Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Meeting of Lebanon Planning Commission to order and be standing for a flag salute, please. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. Uh, roll call. roll. Uh, chair chair Robertson here. Your mic's on. My mic's not on. Uh ch co-chair Garrett Kernowski here and uh Commissioner Miller here, Commissioner Thompson here, Commissioner Fountain here, Commissioner Malloy here, and Commissioner Bashier here. Sorry, I forgot about the roll call. Wasn't paying attention. So, the only one absent then is Commissioner Baxter. Correct. Okay. Um, we don't have any minutes, so we'll move on to uh public hearing planning file DCA-25-02 and turn it over to city attorney. Uh, thank you, chairman. Uh, proud to present uh what has been put together by the varsity team. Uh, but the JV team is gonna give the presentation just a little and and I think uh Miss Hart would be the first to uh to uh admit that because when she puts together a uh a uh presentation, I think she even went farther than she usually does because I think she knew at the time that I was going to be presenting this. So, just so we're all very clear. Um but, uh what we've done is we've uh put two things together which was a result of a uh the code interpretation request that we had.

And now quite honestly I think I remember at the time that there hadn't been a code interpretation for like the previous 10 years or ever or sorry to I don't remember when the last code interpretation was done but it's been a while. So in and so not only the fact that we did the code interpretation which we'll get into uh uh the reason for the actual changes to the development code and some of the definitions but it also uh created a situation which we you know first time in a long time actually looked at the language of our code interpretation uh uh ordinance and uh what we did is uh Kelly for the most part started looking at some other code interpretation languages from other cities and basically uh uh why create when you can steal and went out and we found kind of the we didn't take like one model from just one city but we took uh what we thought were some of the better provisions of some of the uh different uh provisions code uh interpretation provisions that we saw in other jurisdictions. And so what we did is we put together a uh uh an amended or well a replacement uh code interpretation that I think makes it uh a little bit more clear uh more clear not only on what the purpose is uh how to interpret it because normally it's because there's some ambiguity uh when you're when you're trying to uh uh coordinate between you know a master plan parks plans you know driving plan transportation plans and then trying to encapsulate all of that into a development code itself. It's not surprising that there are times when they're they don't, you know, completely uh coexist or coincide in perfect harmony. Um and and that's the reason for a code interpretation for the most part. You're not changing the law. You're you're giving an interpretation so people know ahead of time what what what they what you think that interpretation is. And that's obviously subject to appeal. Uh subject to uh uh the we make it very clear that the city

council is the uh is the uh uh place to appeal it to. And then obviously if it is a land use decision at at that time it could be appealed to Luba. Um so that's the provisions as it relates to uh uh 16.25 in the replacement. Um the actual amendment to the uh development code uh re is in regard to and as a result of the code interpretation that we had earlier this year. And what it does is it basically uh uh solidifies and make eventually once it gets adopted completely we'll make the code interpretation um we'll probably actually uh bring something to withdraw the code interpretation because it'll be unnecessary at that time because we've cleared up uh and made consistent the definition of recreation area so that it includes recreational trails that are owned by the public, right? Or will be maintained by the public. And so all of that has been uh reviewed uh sent to DLC CD uh reviewed for that reviewed to be in compliance with the other plans master plans that the city has uh is definitely uh uh consistent with the with the uh um with the uh comprehensive plan and just make slight changes to the development code itself. Uh the specifics have been laid out. Again, uh all of the the uh uh considerations as it relates to the changes. Uh the public involvement uh has has been complied with as far as notice, an opportunity to comment. And what this board is uh our commission has asked to do is make a recommendation to the city council um uh as to uh adopting both. So, uh, with that, if there are any specific questions or anything that you have noticed when you, uh, reviewed this and what I've missed and and Ron's going to cover. Oh, he see I saw your finger out there. There's one amendment that is being proposed and that is on

page 16. Page 16, it was just a word that was left out. If you go to page 16, under 16.25.030 030 at the bottom under appeal sub one generally unless appealed the formal interpretation of the planning and the word administrator was left out. So the proposed amendment which somebody will need to make it a a a motion to amend will be uh just add the word administrator. So it reads planning administrator shall be the final decision of the city. And with that, I'm open to any questions. Well, we should probably do questions first, especially if there's any questions about the motion. Well, yeah, about any of it. Okay. But you are the commission, so you can do what you want. Any questions for Trey? All right. Then with that, we will open the public testimony portion of our hearing. invite anybody to come forth that wishes to testify in favor of the proposal. Seeing okay, here comes one. My name is Thaad Nelson. Uh I'm a Buildup and a Trails board member and I came tonight not really wanting to speak unless uh someone else uh that we're all familiar with uh uh was here to speak against this uh these changes. Uh we very much support the changes. Um they're overdue. Uh just nobody knew that they were needed previously. Um, it

allows from BLT standpoint, it allows us to to extend trails into any zoning area of the city, uh, which is much needed now, uh, with the all the apartments going in and and the lack of green space around those apartments and the lack of playgrounds and so on. So, um, partly the reason I'm speaking is I want to apologize for leaving early. I don't need to be here since, uh, my competition isn't here. So, thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Thad. And I would note that we've uh collected and and and provided to the commission your written comments as well. All right. Anybody else wishing to speak in favor of the proposal? Anybody wishing to speak in opposition of the proposal? All right. Seeing no movement, then we will close the public testimony portion of our hearing and all further discussion will be amongst planning commissioners and staff. Any concerns? Any questions? Go ahead, Regina. Um, I'm struggling with this a little because this is in low density housing areas and when you go and buy into a community, you're buying a certain lifestyle that you're buying into a lower density situation. And I realize it's only 6,000 square ft versus 5,000 square ft. There's probably not a huge amount of difference, but I having um seen people's reactions to paths went into their community in the past directly affecting them. I I can see saying, "Oh, this is allowed in low density and that's fine." is really much

more of an imposition to that density than say medium or high density where you're expecting a lot of people and a lot of visitors and a lot of activities. So I I'm not firm. I mean, I can still go either way, but I'm struggling a little bit because it it seems like it's reasonable. Low density housing would not want a multi-use path through the properties because that's the lifestyle, that's the neighborhood they want it to be in and create the more spread out. Okay. What were your findings of other cities in in relation to to this? Are you talking uh in in relation to specifically to trails? Well, yeah, specifically in the U the low residential areas. Did you see anybody with wording similar to what? So, when I was talking about looking at other uh other uh uh codes from other jurisdictions, I was talking mostly about the changes to the code interpretation section itself. We are fairly unique. I don't think we copied anybody when it comes to some of our language with with respect to trails and recreation areas. I think we're pretty unique in the fact of of the way that our trail system has been developed with such a partnership um that uh it's not conducive to copying anybody's there in the future. I would I would anticipate ours getting copied. Uh I don't know that for sure. If I could just make one comment, I mean the the only comment I would say is what you're making is a policy a policy argument on on what the best policy is for the city of Lebanon. And understandably that's our that's part of the comprehensive plan. So what we're doing now is simply amending the development code itself to coincide with what the comprehensive plan already says so that there's no ambiguity or questions. So certainly uh anytime that

there's a overall uh amendment or update uh that that creates a need to take a look and I don't know when we do that but to take a look at the comprehensive plan as the policy directive of the city overall that would certainly be an argument and a fair argument and a fair fair comment. Uh today I'm not sure it's as as relevant because all we're doing is now saying we've already got this code interpretation that's doing it this way so let's just clean up the language. If I can add on to that a little bit, we've also got a master plan with trails. So that that's an approved document by the city council. Uh it has a lot of public input. Um public gets a chance to comment on those documents. So all like I back to Trey's point, all we are doing is is aligning everything together. Um if you notice in there, it still takes administrative review, which somebody's got the ability to appeal that to this body if they so choose. Um, but it it just aligns all of our documents together is what we're trying to do here. I guess I'm also make the comment. I've participated in some of Lebanon build trails walks and I I absolutely love the trail system in the town. I mean, it's a really great thing. I guess I'm um a little disappointed to see someone throw a technicality in to try to stop the forward progress of a trail. So, I just thought I'd make that comment. Okay. Any other comments, concerns? Yeah. This language cleaning up this language has will not change the overall master plan for Lebanon Trails. Am I correct? No. No. The M the master plan is set and and it shows and we use the master plan, you know, hey, a trail it shows it'll show a trail going through a piece of property. And when you get on the ground, sometimes you truth that and you go, "Oh, maybe it makes sense to move it over here a little bit." But it does not

change the intent of the master plan. No. Okay. Any other concerns, comments? All right. Is anybody prepared to make a motion? And so the procedure uh would be to first move the uh uh move the uh move it by motion first and then once it's on the table then a motion to amend and then and then well I actually you could move to amend it beforehand and then that way we don't have to do it as amended. Okay. So I would like to make a motion to amend the language under 16.25.030 030 under appeal section one to read of the planning administrator shall be the final decision of the city. Okay. Is there a second? I'll second. All right. It's been motioned and second to amend the um narrative. Um well, I don't really want to repeat your motion, but does everybody understand the motion? Yes, sir. Okay. So any further discussion? All right. All those in favor of amending the narrative, then please say I. I. I. Those opposed. All right. The narrative is amended. Now, if anybody is prepared to make a motion on the proposal, I will. Um, I recommend that this city council approve the proposed development code amendment DCA-25-02 adopting modified language. Is that the one right? Modified language and/or findings. Is there a second? Second. Okay, it's been motioned and seconded to recommend the proposal to the city

council for approval. Any other discussion? All right. All those in favor then please say I. I. And opposed. Motion carries unanimously. All right. Good. Thank you. Um what else do we have? Any commission business? Anything? Yes, we do. So, we will have a meeting in November. Uh believe it's for a conditional use permit for the Walgreens, the existing Walgreens. So, we've got that on the docket for November. Um, Dan, who is on tonight, I don't know if any of you have met him, but Dan is works for the uh Cascades West Council of Governments and he is filling in and will be uh leading the planning commission uh as we move forward until we have a new uh community development director in place. So, Dan, welcome. I know you can't see all of us very well, but uh glad you're with us. Welcome, Dan. Welcome, Dan. Oh, and it looks like you're muted. Yep. The dang mute button. Say that again. Okay, there we go. Hi everybody. Sorry about Welcome aboard. Thank you. Look forward to working with you until until you get a real planner. Okay. Any other business? Any other questions for staff? This is your chance to put them on the spot. Do it. All right. Hearing none, then we are adjourned. Thank you everyone. Okay. All right.