Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, I'll go ahead and call to order today's planning commission meeting. It is August 25th, 2025. Oh, is that mine?

Yeah. Apologies. Should be. Okay, we'll go ahead and start with the visit or actually we'll do roll call first. Um, we'll start with you, John Lamont. Present. Bob Gresens, Marggo Clinton, Scott Winters, Suzanne Johansson,

Nathan Nelson, Evan. Okay, sorry, I'm just um next we'll go ahead and move into the visitors section. This is for visitors that have comments that do not pertain to tonight's um Benda item. I'm gonna lean on you if that's okay for online visitors. Uh yeah, I still haven't done that.

Um I might lean on you of course then. But um I do the only one I have up here is for tonight's agenda item. If you do have comments for tonight, you can go ahead and not on tonight's agenda item, you can fill out a form. Um and then is there anyone if you're online, raise your hand. No online attendance at this time.

Great. Next, we will go ahead and move into agenda item two, the quasi judicial public hearing. I will go ahead and open the hearing. This is for item PLZ 2025363 waterway overlay zone application for the Fire Rock Bridge Removal and Restoration Project located in located on the Dashuites River west of Fire Rock Road and east of Broken Arrow Road. Next, we'll go on to the statement of prehering context bias, prejudice, or personal interest. And we'll just start down the line. None for me. None. None. None. None. None.

None. Next, we will move on to the challenge for the bias prejudgment or personal interest. If anyone would like to challenge that, you may. Okay. Now, we'll go to staff to explain the procedural requirements. Colin.

Sure. So, I'm going to read a prepared statement here, but essentially what this mean is is directed to those of you who wish to testify tonight and and really also for the applicant, too. There's a section here, but it's mostly for what you should be aware of as you're providing testimony tonight, and this is a requirement of the state law. So, unless I hear an objection, the city will rely on the mailed notice and the staff report as well as staff's oral presentation that lists the applicable substantive criteria. While testimony, argument, and evidence must be directed to those criteria uh or other comprehensive plan or development code criteria that you believe are applicable, the failure to address an issue with sufficient specificity for the planning commission to understand and resolve the issue and its decision and to afford other parties an opportunity to respond may preclude an appeal on that issue to the to the land use board of appeals. The failure failure of the applicant to raise a constitutional or other issue concerning a proposed condition of approval with sufficient specificity for the commission to respond to the issue in its decision and to afford other parties an opportunity to respond may preclude a future civil action for damages concerning that condition in circuit court. Thank you.

Okay, next we'll move into the staff report. Erin,

hi. Good evening. Erin Benson, senior planner. Um we're here to talk about the um proposal to remove the fire rock foot bridge and to restore um that uh area of the river and they've got a presentation for you. Uh the applicant does as well. So this map shows the subject property. Uh it's basically one tax lot on the west side of the river and one on the east side of the river. The the one on the east side of the river is owned by the public and the one on the west side is own by the Rimrock West Homeowners Association. Um there is a pathway with um a stairway built into um the ground that um leads from Broken Arrow Road um that uh through this that private open space property to this bridge. Um I don't know if you can see my cursor, probably not, but um you can faintly see the foot bridge in this um aerial photo on the Fire Rock roadside. There is an easement from the end of that culde-sac um that follows a trail and um leads to a steep wooden staircase that um drops down to the publicly owned parcel there. This bridge was built in the 70s. It was originally um built to support a water line that ran under it um to bring water from the east side of the river over to the uh Rimrock West subdivision. Um the bridge fell into disrepair. Um the water line has been um taken out of service and so our engineering uh folks um uh had planned to take it out. Um we did

have a planning commission meeting a while back where um uh we reviewed this application once before the proposal before um only uh involved restoring the um access um on the west side of the river and not the staircase on the east side of the river. And now the project includes replacing um that staircase on the east side of the river as well. Um so the uh there's one, two, three, four, five different um sections of the waterway overlay zone that um pertain to this application. Sub uh section 610 has to do with tree removal and state agency coordination. Section 620 is the repairarian corridor sub zone um which in this location um is an area 30 ft from the ordinary high water mark along both sides of the river. Um the Dashus River corridor area of special interest sub zone. That's the one that extends the furthest out. These are um areas that are generally in a river canyon. So there's uh there's an area of special interest at kind of the north end of the city where the river um flows through this canyon. Uh there's one at the south end too. Um the and then the flood plane sub zone. Um this uh you know right along the banks of the river here there is a flood plane and there's special rules that pertain to anything you do in there. And the last one is the design review sub zone. That mostly applies to when there's u, you know, like a new house or new commercial building or something that's located within 100 feet of the river. Um, not too applicable to this particular project.

This map, um, it's kind of hard to see, but it just shows those, um, different subzones of the waterway overlay zone. This is a photo of the um existing conditions um on the west side. So you can see um the existing bridge there. And this is a photo of the existing conditions on the east side. There's that steep staircase I mentioned. And then kind of in the background, you can uh see down along on the river the foot bridge that crosses the river. Um, again, I apologize. This is kind of hard to see, but this also um shows the work area and kind of that yellowy orangey color. Um, and then the different sub zones. Um the again the proposal is to um replace the wooden staircase with something substantially similar on the east side, take out the bridge and um restore the trail and if necessary the wooden stir uh that's on the west side of the river as well. Um from what I understand there it's possible that that might not have to be taken out. Um but if it is to get to allow um small um uh heavy equipment in there then then it would be replaced in kind there. The the original proposal I think had uh several trees that were uh that they thought would have to be taken out. um they've sharpened their pencil and in um this current proposal only one 18-inch ponderosa tree that's right um uh at the west end of the bridge um will have to be taken out and that'll be

replaced. They'll plant a replacement tree for that. Um so this is an instance where uh a removal of a tree within the waterway overlay zone is necessary to accommodate this restoration work. There are besides uh this approval from the planning commission that's necessary. The um city has to um get a permit from the division of state lands which regulates wetlands. the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, um the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, which oversees the state scenic waterway program. Um this uh this project is located in that state scenic waterway, the DEEQ. So, there's a lot of alphabet soup here of uh state and federal agencies. I I didn't mention the Army Corps of Engineers, but um most of these permits have already been obtained or or they're in the works. Um the repairing corridor sub zone uh has um a list of things that can be approved within there. And uh I think the one that's probably the most applicable here is the one on the bottom number six. Restoration of the repairing corridor including site grading and recontouring when carried out in conformance with an approved restoration plan for this project. The city hired um a company called Jacobs that has prepared a restoration plan. And there's not really any sight grading or or recontouring proposed, but you know, that heavy equipment is going to disturb some stuff um when they're taking the bridge out. And um that'll all be restored with um native plants and um staff believes that it's a good

restoration plan that they've put together. In the repairing quarter sub zone, some of the stuff kind of overlaps in terms of um the approval criteria. In the repairing corridor, you got to get all your state and federal permits. Um you have to design whatever you're doing to minimize intrusion into the repairing corridor and um minimize the amount of vegetation you're taking out. Um take care of erosion. uh take care of any surface runoff and design things to minimize any adverse impacts to wetlands etc. Um and that's been done here. The area of special interest sub zone um that's um uh requires that has the project has to be designed and constructed to maintain the integrity of the existing natural features and biological system. Um there are some setbacks that um are listed in here just like the the design review sub zone. Um because the U city is is just removing and replacing things like for like there's some allowances for those types of things as well as um allowances for um features that facilitate public access and use and enjoyment of the river. Um in the the next sub zone is the flood plane sub zone. Uh there's not a whole lot in here that's very applicable. The when they pull out the um foot bridge, they'll also pull out the concrete um supports for it. And um the

um Jacobs has done an analysis of of what needs to be done there to avoid um impacts to fish and wildlife and um and as well uh you not to alter the flood plane in a way that would have any um negative impacts. the design review sub zone. The really the only uh criterion in there that's uh pertinent is the section on rebuilding of existing structures. Um which um that's allowed as long as there's comparable in size, profile, use, and location to what was already there. And that's what's being proposed. So, um I think the applicant will have more photos to kind of help you familiarize yourselves with this. If you haven't gone down there yourself, this foot bridge has just been basically off limits, closed um for maybe close to 10 years now. Um it's a really neat foot bridge. I mean, I remember taking my kids when they were little and we called it the Indiana Jones Bridge. It was kind of like, you know, it's it's it's got, you know, boards that were missing. even back, you know, then it was kind of in rough shape, but um yeah, this will in taking it out, uh it'll restore this part of the river and there will still be public access from Fire Rock Road and private access to that section of the riverbank um to the homeowners of the Rimrock West subdivision as there has been. Um but we're recommending two conditions of approval. Um, one that approval is based on the plans and supporting documents that have been submitted. Um, and two that before commencing construction, they have to obtain all their uh required local, state, and federal permits and approvals and give us copies of those just so we

have them in our files. Um, do you have any questions? Question. Yeah. Just is planning tracking all those different permits or public works or engineering who who tracks all this?

No. Um I mean the the engineers that are in charge of this project are tracking them. Like I say um some of those the the ones that have already been issued have been uploaded. We reached out to those agencies again this time and um uh for instance the um the department of st state lands said you know they they approved it back before and there's not any additional fill or disturbance that's proposed so it's that that's still good to go um okay etc. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? Yeah, I had a couple questions. Um so this was not built by the city, right? this is built by um you know they probably have more information

okay on that I I don't know the provenance exactly of if it was built by the city or at you know as in order to provide water to this subdivision that was approved prior to annexation um originally this Roomrock West subdivision was all on uh on-site septic systems too and um many years later, the city provided um public city vent sewer. Um so it's kind of an evolution. I was just kind of wondering about just like the beginning, you know, the history of it in terms of when the city

because I I think the city didn't build it and then took ownership of it. Ownership of it and just wondering about what the you know what the agreement was. Yeah. there. Yeah, it's it's kind of water under the bridge, but the the uh the applicant I think can give you more history on that if you want. Okay, awesome.

Um thank you for the presentation. Um last time we heard about this the like you mentioned access from the east side was planning on being removed. Can you speak a little bit more on like what's happened since that last meeting? Um, again, I'm going to defer to the applicant. I know that, you know, that was a pretty controversial and I believe the city manager kind of provided direction to um the engineers that were working on that to to

revisit that issue, meet with the neighbors, come up with uh an access solution. Um, in their presentation, which I've gotten a sneak peek of, they actually have like a visual u rendering of what that replacement staircase is going to look like. um instead of like just one straight shot down, it's gonna have a landing in the middle. Uh it looks really nice, I think. Um so they'll show you that. Thank you. No, I'm good.

Okay. Well, anybody else? You good? We'll go ahead to the applicants, please. Thank you, Okay, perfect.

Good evening everyone. My name is Carter Lawrence, City of Bend Engineering. I'm the project manager. Um, with me also from engineering, I have Jason Sir and then we also have our consultants with Jacob's engineering group, Britney Hughes and Kim Wetzel. Um yeah, as Aaron mentioned, based on our best understanding, the Fire Rock Bridge infrastructure was constructed in support of a water service line to service the Rimrock West um neighborhood before it was part of the city of Bend. Um this infrastructure was inherited by uh water services with the city when the neighborhood was incorporated. Uh in 2015, the bridge was closed due um to public use due to safety concerns. um sort of as part of the an upgrade to the water system in Rimrock West in that sort of westside neighborhood. Uh the water line that the bridge supports um has been rendered obsolete and has been taken offline. Um during this improvement project um on the west side, the city of men hired Jacobs Engineering to perform a condition assessment of the bridge and staircase. Um and I'll pass it over to Britney Hughes to talk about their findings and recommendations of that.

Sure. So um Jacobs, we performed a condition assessment on the bridge. There are several um items. The structure is 40 to 50 years old. Um, which is an advanced age for a timber structure like that that doesn't have um pressuretreated wood construction. There's a lot of things with it that were fairly structurally deficient. Um, probably one of the biggest ones just is that the concrete footings um don't have proper bearing um support. Um so we had made a recommendation in that report and the city took that um to uh keep the bridge closed at at that particular time. Um, they also asked us to do a condition assessment of that east side staircase, um, which you'll see in the in the photo here from kind of from below. Again, similar issues with that. Um, just numerous stair treads, risers, um, are bowed or split or checked. Um, and then there's several posts that just aren't bearing on anything and the ones that are don't have any structural attachment to um, the thing that they're set on. So, um, we, um, originally did, um, as Aaron mentioned, submit a WAS permit in early 2024. Um, and so leading up to that planning commission meeting, it became pretty apparent, um, that there was some additional community engagement that was needed as a part of of that effort. So, the city had chosen at that time to rescend the WA application um, and conduct some additional outreach on the project. um that's since been conducted and that's why we're here today. And that project includes a replacement of the staircase on the east side of the river. Um again, sorry this map is so small after seeing it on Aaron's screen. Um this just shows the W boundary. So that the orange area on the screen is showing um our proposed disturbance area um in order to remove the bridge and get the staircase replaced. Um, as Aaron mentioned, right, the

reason we're here is our project falls within that was boundary. Um, and we're here to, uh, look for approval for our our permit today. So, I'm going to talk a little bit about the major scope elements of the project. So, um, it includes obviously removal of the bridge that includes the entire wood structure itself and the eight concrete peers that uh, it is resting on. It includes removal and replacement of the east side staircase. And then it also includes potential removal and replacement of the westside staircase. The the difference there is we as engineers don't specify the means and methods by which a contractor does their work. We set the parameters with within which they must work. So they have to meet all their permit all the permit conditions. Um but the way that they choose to do the work um can vary. So, um because access down into this, um um canyon is so difficult, um we have pinpointed the west side of the um river as the likely access point if they were to use any type of equipment to try to remove the bridge. Um and so in that case, we envision they might choose to remove that westside staircase and replace it in order to get and replace it in order to get equipment down to the river. if they choose to use to do much of the removal by hand um or using some type of highline or other equipment, they may be packing a lot of stuff into the canyon by hand in order to to take that bridge out. So, um that's left up up to the contractor to make make that decision. Um the design does minimize construction disturbance. Um and then we um are all the conditions for the permits are wrapped into the contract documents that are put out to bid to the contractors. Um and we are looking at doing that removal work during the 2026 inwater work window um pending approval of all the the permits. Uh this is a rendering of what that eastside staircase replacement um would

look like. Uh there are a couple of things that are a little bit different than what is out there now. One of which is to in order to meet the Oregon structural specialty code due to the the um height of the stairs there has to be an intermediate landing. there's not one that's out there currently. Um, so you'll see that in the little profile view there. Um, and then the goal is to replace the the staircase basically in kind um, matching natural wood tones and whatnot um, to blend into the the cliff face out there. This is just a picture of what that westside staircase looks like. And again, as discussed, um this is a uh included as a potential for the contractor to decide how if they if they do disturb um that staircase at all or or damage it that it would need to be replaced. Uh one of the other things we wanted to highlight um in the application is just the plan for erosion and sediment control. So um the again the yellow area here on the screen shows kind of the disturbance area. Um there are several trees out on the west side of the river. So we're um we've got tree protection fencing identified um for any of the trees that are designated to remain in the work active work area. As Aaron mentioned, there is a tree an 18-inch ponderosa pine tree that's just on the um south side of the approach of the bridge um on the west side of the river. There's also another one just on the north side of the approach. And so we took a look there's it's a it's a a dual trunk um tree. Um so we have identified that one as um potentially needing to be removed just to facilitate construction access down there. Um we will be using or straw fence or straw uh sorry silt fence or straw waddles to protect um any uh sediment runoff from getting into the the river. And then um if the contractor chooses, we have um as part of our permit applications to um the Army Corps

Engineers and DSL um and to uh the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. We have identified the potential for the contractor to walk some equipment um called putting their feet the equipment feet in the edge of the stream. Um and if they do that, they would need to to implement these removable erosion control mats for any equipment that they use near near the the edge of the river. Um and then I wanted to highlight site restoration. So um we've identified a couple of different um you know main areas of restoration. So there's the repairarian area obviously right along the river corridor. Um the the native plants that we've identified are in the same context with what is already out at the site. Um, we tried to make sure that we were put it putting back plants and shrubs that that are that are already out on site. Um, there will be some um, uh, plugs put in near the the edge of the river, bull rush plugs. Um, there's ground cover and seating that will also be done in a lot of the area. Um, and then there is um, groups of planting. So, red twig dogwood, um, bitter cherry I think is one of the other ones that'll be down closer to the river and then more of the upland area. um will have some of these other um shrubs that you see on here like golden currant and and the analopee bitter bitter brush. Um these are the other permits that we've applied for or are or will be obtaining. So we have applied for our section 404 permit. As Aaron mentioned, the DSL component of that permit has already been issued. The Army Corps of Engineers is um reviewing the application. um they won't issue uh the application until the 401 permit is approved by DEEQ. DEEQ won't issue their approval until we have our land use approval. So, you can kind of see how it builds on itself. Um we have also

applied to the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department for it's a notification of intent permit. Um I actually met the uh reviewer out on site so she could have a look at what the area looks like. they're really reviewing because we're in a section of the state scenic waterway um to make sure that we're not creating something that would be obtrusive um to to folks enjoying the river. Um we have coordinated with Oregon DEEQ. They told us our the 1200 C permit is not applicable. We still need to implement erosion control measures of course um as a part of the work. Um we have already obtained our ODF andW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Passage Plan um approval. Um, and then the the last piece on here, the the scientific take permits for any of the work that we need to do in the river, um, which would be the removal of there's four concrete peers out kind of in the center of of the river and an island. Um, we'll have to do some work area isolation there. Um, and um, we've talked about either using a the contractor using a concrete saw or some type of expansive grout. The agreement with ODF andW is that the um the peers need to be removed and be flush with the um faces of the bedrock boulders that are out in the middle of the river. Um and so those scientific take permits allow, you know, if we run into fish or something like that, they allow a little bit of take um with regards to that, but those we understand can't be obtained until the year in which we plan to do the work. So we would apply for those in January of 2026. Um and there's other local permits. I believe we're actually planning on obtaining the clearing and grading permit, but the demolition permit and the building permits required for the staircases um are going to be required that the the contractor obtained those. And I'm going to turn it back over to Carter to talk about the public outreach and kind of close out the presentation.

Yeah. So, sort of as you as you asked, um over the course of this project, because it's been going on for a while, we have had extensive uh sort of communication with both east and west side residents. Um we've had we've presented to the west side HOA and then we've we've met with with uh the residents on the east side in um at a couple points in time over the past year. um sort of the big thing to come of that uh were from the westside residents sort of just coordinating that access to the um as unobtrusive to them as possible and then sort of also to help sort of dictate what the restoration in their uh parcel looks like. And then on the east side, we received pretty a strong desire from a majority of the residents to uh retain access to that public parcel on the east side. Um, and that's that communication is sort of what led us to um be able to include the replacement of the staircase instead of just a a removal of the of the stairs to help maintain that that access. um project timeline. Uh in order to make sure we are able to get our our large list of permits in order, uh we've chosen the um 2026 to to do this work. Um since we'll be required to do the work in the inwater uh work window, which is July 15th, October 15th. So doing it this year just seemed seemed a little a little bit too rushed. So, that's sort of what led us to to shoot for next year to do this. Um, when that is all wrapped up, we will do our restoration in the fall, which is the recommended time to do do that sort of planting. And then that will um close out the project with our three-year

restoration warranty to replace anything that that ends up dying. Cool. With that, send it back to you guys for any questions you might have. Um, knowing the west side is private, it's with the homeowners association, the east side is public. Will it stay as a city site or is it going to go to the park district? Um, it will stay as correct. Just check. Yeah. Thanks. Currently accepting offers of 10 cents from the I'm just kidding. You have questions? Thank you.

I have nine, Scott. Yeah, I was just wondering about the the history of it and and you know it it's not a bridge that went in disrepair because it wasn't constructed correctly in the first place it seems like. Um, but I guess I'm just wondering like there's a connectivity there pedestrian, you know, there's not too much on either side of it that it would it would see a lot of usage, but I was just kind of wondering about when the city acquired it, is there a did it have a mandate or is there a um as far as connectivity ability to maintain it kind of thing?

That was before my my time admittedly. uh connectivity I know would be would be tricky because the west side is private so there's just it's not feasible for there to be any sort of like public pathway from public land to a private correct um I would I would have to defer to either Jason or or Michael regarding any sort of um I guess mandate that would have happened not something that I'm aware of I don't know if either of you would would care to speak on it. Free to come up if you want.

Does this microphone work?

I've commissioner. My name is Michael. I'm one of the attorneys for the city. Uh I've been working with project team and with the neighbors on this for the past year since you first saw the application. Um, there was a document that came up from when this area was annexed into the city in the '9s and the legal status and the requirements of that document are unclear. So, it's unclear whose responsibility, what was, when, where, why, how the city has taken responsibility for the bridge and that's why we're removing it because it's unsafe. Um, and we've worked with through this issue as best as we could with at least preponderance of the neighbors to get to a solution that we hope will work for the city and for the folks that live on both sides of the river

and I assume people still use it even though it's chained off. So, we just to put it in the record, oh,

I don't know exactly when the chains were first added to the bridge. I know there was an article back in 2016 in the bulletin. There was an image of the bridge and I think I saw some chains on that image, but I was not personally down there. I have been down there since. And there are signs and chains warning folks not to use the stairs on the west on the east side, excuse me, and not to cross the bridge. And that's on both sides because the bridge is a safety hazard. I don't I've I've heard rumors that people are using the bridge, but I don't actually know whether or not people are sliding under, going between or going over those chains. Yes. Thank you. One more question. Scott, no.

Is the property at the base of the stairs on the east side large enough that people can spend some time down there? Is that why we need the stairs? It's not. It looks like it's a canyon. So I'm trying to figure out what why we need stairs.

I was gonna say just say yes to answer your question. So it was at the time that this land was platted it was in the county and this park area was dedicated to the county. It was predates the park department and when it was annexed it remained public land. It's odd. Normally something's owned by a particular agency for the benefit of the public. This is not that. This is owned by the public. So there is enough space down there for folks to travel down via the stairs to spend some time by the river and we generally heard I wouldn't say there was a consensus one way or another but again with the preponderance I think we heard that that access to the river was something that was valued and how many people can be there at one time I don't know but there is some there is some area to enjoy the river there.

Could you fit the plan commission in there or it'll be tight. not not it is a fairly there it is a fair you know there's the cliff face right that you need the stairs to get down and it's a fairly steep drop um you know we had looked at that can could we crane equipment down in there to make uh removal of the bridge easier but it just there's not enough flat working space that's not to say that there isn't enough there's still a bit of a bank there right that you can stand and enjoy the the river from that location I think we heard from a lot of the community out there that you know they enjoy as even Aaron mentioned right fishing with their kids or whatnot in the summertime out there. So,

and one thing I do want to put on the record through our conversations with the neighborhood, the there is an easement that um bisects the property line or goes over both sides of the property line down to this public park area and then the public park area the the property lines between the park area and the two lots on either side are not delineated very well. And one of the things the city is going to do in connection with this project, this is separate from the WS and was criteria. I just want to put it on the record so you all are aware is to put some signs up to make it clear. Here's the public park area and then here's private property or property where folks should not be going because it's not it's not public. It's not a park. Does that help behind

behind you that that map? I guess you can see it up there. the orange air the orange outline um here publicly is the publiclyowned parcel and then I believe this there's a an ement that goes along the river's edge and then there's an easement this is the easement Michael was referencing that bisects these two properties and connects up to the and then the stairs is right there stairs are right within that ement down it's a clip I mean it's it's a clip without the stairs It's essentially inaccessible. Yeah. So, who's going to maintain this bridge? So, the bridge is being removed. Stairs. All right. I mean the stairs. The stairs.

Sorry. Stairs. The stairs will be maintained by the city. Okay. On on the east side, just to be clear on the on the east side. Yes. The steep stairs down the cliff. The west side. That's private property. All right. For the record. Okay. Not the parks department. Not parks and wreck. They's offer. No. Okay. more question. No, I guess not. Nathan,

um I guess I I would like to ask if there's a um if you can provide like a how we've explored since the last meeting like ways that we could retain the bridge. it our based on my understanding is it is not feasibly possible to retain the bridge due to the fact that it is privately owned on the west side. Okay. So it's not a financial thing. It's like a legal barrier. Correct. And it's unsafe. It's both I think it's rebuilding it.

It's a this has been a legal issue that's been recognized since the '9s. Um, also we did have and I'm I'm not sure may have been Jacobs that did the report, but they did a structural analysis that in included a feasibility on what are all of our options and is it cost effective to rebuild this? And the conclusion the report, correct me if I'm wrong, was essentially no, it's not. The challenge is when you touch it, you have to upgrade it to current standards and it would mean completely reconstructing the entire bridge in that location, including the footings that are in the river. Right. I think

Yeah. Well, yeah. Yeah. Yes. But I think the the bigger piece is as Carter mentioned, right, then the city is essentially facilitating access for trespassing on private property on the west side of the rivers. Unless you just ended it in the middle of the river, the bridge to the safest fishing period. We we talked we talked about that as one of the options. It was it was ultimately not um favored for several reasons, but we in in our work with the neighbors, we did a lot of public outreach to talk about what is the universe of options here, what are the pros and what are the cons. Okay, thank you so much,

Abby. Yeah, I was wondering on the the this yellow area here, um if it hasn't really been accessible for a while, is adding public access, is that area going to be able to support without damaging the vegetation? Um people going down there and fishing when we're adding a new staircase, is is that going to have a big impact on the river and the vegetation there? We have no reason to believe that maintaining the status quo is going to be more degrading. This has been this has been accessible for the public for decades. So, it's just maintaining the status quo.

Okay. Any more questions? Okay. Next. I think we're good. Thank you. You got your steps in. Okay. Next, we'll go ahead and move into testimony. And I don't know if someone's online. Do we have any attendees online? No.

Okay. If you are online and you would like to speak, please raise your hand, but we will go ahead and do the in-person attendees. You'll have 3 minutes to speak. And just to reiterate, we we can't answer questions. We're here just to hear your testimony. Um so we will go ahead and start with Joseph. Yeah, you you come up here.

Good evening. My name Joseph Hesbrook. H E S B R O K. Um, first thing I want to want to say is we live directly above the bridge at this point. where the house above the bridge and it is dangerous and I think the city uh is very lucky that nothing has happened because there has been constant traffic on that on the chains and stuff that doesn't matter. People still come across on a regular basis but I'm not here for that. What I'm interested in mostly is the removal of the bridge and the repair of the bridge. This area that we live in, which is private property, is nearly a pristine area to go walking in. It's a wonderful area to go walking in. And if you've not visited it, and you should visit and because you're making a decision on this, you should see what it's like and how nice it is. But when we see that there is going to be a lot of traffic coming through, taking things apart, moving boulders, doing all of these things to the area that we have, and it would be like somebody coming to your backyard, the utility or the city, and tearing it all up and just leaving it. You wouldn't expect that. You would expect that it would be done the way it was in the beginning. You want your backyard to be the way it was before the construction came along. And that's what we expect. This is our backyard. It represents a financial property for us. This is an area that is valuable to us in a financial way. So, we want it put back exactly or near exactly the way it was. Unfortunately, we've had a bad

experience with the city in indicating um on Silverbuckle Road that they were going to be putting um some shrubbery and keeping the U generators from showing. Well, that wasn't done. And we took we took the city at its word that it was going to be done. and unfortunately it wasn't. So we're a little bit wary about how this restoration is going to be done and got 37 seconds. Okay. Um but that's my our biggest concern is we want to make sure that it is the way that it was in the beginning. But you need to visit to see what it's like and then come back and see what was done. We certainly invite you to do that. Thank you.

Thank you, Joseph. Is the attendee online raising their hand? Not at this time. Okay. Next, we'll move on to Jerry.

My name is Jerry Wine. Excuse me. I live in in Rimrock West and I'm very much affected by this project. I want to just provide some support for what Joseph said and I'm going to first give you pictures of if you could pass them around. This is the work that the city did on Silverbuckle which it said would be uh surrounded by vegetation and we wouldn't see it. This is what it looked like this afternoon. This work was done maybe four or five years ago. We've tried to get the city to come back and do anything. They have not. So this is why many of our residents are concerned. And and I would add one other factor. When this proposal was raised earlier, we got we received uh some diagrams of what uh I understood was the way the work would be done. It involved removing the staircase at Silderbuckle, excuse me, at in on the Rimrock West Side. So, the street is Broken Arrow and uh taking heavy equipment down there. There's currently a path and I'd like to show you some pictures of what the area currently looks like uh because I think it's really relevant. It's it's a really pristine, beautiful area, untouched. uh it's been preserved and protected by the community. In the proposal that we reviewed a year ago,

I may be mistaken in my interpretation of it, and if I am, I apologize. It looked like they were going to take out the pathway, replace it with a 6-ft straight uh dirt road to get that equipment down the bridge. And I had the impression that that's what the way it was going to be left. and and I and a lot of our neighbors were really concerned it would essentially destroy that area. And and my recommendation to the planning commission is that you add a third requirement for approval. that requirement be that um that the area be totally and fully restored to the way it is now and that this be done to the satisfaction of the HOA and I hope to the planning commission. Thank you.

Oh my wife remind that that bridge uh we have very mixed feelings about it in the community. It is the only way out of the community if anything should happen on OB Riley and we couldn't get out. That is the only other egress in case of a fire emergency. Thank you. I'm assuming no hand raised. No hand raised. Okay. All right. We will go ahead and move to the applicant rebuttal. Do you guys have any comments you'd like to make?

Good evening. Jason sir, uh, engineering department here. Um, the project that was referenced previously, landscape restoration. Um, we did install a pump station. We replaced pump stations that were long silver buckle. The ones that were there before were basically the glorified garbage can in the ground that had pumps that had a lot of maintenance issues. Definitely not standard. We improved it to a city standard pump station to make sure that have the reliability, the maintenance, and the functionality that a pump station needs. Um, screening is not something we typically do for pump stations, but given the nature of where this road was and the habitat that was around it, we worked extensively with the HOA to place boulders, to place vegetation out there to make sure that it was placed in a manner that would provide that screening. We also worked with HOA. Um, one of the agreements that we came to was that they would maintain the vegetation that we planted out there. There are spets out there that they get from Tumblow Irrigation District. They get water there. Um, so we worked with them to try and kind of a partnership if you will, where we place boulders, we place vegetation, and then the maintenance was something that the HOA was supposed to to water them. They have a lot of vegetation in the area that they were that's currently sprinklered now. um some of the vegetation that we planted was also within that sprinkler area. Um so that was honestly speaking on that behalf that was the agreement that we came to. Um not something that was a standard but we tried to work with the HOA as much as possible but that's um talking about that fire access is the other topic here. Um we have talked with Ben EMS um emergency medical services out here. Um when we do construction we definitely provide that access. We did special requirements on um these streets. these streets very narrow when we did um water line seine improvements because we are ripping up the middle of the road. So if a emergency call out

happened, we make sure that fire um services can get to the the property that they're responding to. As far as the long-term outlook of what the bridge offers, just reminding that the bridge does not offer the egress. it was there to provide um support for the water line and because of the multitude of other reasons that we've highlighted the reasons why the bridge cannot stay um would I'd like to just remind us there but we do as far as construction packs go we work extensively with Ben fire to make sure that they can still respond that is always a requirement of all of our projects

so the the vegetation you put in it didn't look like it was screening anything though I mean it Did you do a perimeter around there and that was it or I mean what was the agreement I guess? Yeah. So um one of the the challenges with screening is you block access right if you if it grow a hedge then you can't no long you can no longer get to that pump station. We have emergency call outs to those pump stations. We have to maintain the pump stations. So if something goes um power failure, pump failure, we have to get immediate access to those. So there is a perimeter. I would like to reiterate that this is this pump station is not a part of tonight's approval. So I would like to

um if your questions revolve around the pump station I would ask that you would reserve those because not what we're here to discuss but if we would like to discuss restoration of what they are going to be doing I think that would be more on topic of it but I think we need to be careful maybe a question to Ian. So I think the question is before us is the the bridge removal and the replacement of the stairs by the city and in this community there was a project done five years ago where there are also promises to do X Y and Z hedges. So the neighbors have concerns.

Well that's what that's what a couple of folks have said and the applicant again has spoken to that other project. I think the planning commission, as the chair has indicated, one needs to be careful to focus on the application here and also not presume too many facts about this previous application. Even if you do think it is indicative, I think it's maybe more important to ask the applicant in rebuttal. Um, the applicant went over some of the site restoration um aspects of this proposal. um it might be worthwhile to have them touch on those again if you have questions, but that is part of the proposal to restore the site um to the greatest extent possible to the condition it was in is in now. So I don't want that to be overlooked, but that's

Well, that's where I was going. Are they going to come back and do the natural version or the street going in for uh equipment? So you said you're going to bring it back to the natural version and that's what we'll do. So even if you did a straight line for a back hoe or something, you take that out and restore it to the pictures we saw that were passed around.

Some of the other items that came up in a part of the conversation with the the Rimrock West Hoa when we met with them out on site back in December of 2023 was with regards to um the bark chip path that's out there that's lined with rocks and being very cautious in movement of the boulders that are out there along the path. Um, and so in the in the drawing documents, um, we have some requirements in there about how the contractor needs to be, uh, careful with how they move those boulders so that they're not marring them up with any of the heavy equipment. Um, restoring that bark bark wood chip path. Um, though I I do want to point out that the the pathway out there, I believe, is about 2 feet wide. And one of the agreements with the HOA um that came up as a part of our work with them in in December 2023 was to a request to widen that path out to about 4 ft wide. So that's what's currently reflected in our construction documents was the request from the Rimrock West Hoa um folks that were out on the site visit with us back in December of 2023.

So restore and enhance. Yeah. Cool. Sounds good. Thank you. I just didn't want to talk about the pump station specifically. Yeah. Um does any more questions for staff and the applicant? No, I think that last bar was very clarifying for me. Thank you. Okay, we will go ahead and close the public hearing. Thank you for presenting. Did Sorry. Did I can reopen it. I just closed. Are you sure? I'm sure. Okay. Um

Okay. So, next we will move into staff comments. Are there Erin? Do you have any comments you'd like to make? No, I don't think so. I mean, I remember uh meeting with Bruce Roning who was with the park district for many years. You know, we've been talking about this foot bridge for decades now. And we approached the park district many, many years ago. Hey, do you have any interest in um can I sell you a bridge? Yeah. over this bridge and then you were like no no no. So yeah, there were that was explored as well and it was a dead end.

Thank you. Okay, next we'll move into deliberation. Anybody have comments? Yeah, if you start at the I think it's much needed overdue and the sooner we get going on it the better. I sympathize with all the permits you have to get and holding you have to do. So I think it's let's get it going.

Um I think it meets all the criteria. Very supportive. Um I would like to consider some of the uh concerns Mr. line raised about restoring it to the um state that it uh prior to the construction beginning leading down from the the west side, but otherwise I thought it was very well laid out.

Yeah. And I think kind of what they alluded to in presentation, they're restoring and enhancing, which I think will be beneficial in the end. But I of course understand the concern that equipment's moving in, it changes and affects the landscape and they are seeking that it comes back to where it was before. Um, and I would like to think that the 3-year kind of um, maintenance warranty bond period, I don't know exactly how you guys are doing it, would I'm not sure if that covers the pathway um, or the whole restoration area, but I would like to think that that would be inclusive of the entirety of the pathway the equipment has to take, the area of work. There we go. Yeah. Um, I think this is interesting because we heard about it, you know, it came to us before and and then there was public comment and the city changed it up based on that. So, I think that was pretty interesting. I feel bad the bridge is going away even though it's not used. Um, but even if you were to replace it, you the first step would be taking it out anyways and and replacing it again public to private land. It's tricky. So,

yeah. Um, yeah, I have no problem with what's proposed. Yeah, I was agree that access is good and uh it seems like it's the only place to get across the river for a long stretch, but given that it's private land on one side unless there's an easement, uh there really isn't any way to justify building half a bridge. Uh uh I don't think uh so I think it probably does need to come out. Um,

and uh you explained why we are still putting the stairs in there. There's enough access uh enough area to access on the east side that people still can get down there to enjoy that section of the river. And I think you should have another conversation with parks and recck. Maybe there's different people. Maybe maybe the answer would be different. Yeah. Once all the improvements are done. Yeah, exactly. There's still the maintenance. I mean, I don't know. So, yes,

but I appreciate the sounds like uh the time between the first time it was brought up and now was well used to get a better project uh and a more responsive to the community. So, thank you for that. I agree with that.

Yeah, I mostly agree with you, Scott. basically across the board. I um am sad to see loss of a pedestrian access point across the river. I think that we don't have enough of those. Um but I do understand the legal complexity of having a public to private access is not it's not great. Um I in terms of the conformance with the the was um I think the thing that would be most concerning for me here is the the tree removal right is like in the repairarian zone that's like the the biggest ecological impact I think in this case um having it only be one tree there and then having um all the other like mitigation of the construction. I think that that as as far as getting construction down there. Kind of shocking that only one tree above the size that we we regulate here needs to be removed. I think that's the testament to the design that has been gone into this. Um really happy to see east side access still there. That's that's that makes me happy. Um I guess that's all I have to say.

Thanks Nathan Erin. I think that well from a safety perspective, it sounds like we really need to take the bridge out. Um, and I'm really happy to see that they're going to rebuild the stairs um on the east side so the public can have that access. And I actually really like the fact that they're going to leave it natural instead of making it a park. It's really nice to have some public access, natural areas. Um there's no getting around the fact that bringing in equipment is going to disturb that westside area in particular. Um it does seem like you guys have been really listening to the HOA and the and the the the neighbors and um trying to incorporate their concerns into the design. So um yeah, I think overall it sounds like you're doing a thoughtful project and I like it.

Good work. Good followup. I am glad to see it came back and there was a lot of thought that went into it and you took public comment and did something with that. So when I was saying parks and wreck, I was not p picturing a green grass and try to get a mower down the stairs to mow the grass. It's just administered by the parks and wreck instead of the city because it's like if we made it a parks and wreck park, we'd probably have to have ADA access. Oh, that would be Yeah, that's probably why they don't want it. Okay.

Would anyone like to make a motion? All right, I will I will move to approve the proposed waterway overlay zone application for removal of the Fire Rock Bridge and related restoration work with the findings and conditions recommended by staff. Second. Okay. All those in favor? I I All those opposed? None. Okay. Vote move. Thank you you guys. Good work very much. You

okay? Next, we'll move into agenda item three, which is the approval of minutes from June 9th. Does anybody have any comments or everyone okay with them? Okay. All right. Next is communications reports from planning commissioners. Does anybody have a report? John, we can start with you. Report. None. None. just uh sorry that I missed the last riveting meeting where we went over the uh the bylaws for the planning commission. So I I did watch the I did watch the recording. So good job.

Nothing to report. Nothing to report. Okay, Colin, you're up. Oh goodness. So Renee is not here and I you know I did not pull up the upcoming meeting. So I can't go over that. So I apologize and I have nothing for is the next meeting the one that Pauline's doing with the big go on to Ian and I will I feel like that's that's just for my recollection. I feel like we're due that in September sometime. Ian, anything? I'm stalling. Yeah.

Um I will say this um now that the record is closed and we had a very genuine heartfelt comment about the work session and how riveting it was. So um no but seriously speaking I think the deliberation tonight that was a good example of there's not only one way to do it but fairly straightforward was application. I mean some interesting questions but um yeah that was a really well done hearing and deliberation. So good I mean that was great. Has all the pass been so bad? Was that so bad?

Not the outcome but that was everybody everybody had opportunity to ask questions and andbody was focused. That was a good good deliberation. Jeez. So did he install long enough Colin? I know. Maggie, you're going to tell me here. I have it. What the hell? Yeah. So, we have the uh September 8th meeting, the work session for poly's code package. Okay. And what else is on the agenda? That's the only thing on the September 8th agenda at this time. And then the legislative public hearing for the code package will be um the September 22nd meeting. Great. I think she said it would be a long one. Maybe a lot of code updates. It's a lot. I mean,

is there a preliminary version of that code package available? Yeah, I'm sure we'll have I think it might be up on the Oh, maybe it was. No, it's not yet. The agenda is not, but I wonder. I can communicate with Pauline by Senator tonight or tomorrow morning and see if she can get that delivered. I know that she typically before she moves into the work session, she has a group of uh folks mostly in the development community that use the code on a routine basis that she coordinates with and puts puts these in front of them for comments before they become like the draft and move forward through a more public process. She gets their input and so they get is out there. So hopefully if it's ready that we sent to the planning commission was

and you mentioned last meeting here. Yep. some comp plan stuff is coming. Is that tweaks or is that a full revisit the comp plan 5 10 20 years later? Uh I thought you or maybe Renee said comp plan stuff's coming or I think that's development code. Oh just code development code a couple times a year we we go through and it's tweaks here and there. what Pauline traditionally has tried to do a code tuneup as we call it where it's mostly fixing issues that we that is that come across through development project her staff runs into um she's been um her her work plan has been dedicated to doing more council related

uh projects like the tree code that took up a lot of time so we we missed a cycle or two for getting um the tuneup packages through so she's been putting this a lot of these ideas into a folder and then she's now finally able to put those into a project and move it forward. So there are there is quite a bit. Um so we'll take a little bit of time to go through it, but it's there's some really good stuff in it. Just a summary of the topics or the areas of code would be helpful. No reason to send us a pre-draft thing so we get into the weeds too early, but I'm just excited. done with school and ready for

Yeah, he needs something. Need some homework. You need Great. I think we're uh got one thing. Um I was actually going to ask Erin, but he's uh split. just a it's it's small thing but on the maps that are provided in the writeups um the staff reports um the staff reports by the way I thought of really been great

but I have trouble with the graphics when they're like multiple overlays like the Rapirian and the flood plane if because it's you know four on on one if either they could revisit that the coding, you know, the the colors, the grid patterns, etc. to make it a little bit clearer or break them out so that you've got the individual and then a composite because I spent a lot of time trying to follow it. Tonight, it wasn't that important, but on other things it might be.

Okay, I can definitely bring that up with the planners. Um, so what you're talking about is is too many layers on a map. So, it's a great Asian. If it gets too busy, it's hard to see. If I could put higher resolution photos in there, please, so that I can expand them and see because sometimes they're really small. I'll see what we can. I think there's there's high res in like the uh the actual, right? You have to go into you have to go into city view. And I think what they do is when they put that into whatever document it goes into, it just gets it's static. It gets blurry. Yeah. Yeah. Well, it's like that thing where you got to move an image and all of a sudden it's like maybe it's them just them as separate exhibits to

I'll pass it along and try to get an IT person who knows more about the uh but but I will say that they they are relying most of the time on materials out of the file because they don't our planners aren't GIS people who can create their own maps. They are relying a little bit on what's in there already, but I think they probably given our digital tools kit that we have today. It probably could put it represent them a little bit clearer than they are. Yeah, because they're probably originally 24 by 36 minimum. So, when they get trunked down to a a blob a little bit like that, but I'll I'll definitely pass it on. Thank you.

I think we're good to adjourn. Thank you, Colins. Can I get in the spot? Wouldn't be left. Cool. Now I got to go try to find hamster.