Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and call the Bend Planning Commission meeting from Monday, August 10th to order. And we'll start with roll call.

Katie Schnurr.

Nathan Nelson.

Suzanne Johanson. Erin Ludden.

Okay, let's just move on into the visitor section. This would be for anyone who has any public comment that's not related to any of the items on tonight's agenda. Do we have any one that's filled out any papers or anyone online? sorry we have no online attendees okie dokie well let's go ahead and go into the legislative public hearing for pl text 20260207 the sign code update go ahead and leave it to you and i'm opening the hearing just to be clear

Let's see. To.

There we go.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

I just talked about that reorganizing. so the proposed amendments to start with we had a few definitions and um there's the exhibit a that's the full package i should note too was pointed out at the top there's notes about the text that are underlined is uh code that's supposed to be added text that is a strike through is it says to be added that's supposed to be proposed to be struck and i fixed that for the one that's in the file and we'll fix it going forward. So I just note that that was a little typo there. And then there's staff comments throughout that are bold and italicized in brackets. And then there is a exhibit that is Exhibit B that's kind of a summarized version of those, a two-page just brief summarized version. So I'm going to kind of go through an even briefer. description of these amendments, but you can follow along with probably the exhibit B is the easiest way to follow along. So the definition section, we had a few definitions that we were just simplifying and clarifying, nothing substantive that changed there. In 9.50040, permit requirements for sign districts, we added some clarification that even if a sign permit comes in, If it's in a historic district, it may also require a separate historic sign permit. And if it doesn't require a sign permit, it may still require a separate historic sign review. We also split that section. We split the permit requirements and the districts into two separate sections just to provide better clarity. They're kind of separate items. In 05-0, which is signs exempt from permit requirements, we moved a few types of signs that up till now have required an actual sign permit into the exempt section. Things that we just didn't really feel needed a true sign permit. Window signs are one of those. Freestanding directory signs. And we've got some kind of pictures up there that show a few of these types of signs. And then suspended signs and mostly because typically these signs are small enough to not require a structural permit. And they are not typically illuminated so there's no electrical permits there's a lot of reasons why you wouldn't necessarily need to get a permit for them as long as they meet the standards. um. Another thing we added into this section, we already had light pole banners in there, but we'd had a request from, I think it was Polish that we talked to. One of the developers that had some big multifamily complexes that have very limited amounts of signage that they can pursue because they're in residential districts and they were asking you know they've got some light poles throughout this on private property could they not do light pole banners so we kind of took a look at that and thought yeah that seems reasonable so that was something we added in there um and even not just multi-family but like some of their bigger um residential single-family neighborhoods where they have light poles to be able to put some banners so we some parameters on that we don't just want every neighborhood that's got a light pole banners but when it's a development that's six acres or more or multi-family development 20 units or more those seem to be reasonable thresholds that we've got for other types of signage as well so that was something that we added in we added an exemption for plaques and commemorative markers so these are the ones that you see on like historic buildings or sometimes on historic sites These could also be on park sites or along trails. One of the examples was the trail along the river in the Old Mill District has some interpretive signs. That's why it's got that six square feet limit, because it can be those type of signs as well. So that was our exempt requirement changes or exempt permit changes. And then we have temporary signs. Up until now, So last year, we amended the code to require registrations for portable signs, and they were a one-time registration. And the banners kind of stayed at every time you do a banner, you need a new registration. And so we got to thinking about that, that maybe we should go the same route. as the portal signs and just do it as a one time registration. So a business can just register one time for a size of a banner and a location of the banner. Those banners can be on a building, they can be freestanding, but they kind of set the parameters of where the banner is going to go and how big it's going to go. And we approve their one time registration. And then they're still limited to 60 calendar days a year. But they can either have a chunk of 60 days, they can manage their own 60 days you know these are on a kind of enforcement basis so unless we get a complaint that somebody's leaving them up here around we're not gonna overly worry about those similar to any other registration sign um what else did we change we separated in this section oh the freestanding versus building mounted banners and changed the banner size in sign districts one and two to better match the limitation on permanent freestanding signs. And then the one other change in there was we realized when we updated the portable sign regulations last year, they were mostly along street frontages, but we didn't really contemplate alleys. And downtown, there's businesses that only have an entrance off the alley and they we actually had one or two requests for permits for those businesses. And we're like, Oh, we can't technically can't approve these. So we've got talk to fire, talk to building and came up with an allowance for if they have an actual public entrance off the alley that they can put a sign within three feet of the wall and the alley has to be a 20 foot wide minimum alley. So if it's a narrower alley, they wouldn't be able to do it. But that, we'll pretty much let a lot of the businesses in the downtown area in particular to have to be able to have those portable slides. Prohibited signs, we just clarified and simplified language in that section. And then the section for permanent signs, this is the one that we really overhauled. And there's not a lot of substantive changes in this other than, like we said, we moved suspended signs, directory signs and was the third one? Spended directory and window signs out of permanent signs into exempt signs. But then we also reorganized the whole or how the section was laid out and how it flowed. But substantively, not a lot of changes in there. There were some. We added an allowance for building signs for, again, for multifamily developments that are over 20 units. We revised how sign area on multi-tenant buildings is calculated to allow each tenant space to calculate their own individual sign, as opposed to trying to allocate an overall building elevation to different tenants. We also Was that the last one that we count? Oh, we removed the minimum sign area. In sign district five. In sign district five. Well, we removed the minimums from all of them, and then we increased the sign area. For sign district five, that's what we did. Which is the ones that are visible from the parkway? The sign district five is the residential zone. So this kind of came from a church in Bend that, Was trying to get signage and they had a cross that they and it was the way that you calculated it was really restrictive and currently the code limits those signs to 12 square feet so we're proposing to bump it up to 30 square feet. Just to give a little bit more sign area and typically these are institutional or. I mean, there's some commercial in residential zones, but they're still restricted based on the lineal feet of the frontage of the elevation, but this gives them a little bit bigger sign, especially when you have a bigger facade. And then the last thing was to remove the illumination restriction for subordinate facades visible to the Bend Parkway. So these are the ones that aren't directly facing but are maybe on a side street, but you can still see them. and then we talked about moving those projecting window and suspense suspended signs to oh i'm sorry projecting signs was one more so these are limited to a maximum height of 24 feet currently and when we have we're getting more and more multi-story buildings um they tend to be especially in the downtown or the bend central district they tend to be up close to the street where those sites don't accommodate a freestanding sign. So in lieu of that, we thought we could allow higher projecting signs, similar to what we do for building signs, but have it be a projecting sign for those type of locations. And an example of this that Kim had was the Oxford downtown has an adjustment to allow this. So this would eliminate the need for the adjustment for those cases. and then the other one that i think this came up last year kind of at the tail end of the discussion when we were allowing electronic components the reader boards for freestanding signs um what about for schools and churches that tend to be in in residential zones that don't allow internal elimination and it kind of came up at the last minute we were trying to figure out a way to do that but but still keep that dialed in because historically we haven't had any internal illumination on signs in residential districts. So, but it was coming up again and again, and we took a closer look at it and we already have a pretty decent limitation on the size of ground mounted and monument signs in sign districts four and five. And so if we're talking about the 25% of that area that's allowed for an electronic component, we're talking maybe 10 square feet. So it's pretty minimal. We still wanted to try to keep that minimized. And so our thought was to limit them to public and institutional uses in those districts. So that would cover your schools, your churches, your bigger site users that have more of a need for those type of reader boards. And then the last was just some minor edits in the general requirements section. So I think that pretty much covers our proposals. And we didn't get any public comments. So I don't see anybody .. So I don't know if we'll have any public comments for the hearing or not. Any questions for us?

Let's just go quickly across the right to left. Aaron, do you want to start with the other questions?

there was one, one thing I had questions just on the wording. Okay. Um, this is in section. Well, it's on, it's on page 12, um, under specific standards by building sign type. Um, Okay, an awning or canopy cannot extend within two feet from the street curb, so that has to be the curb minus two feet, and that's the maximum. I wanted to make sure I was interpreting that well. And then on illumination, for things like the directory signs or some of the things that generally wouldn't be like an illuminated sign, is it legal to have like a little solar light that makes, shines on there so you can read it at night?

We basically have definitions for types of illumination. Internally illuminated means the light source is hidden behind the face so it shines through. So it glows. So yeah. Okay. external illumination to be attached or detached and what you just described would be attached so if you had something that's at the top and maybe it's a concealed light bar or solar light as long as that light is shielded so it goes down onto the face that's external illumination that would be allowed in any district okay they would have to get the electrical permit for that but they need that first little solar if it yeah that would not if it's hardwired so you're actually connecting to sure that that that should require a permit i just wanted like little solar things just you know they're they're yeah they don't require a permit um and so they're part of the exempt section of the code and as long as that's how you're illuminating it if we got a complaint about the light not being shielded then we would go out and take a look at that but right right okay

Thank you. I really don't have anything. I was saying, I don't know how many times I've been involved in sign code a lot a lot a lot and like you said i mean huge hearings so it's nice to have it be nice and quiet so good job uh i do have one question though uh for people who display an american flag there are rules about displaying the american flag right about it being illuminated at night and not touching the ground and being destroyed if it's

uh damaged uh that I assume we don't enforce any of the American flag standards we don't have that in the sign code the only only section of the code that touches on that is the fact that we we do try to define what a flag is by its shape and how it's attached to its whole um but because we have to step aside for anything that's content related you know which includes the American flag right we don't regulate or include any of those type of regulations for displaying the flag that's what i assume thank you thank you any questions um yeah for projecting signs is that literally a projector giving a sign what means sticking out of the side of the building that's a good question and projecting side is basically a double-sided sign so if you're downtown um there's gonna be two faces so no matter which direction on the sidewalk you're walking You're going to see the sign from both sides and it's attached to the building on one side. Okay.

Yeah, there's a picture. Yeah, there's one.

See, it's kind of, it's a little dark.

I've done a better job with that.

It's a little R that's up there on the third floor.

Yeah, that projects out from the wall.

That was my, when I first saw projection, that's when I was like, oh, wow. And isn't that like electrical?

Yeah. Moving out of the wall. Yeah. You go in Mexico and you're walking along the sidewalk, they all have them projecting them on the sidewalks. We haven't thought about that one.

I did have one more question. On building solid buildings up to 40 feet, you're allowing signs that basically at the top of the building. What about buildings, I think our max height is 65 feet. What are we allowing for those buildings?

We do have a limitation on how high the building sign can be. And in this case on a projecting sign, if you do have a three story or more building where it's 40 feet in height or more, that projecting sign can float up to 38 feet and that's the cap. But there's also another limitation has to drop down from that roof at least two feet. So it doesn't look like it's floating up and off the building. So we do have a limitation there as far as its clearance. It's maximum height of 38 feet for those tall buildings. If your building is a single story or two story or doesn't exceed that 40 foot limit, then we're still keeping that cap at 24 feet.

And Kim, that was recently increased.

Yes, good point. It matches what we allow for a wall sign, a building wall sign. And yeah, we increased that last year with our last code updates.

So if we had a particularly tall building, they would have to apply for a variance.

And they could apply for a variance to some standards. If I recall, they cannot apply for a variance to that height standard. I'd have to look it up to double check. But I think that's what we found in place for a wall sign. They could not increase that height beyond that limitation.

Pretty hard to read as it gets higher up in the air.

Yeah, I guess I'm thinking like if you're on the parkway, for example, you can see the Jack Straw building. If you have other buildings, which are likely to go up.

Yeah.

And if they're taller, they put in like a taller hotel or something. We're going to let them put the name, the top of the building, or is it going to have to be kind of in the middle?

Right. So again, we would go back to the type of sign wall sign or projecting, and then look at the limitations for the height of those signs and what we're going to, what our intent is, is to keep them down at the main storefront level, but where buildings are like the hotel, multiple stories allow that sign to go up, but cap it at either 24 feet. If it's a one or two story building, or 38 feet if it is three or more stories or more than 40 feet in height. So we're still capping it at that 38 feet depending on, but if that 38 feet puts it right to the top of that building, they have to come down. They have to come down, right.

Okay. So they want to build high rises here, then they'll have to ask for new regulations. Right. Okay.

Awesome. I think that sounds like it's all of our questions. We'll go ahead and move on to public testimony. Do we have any? Okie dokie. Well, public testimony is open. Public testimony is closed. Do you have any comments? Let's go ahead and close the public hearing and move on to deliberation. Let's start on the left. Katie, do you have anything?

I like the way the signage has developed over time. It's not perfect, but you really don't notice it until you go someplace that doesn't have those kinds of restrictions. And then you come home and you really appreciate it. So good job on keeping our signs code updated and relevant and appropriate for our community.

Yeah, I, uh, the changes all seemed relevant to how the city is developing and need for like schools and such to be able to post their events. And yeah, I think I'm supportive. I don't have any. Yeah.

It seems like the changes make it a little bit more organized, a little more flexible. I think both of those things are good. Um, so I don't really have any issue with it either. Um, do we have a motion?

I move to recommend that City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Bend Municipal Code Chapter 9.50 signs as contained in Exhibit A, along with the findings contained in the staff report. I'll second that.

Awesome. All in favor? Aye. Okay.

That is done. Thank you guys so much.

Thank you.

They're wrapping it up down there. I'll give a little plug to the sign code and back to what Suzanne said. It's been in effect, Kim, about 25, six, seven years now. 30 something okay well but it's like the hardest working code that nobody really knows about yes and it's because of the standards that we have that makes the city look so beautiful and and it's been in place for so long that people really don't realize the benefit that we're we're receiving from it so i want to give a shout out to kim and all of them Mike Noce, Mgmt. Work, but she's one of them.

Thank you. Amy on this particular one for a job. Amy, take him over around the base changes one final order of business.

Um, Nathan is to nominate a planning commissioner. Bring this to Council. I believe we're looking at September second, as the City Council public hearing date. If there's a commissioner who can represent. Okay, that'd be great. Erin, thanks.

Oh, yeah, that is section 8. I did miss that. I'm sorry. Well, let's move on to agenda item 4, approving the minutes for the June 22nd meeting. Anyone notice any issues with that? Awesome. Awesome. And then we'll move on to the agenda item five, which is working out the details on who's going to be on the neighborhood commercial sites working group. So if you remember, we sent out an email to the neighborhood districts to see if we can get some volunteers to join that neighborhood commercial working group. We were looking to nominate three applicants we got three applicants so we got ian um karaz from the orchard district uh karen johnson from old farm and kevin moriarty from summit west um which conveniently is like a pretty diverse geographic area for them so i'm happy to see that um i think that selecting all three of them is fine Um, unless anyone has anything to say about that, does that sound good?

Awesome.

Um, we want to, we also want to add, uh, two of us to the party. Um, there's going to, the meetings are going to start either at the end of August or at the beginning of September. Um, and it's going to be two meetings a month for two or three months. Each one is going to be about two hours. Uh, do we have any more information about when those are going to be happening at this point?

Caroline Miller, um no that's great information, thank you for sharing that much and no really I think is dependent on when we could get this working group formed for calling to start. Caroline Miller, Setting up some meetings, but I think what you said is still good guideline I don't know what week she might be looking at to start, but as she said, maybe end of August beginning of September. Caroline Miller, Okay, we can pull the group and try to find the best days and times that were based on the participants. awesome um does anyone want to to volunteer I would love to do it I just want to make sure if it's going to wrap up by the end of the year because that's the end of my turn you assured me it would okay because I I know that both you and Scott would be termed out this year and so wanted didn't want that to be a limit limiting factor before I volunteer what's the apart from the meetings what's the additional workload outside of meetings anything probably none other than providing your input as a commissioner and then um you know occasionally reporting back to the full commission on on what you're talking about ultimately whatever development code changes are drafted will come to the full commission of course at some point for your recommendation to Council but just helping to be that liaison from the working group back to the PC okay I don't have a problem with with that at all um

Aaron Ostrowski- Can we do the nomination for both at the same time, or do you mean both planning Commissioners yeah suggest to in the same.

Aaron Ostrowski- discussion sure.

Aaron Ostrowski- I nominate Suzanne and Aaron to be our liaison.

Aaron Ostrowski- All right, then, all in favor. Margo Alves- I excellent okay i'm in so you all know, I did put an email out to all Commissioners to let us know, knowing that margo and Scott we're not going to be here to let Nathan and me know if they were interested that we would bring them up and. Margo Alves- talk about them didn't hear from them so we're not leaving them out, but the next thing is maybe didn't have time for other reasons didn't want to put their names into the. Okay, well, thank you. Suzanne and Aaron pulling will be in touch very soon. Great.

Oh, well, this is like, the fastest planning commission meeting I've seen.

We should put you in charge all the time.

Oh, don't say that. Let's go into communications report from planning commissioners. Let's start with Aaron. I have nothing. uh nothing nothing to report myself though i did see an email from staff earlier this the last week or two about the the growth plan stuff is starting to come up um so i just want to get that on everybody's radar making sure um That's on your radar.

Awesome. I just have a question, though. Can you help me get in contact with our city IT person? Because I am locked out of my city email.

Do that. Out of your city email. Okay. Yeah, I think usually they ask to contact the help desk directly, so I'll get you that. Okay. Thank you.

Reports from the planning manager?

I'm just a couple of brief ones. Um, so we were not officially counseling the next planning commission meeting until we knew how this public hearing went. So, since you ultimately made a recommendation to counsel at this hearing, then we will cancel the August 24th meeting. We don't have any pressing projects or matters to bring to you in 2 weeks. And then, um. Since our last meeting, we, we did receive resignation of progress since for the planning commission, he's moved out of the area and so needed to resign from the commission when city council. Made selections and appointments to the Planning Commission in December of last year. They also appointed two alternates, which was the first time for the Commission, so we had two people to contact right away. Once Bob let us know that he needed to resign and so we reached out to those and. Kevin Semino is the new Planning Commissioner that was appointed by Council confirmed or Karen Hollweg, yeah chosen by the mayor confirmed by Council at their last meeting on Wednesday and so Kevin will join us at whatever your next regularly scheduled meeting is when you have business.

Very exciting yeah.

Karen Hollweg, um I think that's all I have thanks. Kevin Hollweg, Anything calm.

Kevin Hollweg, Nothing I did my son or my plug for the sign. Kevin Hollweg, The thing for me. amazing okay fall back sorry a couple things i've forgotten about council items um we had a couple items at council that came to planning commission right when reporting with stevens rand it was the stevens ranch industrial swap which they approved they did a they also had a public hearing on the residential code updates that you looked at recently Brett KenCairn, Again, those were unanimous approval by Council, and then there was a second reading of the cabbie master plan, which was also so that's final, so the way it works with Council is there's a first reading. Brett KenCairn, And then, a second reading and then a 30 day effective period, so that cabbie master plans and it's 30 day effective right now. Brett KenCairn, will be effective in. Brett KenCairn, Yes, that would be whatever 30 was 30 days is from last Wednesday okay.

And then coming up on the September 2nd Council meeting, because they have a little break right now in August, will be the sign code amendments that you just heard tonight that will be presented to Council for their action on September 2nd, as well as the Caldera Ranch urban growth boundary expansion comprehensive plan, math and text amendments that you saw maybe a month ago. I know we have a commissioner appointed to represent the commission. I just don't remember who that is at the moment, but we'll have a planning commission representation there as well. I didn't think I had the two from last week.

We'll look back. We have it in the notes.

It's on somebody's calendar. Awesome. I think that's everything. Move to adjourn.