, for services in this bianium. Um that and the total contract amount are both within the materials and services contract uh or materials and services budget line item in the growth management division. So you've already budgeted for this work and future contracts will be budgeted and negotiated in the next two biania because this project could run until 2030. Uh and an estimated total cost across all phases including this would be 7.2 million.

So all the big pieces are coming together and this uh contract amendment approval is uh is the last and and most meaningful. So, the new state rules that guide the housing, uh, that essentially guide housing and all the work we're going to be doing in the next couple years, uh, associated with the owner rules, those were effective in January of 2026. Um, the Department of Land Conservation Development, they approved our climate friendly and equitable communities major report just about a week ago that essentially establishes our targets and measures associated with CF. um very important piece of work to come together. Uh and DLCD approved our alternate dates request earlier this summer to align with the sequential review approach and we are still awaiting DLCD's approval for the sequential review. Um and so the the city council approved that, the county approved that and now it's on the state's desk. I expect that within a week. Uh city boards, commissions, and partner agencies have also been briefed and are supportive. And for those with a sense of humor, this is a photo of Salem, Oregon. This is where the rules and laws all come from. Y

I can see Anthony there.

It's so it's it's gorgeous. Um so the team, this is a a multi-disiplinary team. Uh I think first and foremost, and I um you know, throwing the word expert around is is a little bit dangerous. It sets very high expectations, but I'm going to say it anyway. I just did. I think they're expert in their field. Um they're extremely experienced. I was counting up over 200 years of their experience on the project team members between all of them. Um so Cascadia Partners is the prime consultant. Um they provide all facets of of urban planning services um across the west. So it's not just Oregon. Um but they have I think a particular specialty in making sure that the plans that they create are grounded in market reality. Um and so they also have expertise in equity focused engagement as well as spatial analytics associated with this kind of planning. Eco Northwest they're focusing on core deliverables for housing employment and housing production. Um and then we have KDson Associates focusing on transportation planning. DKS and Associates focused on transportation modeling. Both of those transportation firms have expertise across both of those disciplines, but they have a particular strength that we're playing to in this contract. Uh and then Walker Maisy for urban design, climate resiliency and in a relatively small role. Um this group of firms um they're Oregon firms um and they also have local experience and local roots. A number of the uh team members live in Bend. Um KDOS Associates has a full office here. Um Echo Northwest, why most of their folks don't necessarily live uh in Bend, they're they have an office here in town. Um, and so they they are um they're locals as well. And for the folks that don't necessarily live here, they have been working in Bend for decades and have a really good sense of the community. Um, they have been advisers, members of this team, advisers

to DLCD in their recent uh, housing rule making. So, they've been on the inside working with the agency on those rules pertaining to the project and advisers to um, Oregon Department of Transportation on the transportation planning rules. um they have a wide span of clients smaller than smaller than Bend larger than Bend uh and across the west and I think they can bring that that expertise and experience into this project. Um and I I think really importantly they've been delivering local successes at least some are some or all these team members have been developing local successes for abandoned a number of projects. Legacy Village for example involved three or four of those teams uh team members in that project. So um Eric wanted me to touch on efficiencies um recognizing the budget amount and um so we spent a considerable amount of time negotiating the scope of work working with the consultant uh very actively over the past month and a half um and really focusing on trying to put the consulting team in the best place. um across these different deliverables with all these different team members. So rebalancing roles uh of the consulting team, streamlining uh the number of staff that are working on a project, all those things are important cost containment measures uh self self-performing of different deliverables uh in growth management, communications and the office of performance management. So essentially the city staff are taking on more responsibilities and delivering those in the project rather than having the consulting firm provide those services for us. Um I think the form of engagement overall is really important and that approach to engagement which we've discussed before and trying to talk about multiple subjects at different touch points over time will deliver efficiencies and then also they're developing a lot of these tools and then we are expected to deploy them. So if you look deeply into the scope you'll see that they're here and they're providing those services and support. They'll be with us for some of the way to train us on the tools to show up to

uh different events, but there's an expectation in this that the city city organization will take it beyond that. Um and then some kind of internal stuff that doesn't sound real exciting, but is actually really important in cost containment as well as efficiency. Creating a spatial data portal so that we can share our data back and forth elegantly so we can leverage the information and data analytics that are coming out of the project for other city uses. um and better internal communication systems as well. Um and then also there are elements of this project we're investing in things now that we will use later. Um and I think filling gaps that have been in the organization, no fault to the organization, but this is an opportunity to do some things now that we will carry forward in the coming years that will make it much more efficient and effective. In particular, some of the transportation and land use modeling tools. bring those on into the project so that we can use them in the project and then carry them through beyond this for use in the monitoring of those climate friendly and equitable communities targets as well as experimenting with new online engagement tools. This is a breakdown of the contract amendment more or less by the type of work. Um you'll see transportation stands out. Um however when you sum up all those other bars what you'll see is that it's about onethird transportation 2/3 other planning type activities. Um so transportation receives um close to a million dollars worth of of services much of that in transportation modeling um for this phase comprehensive plan. This came up in some of our our discussions with council. The comprehensive plan you look at that it's a small bar and that's because in phase one uh city staff is going to be doing a lot of that work in house and we've already begun that work. Um land capacity and need that's our core deliverables. These core deliverables are around our buildable lands inventory, our employment opportunities analysis. Those core deliverables, that's land need and capacity, growth planning and urbanization are a lot of

supportive uh supportive services in order to contextualize this project and make it meaningful and inform our comprehensive plan. uh engagement and government governance is also receiving a considerable amount of resources because without that uh the rest of the project doesn't really doesn't have the impact uh and connection with the community that we are hoping for. Um and of course project management and contingency services u councelor Riley asked me to add this slide. Um so this contract is for the first phase of work essentially to run through the bienium. some of the work in this contract will be done in this bienium and other we're starting certain tasks that will then move uh be completed in the next phases of work. So it's not a clean line. We're starting some of the work that we're then going to have to budget for and contract for in the following phases. So the work that is included in this contract amendment is in the first bullet points or dots of one and two in that 2026 through 2027 time frame where the focus is really on identifying our future needs. And some of these major policy drivers determining our existing capacity um in the deliverables that you see in the slide uh such as a contextualized housing need, employment opportunities analysis uh as well as our housing capacity analysis, buildable lands inventory. So the big question is okay, what are what do we need? What do we need um in terms of our 20-year land needs for employment and housing? So those are that's the big question we're going to answer um from a deliverable standpoint. Um, and I have a deta more detailed graphic here. I recognize it's a longer um I was joking with

more detailed one than this. No, I get no absolutely not a lot.

I can I am happy to go through all of this as you know. I I am so excited to talk about this, but I also recognize I should probably rein myself in at this moment. Um, so this is really designed to help me discuss um and answer your questions. Uh, but if you want me to cover it briefly, I'm happy to do that. Um, so this is the first more or less the focus of the project in the first in this bianium in this fiscal bienium. Um, and so we have our mobilized tasks of setting up our project management and governance structures, creating our data portal. That work is underway. We're in the process of then selecting a modeling tool for land use and transportation. Ultimately, we will pick that tool. We'll use that through the project, get our staff up and trained and beginning to run that with the hope that through this project that our staff can take on a stronger and stronger role in that. The framing portion of this is work related to scenario planning that we will bring to the council in an August workshop which uh I think a schedule or it's getting close. I'm going to meet with the mayor and talk about that, but we're planning for an August workshop with the city council probably offsite um to make it much more kind of enjoyable than no offense to the table here um but something that's a little bit more comfortable and more relaxed for everyone. and lack of windows.

We can have windows. Well, we have a public window. Yeah, public works campus. We can do that. Yeah. Everything. The public works campus does everything. So, we'll go there.

Um, so we're we're really pointed towards that workshop and that's kind of the the kickoff um of the project. It's a it's it's going to be, I think, an exciting big learning opportunity and to get some of your input that will then drive our consideration of these subjects as we move forward. Um, in that framing, figuring out our land needs. So what does the contextualized housing need tell us about how we're going to affirmably further fair housing and and tailored housing needs in terms of type, location, and characteristics of the units that we need with a particular focus on underserved community members and also I would say the nuts and bolts of Oregon planning on our buildable lands inventory, the economic opportunities analysis and housing capacity analysis. So we're that's the framing. Um so it's a little bit of education, background, city council guidance, and then the core deliverables. The plan and engagement uh line that you see there is a step that I'm really really excited about. Um part of the the the contract includes visioning. And that's really about working with the community and the council to identify what are what are our goals, what are our values, and what are our principles related to how we're going to grow. and working actively with the community to decipher what are those values that they have and and how what are these what is the community thinking in terms of those subjects. Of course, the city council ultimately will adopt that vision. So, that will be your responsibility during the project in phase two, but in phase one, we're beginning that. So, if you can imagine, you have your kickoff, we have a workshop, and then shortly thereafter, we roll into visioning and a really big public outreach effort um that's detailed in in in the scope of work. um that community visioning also can influence these deliverables and in particular the second phase deliverables around how we're going to grow up and how we're going to grow out. Strategize. Um this is really getting more tactical I think with with the city council on a couple different subjects. One on the transportation system. So we're

beginning our transportation system plan update slowly but steadily in phase one of this work. Um and so talking about our system goals, objectives, performance standards. Performance standards will how how will you council how do you want to define the success and how we're going to rank and evaluate our our system as we grow. So you'll establish those. Um we're going to work on inventories um uh of our system and existing conditions. How's our current system operating? And we're going to learn those things as well as starting to test our efficiency measures that come out of community visioning. Um and then adopting so city council within this bian would would adopt the draft package one of our contextualized housing need as well as the um the buildable lands inventory economic opportunities analysis and the first phase of the housing capacity analysis. So those are two adoption points in another form of engagement. So if you can imagine engagement is almost they're connected of course and they're very connected through this team's proposal but we have kind of higher level on visioning and then we have I would say kind of more tactical engagement as well. Um you'll see community impact analysis which is really a it's a system and a an analysis both spatially and historically of of how our community has come to be where it is. It's a it's an analysis of past patterns and practices of discrimination. It involves a a very spatial analysis of concentrations of underserved community members. It also also is analyzing how we're going to meet the various legal requirements and have a framework for considering equity in all of the deliverables, not just the ones that are required, but throughout the entire project. Um, and then that also influences our communication engagement uh strategy which we will finalize. We will also be investing in an online engagement tool that is new to the city. We pull those things together. We will begin focused engagement with

stakeholders uh with different members of the community in smaller environments um in associate also separate from community visioning but we'll complement. So, we're bringing those themes up. And then after the city council workshop, we'll begin our um our governance structure, which we've talked about, which is city council as well as our um we're calling it the city the joint committee working group at this point, not the committee of committees. So, we're we're we'll find a better name, but we we we had to move away from committee of committees. Um so, that's when we'll start our governance. So, I'm happy to answer any questions. You'll see the issue summary with even more detail um as well as a recommended motion.

Thanks, Brian. Any questions? Excited to kick this off, get it going. Really big project. The motion. Yep. Go ahead. I move to authorize a contract amendment with Cascadia Partners LLC for the city of Ben growth plan for an increase to the contract amount for phase 1 services in the 2025 2027 bianium not to exceed $2,739,282. Exactly. For a total contract amount not to exceed $2,898,459. Second. All right. Move by council. Second by council Riley. All those in favor? Any post? Okay. Unanimous. Thank you, Brian. Thank you. Thanks so much.

All right. We're going to pull up item number 12 now. So hopefully Eric is here. There he is. Council has asked to adopt a resolution authorizing eminent domain for properties along neur as part of an corridor improvement project. Are you there? Uh,

good evening, council. My name is Eric Forester. Uh, I'm assistant city engineer on the CIP engineering side of the house. Um, with me is Todd Johnson, senior project engineer for this project. Um, this is a revisit of the NE corridor eminent domain resolution that you saw back in December. um where inadvertently we did not have the legal descriptions with the project. Um and then in addition to that um further communication with business owners uh there on Nef Road um the realization that maintaining access to their businesses um necessitated um a couple other files just for uh temporary construction easements um to tie them in um and maintaining that um access to their properties. Um, I understand council's pretty familiar with this project. Uh, the it's the 10-ft path that's going to be running along Nef. Um, let's go to the next slide here. Oh, I hit the wrong button. Apologize. So, uh, the path starting there on the east side of Pilot Bay Middle School and running the full length of Nef down to Eagle Road. Um the parcels shown on the screen here are the 15 parcels. Um and the y the ones in yellow are the newer ones. Um so communication has happened with um these property owners. Um and then also just identifying that this mechanism is a way for um the city to maintain um schedule certainty if um appraised value is not close to what maybe property owners believe the value of the incumbrance that we're either taking or using their property in some fashion or if they're just non-responsive. Um it gives us a tool to maintain the project. So being pretty succinct here, um that's the resolution that we're looking for council to make

tonight. Okay, any questions? Multi-use path. All right, I move to adopt a resolution exercising the power of eminent domain if agreement cannot be reached with property owners for the acquisition of portions of up to 15 parcels necessary to construct the NF Ford project and authorizing the city manager to take steps necessary to implement the resolution. Second. All right. All right. Moved by councelor Mendes, second by councelor Platt. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Unanimous. Okay. Thanks, Eric. Okay. Thanks. All right. We're going to hop back up to item number 10. Councelor Norris, you want to go ahead?

Yes. Um, I am choosing on items 10 and 11 because I'm an employee of hidden homes and there these items would have a financial impact on my employer. So, I will be meeting. Thank you. All right. Thank you. And are we are we are we talking about 10 and 11 together or Okay, Ashley, go ahead.

Yeah. Council has asked to adopt a resolution to authorize the city to enter into a clean water state revolving fund loan agreement with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality to finance the Aelia and Windsor sewer project the total loan amounts not to exceed 2,900,000 and council is asked to authorize a contract with CRAL Development LLC for construction of the Aelia and Windsor sewer project. Good evening council. Um Drew Wells with the project engineer with the engineering department presenting on the construction contract for the Ailian Windsor sewer project. Uh and my name is Kim Alletz. I'm the assistant finance director and I'll be talking about the loan.

Um since Jason Se was here presenting on the King Hezek Fargo project at the last council meeting, I'll skip the uh history on the sector to sewer program. Um this is the second part of the seventh selection that was um selected last October or excuse me October 2024. Uh these are the two project areas. Aelia um just north of Reed Market and west of Pedigrew and then Windsor Drive is just off of um north not road and west of Brer House. Um we will be doing full with pavement restoration and traffic closures with local access for both areas. Overview of Aelia. We got 1675 linear feet of sewer main, 21 service laterals. Uh you can see here the dotted properties are the ones that sign the application for the the uh program and the non-dtted are the ones that did not sign. Windsor area uh 2355 linear feet of sewer main with 33 service laterals. And again the dotted ones were the ones that sign. We'll note that uh we are looking to close braster house uh full closure. We've limited that to the summer schools out um but we do need to close up for uh construction made along that short stretch there and we'll be doing some public outreach with a information booth and popup and doing a broad outreach prior to the closure. Hey

Drew, can I ask you a question? It's a good example of what I tried to ask about last time. So there's that little teeny tiny culde-sac there. So, will a main be taken down that culdesac to the end of that culde-sac even though those people haven't signed? Not with this project. No. We'll look to stub out to the north. So, if they do their own application in the future, um they would have a way to connect to the manhole we'd put in the intersection of Broster House in Windsor. Wow. So, they didn't sign so they miss out. Correct. Do you go back to them and ask them like, "Hey, second chance." I mean, they they always had the opportunity to to

Yeah. The program was never designed to make outreach. actually that was not what was requested by neighbors. They wanted to do it themselves and they didn't want the city coming around and asking people to sign up. Um and so that's the way the program is structured is the neighborhoods put together their applications because that's that's the way they wanted the program and it's budget it's budgeted and grant and you've got the grant now, right? So yeah. So any idea why this is a lower take rate on this on this property? A lower what take rate and the people who signed up just Yeah. I'm not sure why. Okay. Thanks. That the culdeac you're referring to is Windsor Court. Yeah. No, that that one's receiving. Yeah, Windsor Court will get it. This one down here, I don't call the name. Oh, Windsor Court will get it, man. Is that the one?

That's what I was asking about. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, we'll we'll do one down that. It will get Okay. Even though they didn't. Okay. Oh, I thought you were talking about that little stubby culac that's white. Yeah. Crossroads. No, I was asking about Yeah. Wind. Yeah. And everything in red is getting served. Sorry. This isn't show. Yeah. Any the we're getting Windsor court with all those red properties, those all good services. Okay. So then maybe there was sounds like there was confusion about what my question was, so I'll just ask it again. So the ones without the dots that didn't sign, will you go back to them and give them an opportunity to join or no? For all the properties in red, whether they have dots or not, they'll get sewer laterals to their property and then they Oh, from there. It's their choice. It's their choice. Yeah.

Um and I guess a good opportunity to follow up on your question from last time. Um, out of the 230 properties that have connected to date, roughly about 90 that didn't sign, um, did take advantage of the connection distance.

Overview of the project timeline. Uh, committee selection in October 2024. This is the second part of the second project of that selection. um designed for 2025 and looking to start construction probably mid mid April late April this year and be done by October and overview on the project budget is $1.9 million as a low bid with CR L and a total estimated project cost of just over two million and then yeah as was mentioned previously this project is being funded by Clean Water State Revolving Fund loan bit of a mouthful so I'll refer to it as CWSRF F. Um,

not sure which is worse. Yeah. Um, the loan amount is not to exceed 2.9 million. However, um, consistent with all of our other CWSRF loans, the amount drawn and borrowed will only be the amount to complete the project and the um final loan amount will be adjusted to the amount that were drawn down. Um, this loan is also eligible for principal forgiveness up to 50% of the final loan amount. So, we'll only pay back the 50% that remains um of what we originally drew down. Great. All right. Any other questions, council?

All right. I think we had two motions, 10 and 11. to adopt a resolution authorizing a clean water state revolving loan fund agreement to finance the Aelian Windsor sewer project in a total loan amount not to exceed 2,900,000 and substantially the form presented to council and as approved by the department of environmental quality. Second. All right. Moved by councelor Frola, second by councelor Mendes. All those in favor. All right. Next motion. I move to authorize a contract with CBRL Development LLC and substantially the form presented to council for construction services for the Aelia and Windsor sewer project in an amount not to exceed $1,97,6760.

Second. All right. Moved by councelor Mendes, second by councelor Platt. All those in favor? I. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. That gets us to city manager report. Yes, Sandra. Yes, I'll be quick here. So, I mentioned in the council memo last a couple weeks ago about the recycling part inspection program. Uh, so there's as part of the recycling modernization act compliance, there's going to be folks out in uh from the waste haulers inspecting our looking in the bins.

Looking in the bins. So, I this kind of like a public service announcement. I shared that all with you. There'll be public uh press releases from the the haulers, but one is until that was taking place. Um couple other announcements. We have the Hawthorne uh connection Franklin open house next week on the 7th at the New Newberry Hotel from 4:30 to 6:30. Uh, also a reminder that April 8th, next week, it was mentioned the round table for our electrification policy that is going to be at the public works campus from 4 to 6:00 p.m. Uh, and we've had diverters installed recently and we've put a lot of information out in the community and I want to make sure that some of that information also is going to go in the council memo that includes just some factual information. Um, so just giving you a heads up to look for it. So if you get are interacting with the community and there's some concerns, it's new for Ben. So, I think there will be some reaction to that. We want to make sure we're equipping you with uh good information there. And I that's it. Yeah, that's it.

All right. Great. We are adjourned. Thanks everybody. Thanks.