Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

K. This time, I would like to call me to order, and call to roll call, please.

Matthew Mansfield?

Here.

Jose Valapando? Jose Valapando?

Here.

Chris Wright? Here. Kayla Maverick?

Here.

Randy Rickert?

Here.

Jason Dale?

Here.

And the we have Jerry Turgeson?

Here.

And Linda Newton Curtis is absent. Alright. Jose, so now, you need to ask if there's any public comment.

Yeah. At this time, do we have any public comments?

There's none in the room and none on Zoom.

K. Any, comments from staff?

Not quite yet.

Thank you.

Now we go to the consent agenda.

Move to the agenda.

It's the, the consent agenda that, for the minutes.

Mister chair, if I may, I motion that we approve the, minutes for the, October 9 planning commission meeting.

I'll second. Commissioner Wright.

Can we vote?

You could do a voice vote for all those who are in favor, say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed? Hearing none, the vote passes, and minutes are approved. And now we are going to the items from staff.

Thank you, Faye. Good evening, chair, members of the commission. This evening, and we are on that agenda item for the updates, right, Faye?

That is correct. Just getting the PowerPoint up.

Okay. Thanks. So while we're getting the presentation up, this is a follow-up to the Planning Commission's request for an update and information on housing production in the city, and we're also going to be sharing with you updates on several projects or initiatives that the city council has asked staff to work on this year and are also on the planning division's long range planning work program. So, we'll lead off with associate planner, Chromy, presenting on housing production, then Leanne, planner Wagoner will say a few words about an upcoming planning study, a housing capacity analysis that we are preparing to undertake. And then Planner Dingwall will discuss the urban growth boundary work and we have a couple of different initiatives relating

to

the Urban Growth Boundary that we'll be sharing this evening. And of course, this is an opportunity for the commissioners to ask questions, provide any input that you might have, although there's no action that we're asking of you tonight. It's primarily an update and informational. So with that, if we're ready to go, Faye, I'll turn it over to Jeremiah.

Thanks, Scott. Jeremiah Comey, associate planner for the record. So what we're gonna go through tonight with these couple slides is development pipeline, some recent housing developments, and then housing developments that are over 10 units and just go through where they are and what what we're looking at for the next five years or so. And I'll try and get this quicker to work, or just Did

you turn on the side?

Helps if

I turn it on. There we go. Okay. So this is a map of developments in the city of Newburgh that have more than 10 units. So there are some other infill projects, some smaller ones that are not shown on this map.

So a lot of activity, as you're probably aware, we have the Kalina division off Mountain View and then Crestview Green on the East Side of town. And you may remember not too long ago, Gomi at Springbrook off of Springbrook when kinda where Springbrook turns into Mountain View if you go Northeast. And then some prior things that are now finished on the West end was a 12 unit subdivision on Cordova College. We had the Crater Lane Cottage cluster on the West end and then River Run on the far south down by the bypass. And then there's a couple apartment units right off Springbrook.

I'll go to the next slide. Somebody's building in

that empty lot there near where Sherry's was. And that that bare lot there? That's what that 28 units is? Correct.

So that was approved by your commission back in 2020. I think it was 2022.

Oh, I

must have missed that or

it slipped in my mind. Yeah. It was a conditional not getting old.

It was a conditional use permit back then, and maybe commissioner Daley, you might have been calling that me. I don't know. But it did come through this this body. So they are in the final stages of permitting on that. As far as I know, they have a streetlight deal that needs to be fixed, and that's all what's left.

So these are kind of the development names and just the type of housing. So a fair amount of single family and apartments. Kalina has it'll look like single family from the from the street, but they're considered detached quadplexes or duplexes. You won't really probably be able to tell from the street just the way the code reads with our detached units. And then we had that separate cottage cluster unit.

So there's of all these developments, if you count up all the dwelling units, we're a 41. And their their current status, most of them are either currently under construction or will be under construction soon, and then some that are just finishing up or recently completed. Okay. Yep. I'm sign up back up for you.

Yeah. Where is that? Like, it's hard to see exactly. The 28 units that's

So 28 units, I'll I'll try and use the maybe the laser pointer.

When you said Correct.

There were but they put

a process for Sherry's is? No. No.

Just trying

to use it here.

Yeah. A little more sense. Sorry.

Yeah. So that that that 20 unit development's roughly across from Safeway, not vacant lot, Springbrook, and Haworth, Haworth.

I've heard

it both ways.

The Bymar Park.

Correct. Yeah. Over by Bymar.

And then a 100 units up there, that's that's by the Allison, isn't it?

Yes. That's behind the Allison to Northeast of Allison. Yes. That's a plain unit development.

Go ahead. Thank you. Yep. Oh, I was gonna ask one more thing.

Oh, go ahead.

Oh, can you put

your mic on there? Yeah.

Would you characterize the nature of the majority of these units? Would it be low income, middle income, identity?

So as far as we know, no. But none of the developers have asked or done any sort of, like, income restriction. No. I

don't mean that. What I mean is, like, price point.

Some of them, I don't know yet. Like, then go meet Springbrook. We don't know. Kalina, I think their, their smallest unit, which is about a thousand square feet, it was three bed, one bath is running. I think they have advertised for $4.69 9.

The close to market or close closest

Close to starter homes, but not maybe just a hair above

or something. And I know the the cottage clusters that they were condo eyes, but then they sold them to, I believe, a management company to rent out, and they're ranging in rent from 21 to $2,300 roughly a unit. Mhmm.

What's do do you remember

the square footage on those roughly? Ones, I believe the two stories with that, I think, one.

Oh, good size is on them. Okay.

They're, like, a thousand 58, I think.

Okay. Total. Yeah. Thank you.

Yep. And then just so you know, I I've been told at least the West Branch apartments that should probably start construction soon. They've told me at least that there would be a market rate. So

Yeah.

I don't I don't know on other prices on Crestview greens. Leanne might know. I don't know off top of my head. They've put out pricing for that. Yeah.

You can charge me market research fees later.

Okay. Commissioner Wright, I have a question. Go ahead. On this slide, where to the east, Chris Chris View, it says 14 units, 95, and then 24. The sign in that area says a 110 units. Can you explain the spread of that, please?

Yeah. So the the way that it was approved, you see the 95 units is the townhouses, the 24 units is an apartment complex, and the 14 units are single family out there. So

And that's the already existing one?

That is new one. That's the new one getting developed. So you're thinking Crestview Crossing, which is the

one that's already developed. Road.

Okay. So, yeah, Crestview Green is next to Benjamin Road. Yes. And then the 196 units, that's part of the, there's three buildings now, part of that apartment complex, and then they're gonna be adding five more

there. Great. Thank you. Yep.

Commissioner Mansfield, quick question. Roughly, what's the ratio from single family to not single family homes coming in slash apartments?

Probably I mean, are you completely just saying single family, including, like, Kalina's duplexes and quadplexes? I guess

Duplex, quadplex.

Right. That's that's why I'm asking. So, I mean, because that four zero three includes those 68 units. So it's I think it might yeah. It shows it on breaks it down for you here. Sorry. So that's that's the roughly, it's about six sixty, forty. Yeah. So and there's, I mean, some other smaller developments too that are using that range of middle housing or single family that aren't included. This is just developments with 10 or more units in them.

So this this does break it down for you to help out. And those two quadplex and duplexes are all in Kalina, and the townhomes are in Crestview, Green.

And So just a little bit of a follow-up on that and a spoiler alert. When Leanne shares what we're going to be doing next with housing capacity and looking at the housing needs of the city, the new state requirements around housing needs assessments require that we take a finer grained look at what the needs actually are in the city, so it's not just about volume but also income and affordability. So that's what we'll be looking at next. But, you know, the split between attached housing and detached housing or multifamily and single family housing is fairly balanced. You know, there's significantly more single family homes, but, you know, some other communities really have a deficit of rental housing, and Newburgh know, has done a good job in producing that along with the single family homes.

So we are seeing that continue.

Thank you, Director Siegel. I'm gonna go to the next slide. So this is just a population estimate based on PSU's estimated populations between basically now and 2040 with their estimate. This includes potential an annex into the UGP for 2040. They estimate roughly between 2020 and 2040 that we're gonna add 9,646 people, annual growth rate of 1.3%.

Based on the 2023 ACS data and this has actually come down. It's about 2.6. And if you look back, it's families aren't having as many kids. And this number of people per household is actually kind of keeps coming down. So it used to be, like, 2.8 to 2.74.

Now it's, like, 2.66, and it's you know, it keeps getting revised down. Just a lot of factors with that, people having less kids, more people living on their own. So I just oh, good. I mean, you have a comment. If if assuming all this, development in the pipeline gets built out, it would result in about 20 2,706 people added to Newberg, which is about 2% annual growth rate, and that's assuming a five year schedule.

Kalina's schedule isn't their phasing schedule is not till 2032. So it it will ebb and flow depending on what's going on, but it's not anything crazy that's that's happening in Newburgh at this point in time. Any questions from commissioners? K. I turn back over to director Siegel, or should I turn it over to Lee? Sure may

ask you a quick question? Sorry. Based off of this anticipated growth, is there gonna be a need for our city's boundaries to expand in order to facilitate the increase in, population?

So, commissioner Anschel, I think you're getting a probably a little ahead. I think that's the third item we're gonna talk about tonight with the the UGV expansion. What I know that's talking about industrial lands, but there is other things with the senate bill fifteen thirty six fifteen thirty seven that yeah. Fifteen thirty seven.

Yeah.

That and it would bring more residential land into the city.

Yeah, thank you, Jeremiah. So, we look at that through two lenses. One is a macro scale and the state housing needs analysis methodology, which we'll be getting into and Leanne will be sharing the upcoming study on that. And that's looking at citywide housing needs, looking at population forecast over twenty years and the metrics around things like some of the things that Jeremiah has already discussed like what are the trends on household size? What are the needs for housing based on projected employment and income?

And we do have an employment needs analysis that the city has adopted that will be part of the basis for that. And then we also look at the urban growth boundary on more of a macro scale, but on sort of opportunities in specific areas and the state has created a second pathway for the city to look at that and to look at smaller areas that could be brought in in order to produce affordable housing or to swap out land where we have land that's inside the boundary that's not easily served with utilities. And I don't want to steal James' thunder, he's going to be talking about those two different pathways and we don't know yet. The short answer is we don't know yet if the city would need to expand its boundary on the macro scale, but the last time that the city looked at this, the conclusion was that they needed to. So we're going to be doing that work over the next couple of years.

Commissioner Mansfield, does that hopefully answer your question?

Yes. Thank you.

Okay. You're welcome. With that, I'll turn it Jeremiah, unless you have anything else to add, we'll turn it over to Leanne. Good.

Thank you, Scott. Yeah. So I think we've gotten a kinda good segue, and this work that I'm about to describe is actually also gonna lead into the efforts that James is spearheading with the urban growth boundary amendment. So the city applied for housing planning grant work, and that is to produce the first of two steps that are required by the state. This first step is to produce a housing capacity analysis, and we were successful application and were awarded up to a $100,000, to do that work.

The city has, opted to go with a DLCD provided consultant. We're still waiting to hear about our pairing, which consultant group we'll be working with, and we will be keeping everyone posted about that. So we're excited about the opportunity and the grant award. That's pretty fresh news. But what we're hoping to gain from that study will come away with findings that will end up in our comprehensive plan.

But the housing capacity analysis essentially looks at all of those needs that, director Siegel was talking about, and do we have enough land for that, and all of the demographics. We've we've taken sort of a peek at some of those, statistics back when I was doing the work around, our rent burden status, and that gave us a glance at what our demographics are, what our household sizes are looking like, and Jeremiah is correct. Our household sizes are diminishing. It's hovering a little above two persons per household in the majority. And so we'll be looking at all of those factors, including affordability, income levels, etcetera.

And like I mentioned, come away with findings that'll go into our comprehensive plan. And then the second step within a year after completion of our housing capacity analysis, we'll be going into that housing production strategy. And that's gonna be how we meet the the objectives that were outlined with the housing capacity analysis and putting those two things together for a framework so that we can meet our goals. Is there any questions that any of the commissioners have about Leanne,

if I may add, and for those of you who are on the commission or who are following city planning five or six years ago, a lot of this may sound like it may sound familiar because the city did go through a study, it was called a housing needs analysis, it was under a different set of state planning rules at the time, and the city did produce a report that identified housing needs and land needs and so forth, and the planning commission reviewed that and did in fact make a recommendation to city council then accepted the report in 2022, I believe, but it didn't move on from there. It wasn't formally adopted or enacted to become part of the comprehensive plan, and so now that we're sort of resetting our housing needs analysis through this study, we'll have an opportunity to apply more recent population forecasts. So the population forecasts that we're required to use are published by Portland State University and those are from 2024 and they extend out over I think, well, there are twenty year forecasts, they even go beyond that, but I believe that they're updated every four or five years. So, that's the forecast that we'll be using.

We will also have an opportunity to look at a more recent buildable lands inventory so that data that was collected in 2019 is no longer really very useful and so the study that Leanne is managing with the consultant team will allow us to update that. And Leanda, do you want to say a word about the sort of the technical review and the planning commission's role on this that we anticipate?

Yes, and that was going to be next. So, part of the requirement that we have an advisory committee body, and I've spoken with staff at DLCD and asked them about using our existing commissions to serve in that function. So we're desirous to engage the planning commission and also the affordable housing commission to serve as that advisory body. So as we go through this study, there will be touch points and opportunities to engage both commissions with the work that we're doing and garner feedback. We also are gonna be having touch points with the community to get community input as well.

And we'll be doing that in conjunction with our consultant group.

Yeah. So if the commission had any questions about that upcoming study, as Lance said, we'll keep you posted on the progress. Or if you have any feedback on, taking this on. Think there are probably four or five key milestones in the project and probably at each of those points in the process there'll be a touchpoint with the planning commission, either an update or something for you to respond to, which we hope would be welcome news.

Quick question. It's a housing needs study, but I remember there being quite a bit of work the last time as far as, industrial land need as well. Is that also going to be included with this, or is that a separate thing you guys need to do? Because it seems like I could be misremembering that the last time these population studies one, I I seem to recall that they were for 2036 or 2035, and now it's 2040. And I seem to remember the population projections being a lot bigger three, four years ago when maybe not a lot, but some.

And so I'm wondering if if that's gonna be enough impetus to convince people that the UBG expansion is necessary or not.

Yeah, on the employment opportunities analysis, which is the study that looks at land needs for industrial and commercial lands, That study is still relevant and the city council did ultimately adopt that and it is part of our comprehensive plan now. That's valid now for another probably seventeen or eighteen years, James. I know that it's a document that should be reviewed and periodically updated, but we do have that in place.

Oh, okay.

Yeah. And then on the population forecast, what we found when we compared the forecast that was produced by PSU for 2020 with the one that was published in 2024 and the growth, sort of the aggregate growth for Newberg over a twenty year period, you know, given that these are different twenty year timeframes, it was showing more growth or more population added to Newberg compared to the prior population forecast. I can't remember the exact figures, but I think that probably works in our favor in terms of justifying land need if that, in fact, is the direction that the city is wanting to go.

I see a lot of numbers. I'm not surprised I misremembered that one.

That's all right.

Commissioner Wright, with the affordable housing commission and planning commission meeting, would we be meeting in person or on Zoom? Do you guys know?

I think we're flexible in the format of that, and that's something that once we start our kickoff meetings with the consultant, we can kind of drill down on that and get a format. You have Any preference for

meeting that's held in person, we're also if it's a meeting of a public body, which is the planning commission is a public body, we're also obliged to provide an online format for people to participate. So you would see it could potentially look a lot like the meetings that you have routinely. If the meetings were all if there were a meeting that was Zoom only or online only, that would be made clear in the public noticing and the agendas that we put out for that.

Thank you.

Are there other questions or thoughts about this work before we move on to the urban growth boundary? No. Okay. Well, I'll hand it off over to James at this point. Thank you. Thank you, Leanne.

All right. So to follow-up a little bit on your question there, Commissioner Dale. So the city council broke out the employment land analysis from the overall work that was in 2021. And so we brought that back to council, and they adopted it this fall. So the economic opportunities analysis is officially adopted and has has that demonstrated need for approximately a 152 acres of employment land, so a combination of industrial, commercial, mixed use, etcetera.

So now that that's adopted and didn't get appealed, that could serve as the foundation for a urban growth boundary amendment for employment lands. So that's kind of the big hurdle there to get that adopted. And then there are a couple pathways that the city could take, depending on council's, kind of how they would like to move forward. Kinda if there are more kind of immediate action points or users that that we're seeing, that could use more industrial land sooner, we could move forward with a standalone urban growth boundary amendment just for employment land. If there isn't necessarily as, kind of timely of an of a need, we could move forward kinda with a combination employment and residential urban growth environment once the updated housing capacity analysis is finished.

So, there's a little bit of kind of TBD there just kind of seeing on kind of what that urgency and kind of what council's, thoughts are there. Scott, do you have any thoughts on that kind of next steps for that employment land piece?

No. That's spot on. Thank you.

Yep. So yeah. So, I mean, hopefully, you know, we could be, seeing some movement. We've had some, conversations that, there's kind of some long range planning going on with some utilities, and kind of some discussions that that could also contribute to kind of other projects that overlay with employment, industrial development. So just a a couple of avenues there.

But we have the 152 acre need in the books, which that's a good thing to to check off for us to move forward with any sort of urban growth boundary amendment there. Any questions on the EOA adoption? Yep. And so then moving on to the SB fifteen thirty seven.

James Oh, Scott. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but it just occurred to me that the process for amending the urban growth boundary is different than the process that we go through for adopting a housing capacity analysis or an EOA in terms of the planning commission's role. So if you could say a word about that, I think that would be helpful.

Definitely. Yep. So Newburgh has the Newburgh Urban Area Management Commission, which is kind of a co body with the city and the county. And I believe, commissioner Dale, last time I checked, you were the chair of that, and we have a couple of vacancies. There haven't been any meetings lately, you haven't had any applications that were, kind of falling in that jurisdiction.

But any urban growth boundary amendments, as opposed to some of the annexations that we've had where they come to, planning commission for a recommendation then go to city council. The urban, area management commission has some policies and procedures, that outline different pathways for different, applications. So although the annexation does impact land that's outside the city limits, the agreement just has that go to planning commission, city council, and be referred to the county. The urban growth boundary amendment, however, gets diverted to this Newburgh, urban area management commission, which makes it a decision on the application and then refers that decision to both the city council and Yantel County board of commissioners for a concurrence. Either of those bodies can also choose to refer it to their respective planning commissions, but, that's not required.

It depends on what council and commission choose to do. But so when either the employment land or regulatory boundary agreement or the, feature residential comes forward, it will kinda get diverted to that New Mac, body and then sent to the council and commission for final approval.

And in that instance, the commission is the county board of commissioners? Yes. Sorry. Not planning commission.

But when city council may choose to also refer it to planning commission, but that's just their decision at that time. Alright. Then moving on to, yeah. So we we we'd be seeing you a fair bit, I believe, if that move forward. Moving on to to the second James, I'm sorry.

Were there questions for James on that last night? No. Okay. Thank you. No. We're good.

Okay. Moving on to the onetime UGB. So this kinda jumps back over into into the housing bucket. Senate bill fifteen thirty seven in 2024 was passed by the state legislature to provide avenues for jurisdictions to expand their urban growth boundary or modify it without going through the typical, procedures. The state has issued a variety, I think, three kind of major ways for cities to amend their urban growth boundary.

There's just the the typical periodic review. There's the sequential, which kind of takes it in a step by step piecemeal approach, and then there's the simplified. The city tried the simplified approach in, I think, 2018, and it didn't make it its way through. There were some procedural and analysis concerns that the city and our consultant raised, so that didn't move forward. And then we tried the sequential process in 2023 to 2024, but that was, held up when, council decided to update those housing analysis.

So that was kind of the spark for land's project on the housing capacity analysis update. So this s p fifteen thirty seven is kind of a alternate where cities can issue a solicitation for up to 100 acres of affordable housing. The city puts out the solicitation, and then private, property owners would submit their bids as opposed to the other avenues where the city would go through the process to evaluate which lands to choose. It's an owner driven process. There are long term affordability requirements.

I believe, sixty year, deep restrictions for affordability and then a variety of other requirements for site planning for circulation and open space and limited commercial uses to support the development. In order for the city to be eligible, we need to have a demonstrated need for affordable housing, which, the most recent data of our extremely rent burdened households is, I believe, roughly 28%. So it's above the 25% threshold that demonstrates that need for affordable housing. And then, also, there are some requirements for developable land in the city. So within the last twenty years, the city has had some urban growth boundary amendments for residential uses, primarily in 2005, 2007.

And there are requirements that those either be developed or have a a, financing plan and a comprehensive plan. We are currently engaging with DLCD to understand the, kind of definitions and how they're evaluating what that development means for the housing capacity analysis that land will be leaving. The state has some pretty clear, kind of step by step instructions on how to do that political lands inventory analysis and safe harbor provisions that a city can use to kinda demonstrate, what a parcel's development status is. This bill does not call out those as what one should use, and so there's a little bit of a question of of those previous urban growth boundary amendments, do they qualify as being developed? So what that means for us now is this fall, city council approved a motion to move forward with a solicitation.

We had done some outreach and received feedback from property owners that they would be interested in this. And prior to the issuing that solicitation, we reached out to DLCD to get, confirmation that the way that we were, reviewing our eligibility matched how they were. So we're kind of in a little bit of a holding period. We do have a couple property owners that would be interested in applying and are doing some kind of back end work on their end to verify their eligibility. So if things go well, you know, we we will plan to proceed with that solicitation and get the get the bids and potentially have up to a 100 acres of affordable housing added to the urban growth boundary.

James, could you just clarify what the affordability requirement is? Because it's not over the entire 100 acres or all of the units that would be built. It's a percentage, I believe.

I will we can pull that up. Yes. And while I'm pulling that up, the other option that city council is considering, which you might hear about, is the bill also provides that a city, instead of doing the one time expansion, can do a land swap. And so we've had an applicant approach the city with a parcel that's pretty constrained. It has some floodplains, some stream corridor, so it's not terribly developed, developable, but it was included in a previous urban growth boundary amendment as part of a much larger annexation.

And they are proposing to deannex and remove that from the urban growth boundary and then do a land swap, to add other lands for residential purposes. And so council would be choosing between those two options. And so if if we can't move forward with the one time, that could be a different pathway that that council chooses to move forward to, but we won't know. We won't be bringing that back to to to council until there there's a little bit more clarity on what those options are.

And then

for the affordability requirements, it requires that at least 30 of the residential units are subject to affordability requirements, that require for a period of not less than sixty years that the units be either available for rent to households with an income of 80 of 80% or less of the area median income or available for purchase by households with an income of a 130%. So so as as a higher income rate for purchase than it is for rental. But 30% of that 100 acre units would be restricted for affordability for at least sixty years. So, yes, I think those are kind of the big picture points there. Scott, is there anything else you wanted to touch on?

No. That's great. Thank you. And I think, you know, these two or three efforts are all inter related, of course, so if the city were successful in adding land under either the one time expansion that James was describing or we're exploring that as part of a larger citywide housing need. You know, any land that would be brought in in the near term would be included in our inventory potentially or be discounted from our need later on.

So, you know, that calculation is it would just advance some of the land that we would need rather than adding to what we might include. Yeah. So, yeah, this is a lot. There's a lot of planning work happening and coming up and so we really wanted to make sure you're aware of that and prepared to engage in it once there's some work to bring to the commission. Are there any questions or if any of the staff have anything to add that we haven't discussed?

Commissioner Wright, I want to make this straight. The owner driven process is property owners coming forward and asking to be in the UGB. Is that correct?

Yep.

So What are the advantages of a property owner doing that? And that's unusual. And how how do you plan on reaching out to property owners? Thank you.

Yep. So so for the kind of typical urban growth boundary amendment procedures, so kind of that sequential or what might come out of the housing capacity analysis work, The state has some procedures and priorities where the city is kind of evaluating land. I believe, for example, in the in the last effort in the late teens, the analysis areas were a one mile buffer around the city and then a mile and a half buffer around the city. So the city is kinda evaluating those lands to propose that that those get added, and there is a hierarchy of, kind of developable lands, urban reserve, agriculture. So there there's kind of some guidelines about what how the city could choose that.

For this s p fifteen thirty seven, there are some guidelines on what properties could be eligible. So they can't be, designated as high value farm or forest land unless they have an exemption approved by the county and the state, and it also has to be adjacent to the current urban growth boundary. So the city would put out a solicitation. There are some guidelines on the public notice requirements and the, kind of procedures for that solicitation, and then property owners would would kind of submit a concept plan. There are are kind of two levels for, sites less than, I believe, 15 acres.

You don't require a concept plan, for sites that are larger than 15 acres and and up to a 100 net acres. It requires a concept plan. And so once the solicitation is issued, there would be a deadline for applications similar to an RFP that the city is issuing, and then applicants would submit those proposals. I think to speak to some of the advantages, I think a couple of the property owners that we've had conversations with, both who have reached out on their own and who, kinda responded to some outreach is that, you know, they have larger pump parcels of land that they're, you know, looking long term to to to develop. And so as opposed to waiting for you know, if land's work, you know, is started in 2026, you know, the first report is done in 2027, say, then the second report in 2028, and then we start the Irma growth boundary amendment 2028, that would be probably two to three years depending on how that goes.

So somebody looking to add their property to the city and then develop it, you know, has that seven year window before that could be possible. So this is just a a kind of much more expedited pathway for a property owner who's eligible, who wants to develop to kind of come into to the city limits. Yes. And then as far as who if people want to, so prior to deciding to issue the solicitation, last year, council asked us to do kind of some initial outreach, and so we sent out letters to property owners who would be directly adjacent and could be eligible. And we we received probably, I think, maybe 10 to 15 letters of interest from property owners across a range of site sizes.

So they aren't all that 100 acres. Some are five and ten, and then it'll be up for council to determine if those smaller sites met the goal of what they're looking to do. But we did receive some kind of concrete interest from property owners that if we move forward, they would be interested in pursuing this.

And then ultimately, any proposals that would be re that we would receive, the council would have discretion as to whether or not to approve one. They could choose not to or they could ask us to issue a new solicitation. It's not there's no obligation on this for the city to approve any of these. So, you know, there could be, you know, community feedback or engagement around that too depending on the process the council wanted to use.

Thank you very much. That's a great in-depth explanation. Thank you.

So with that, I believe that concludes our presentation and our update on these work program items. And I think, you know, the next thing that you'll probably see I would imagine would be a finalized work scope and a schedule and some requests for, you know, scheduling those planning commission presentations and touch points along the way for the housing capacity analysis. I don't think there's anything coming up on the employment. It sounded like there wasn't anything coming up on the employment lands, although certainly if the council were to direct us to engage on that or if we had property owners who were requesting it, then that would certainly, you know, that wouldn't come directly to the planning commission, but New Mac would be involved with that. So, Faye, I think we're ready to move on, and what do we have chair, what do we have next?

Is there any items from the commissioners? I just would like to make a note that, to the people who are your term is coming up, they you still have an opportunity to the end of the month to reapply if you would like to. So you can come see me if you have questions on if your term's up or not. And that's all I had. Anybody else?

Commissioner Mansfield, a little bit ago, the planning commission sat in with city council in a discussion about the curb designs, sidewalk designs. I was wondering if we had an outlook on when that discussion would continue.

Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner Mansfield. That's a good reminder. You know, there was no direction or follow-up requested from that joint work session, and so I've my check-in with the city manager I did ask about that and he said that there wasn't any action at this time. The consultant team with Keller is going back and looking at that and I think when they have some alternatives that they can share with the city council, that'll be the next time that we hear about it.

Anyway, and I think on the process on that, I've recommended that if, you know, there is a proposal to amend the transportation system plan to add street sections whether other street sections with or without curb type sidewalks that would be properly vetted by the planning commission. And so we, you know, we look forward to following up on that. There's just no direction at this point to do that.

Thank you.

Yep.

Commissioner Wright?

Yeah. Commissioner Wright?

I'm sorry. I should have probably mentioned, I'm the alternate for the NUMAC, just to let you know. I don't know if that's down. I just talked to commissioner Dale.

K.

I don't know if we want somebody else. Give them a try. Should I stay? Yeah.

Think when we do have something that we'll need to come before New Mac, we'll be reaching out probably through the city manager's office to make sure that we have representatives from each of the bodies that are part of that including the county, so I'm not sure that all of those positions are the individuals who are serving in those roles are still available and, you know, willing to do that. So, it's been a while.

We do have, I believe, three vacancies across The Atlantic, the county and city. And then it looks like, commissioner, Dale, your term on New Mac is through 2027, and commissioner Wright, your term is through 2026 on New Mac.

Oh, that's good.

Alright. Thank you. I did I when I looked up the New Mac, it didn't have anybody's name on it. It's been zeroed out. I don't know why.

Where where were you looking, commissioner Ryan?

Under agenda and meeting minutes. There's only there's one document in there now.

Oh, that may have been a result of our website update. We can look into that too.

We do have a separate page for for New Mac, and that lists the number. So you should be able to also find that information on that page as well.

Thank you, James. The only staff the only other staff update this evening unless the planners have something to add is that the city council is scheduled to hold a public hearing on the code maintenance amendments that this commission reviewed and recommended. That public hearing is on the seventeenth, so it's next week, next Monday. And we had a productive work session and that's all I have to report on that.

And then I I I can can I have one comment just for for an update, and and, Scott, you might have something to add here as well, but just, with the kind of the work that the planning commission did on the vacation rental package. So the city is currently in the grace period while we're getting applications in. So, we have been receiving applications both for planning applications, business licenses, and PLD registration. So the state's been doing a lot of work on that, and it's been a lot a lot of coordination. And so we are kind of continuing to work through that. And then once in December, once that grace period ends, we're gonna gonna be moving into kinda the more monitoring phase, but we are seeing people come in and apply and get registered.

Yeah. Thank you, James. Yeah. There is a lot of back end and back office work that happens after these policies and codes are adopted. And James has been and Faye have both been doing a lot of work to operationalize those new regulations and registration requirements. Unless there are any questions or anything from the commission to staff, we have nothing further this evening.

Jose, you can go ahead and, if there's nothing further, during the meeting.

Hey. Is there anything, further? Yes. We can end the meeting.