Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

It is now time to begin the meeting of the Beaverton Planning Commission. For the recording, I will make an absence to make sure which committee members are present tonight. Commissioner Mettler. Present. Commissioner McCann.

Present.

Commissioner McCoy. Present. Commissioner Paik. Present. Commissioner Winter. Good evening, Chair. I am Anna Blatinski, the Manager of Planning Division at Beaverton.

Saya hanya punya satu pengumuman yang cukup mengharukan Max Everett yang telah menjadi pendukung setiap komisi perencanaan kita serta banyak hal lain yang dilakukan tim. Perencanaan akan pindah dan hari ini adalah hari terakhirnya. So, I want to take this opportunity to say thank you, Meg, for all your support for the Planning Commission. I would like to extend my thanks to the I-COMPASS platform, but what is most visible is the transition from the long-distance planning commission, which has been in place since 2020, to our new hybrid arrangement that allows members The audience is present directly and for us to have a face-to-face conversation in real life which has a lot of extraordinary benefits and Max really helps make the transition smooth. So thank you for Max, we will continue. And yes, let's make this meeting go well.

Thank you. I also want to thank Max for organizing our meeting and making it go smoothly. So thank you and we will miss you. The first agenda is a presentation on the Biverton climate action plan. The outline of tonight's work session is as follows. We will start with the presentation of city staff, which is followed by discussions and questions from the Commission to the staff. Now we start the presentation of the staff that will be led by the project manager, Kevin Boland.

Good evening everyone. Thank you for inviting me. I am Kevin Bolan. I work in the City Continuity Program. And tonight, we will discuss the latest innovations in the City Action Plan, then share with you some new resources that we have organized, including free maps that can be used. I have a number of slides that I will discuss. I have several notes so that no one misses it. But if you have any questions during the explanation, please go ahead. So, we have updated the city's climate action plan. The council adopted it in February this year. And you know what the plan is in a simple way, the U-plan is about how to reduce carbon emissions or carbon pollution and how to be prepared to face climate impacts. All the things in it, I mean to bring the outline, it's about 120 pages long. All the things in it, you know, it's not just a complement or a small idea that I have in mind. All of that is based on science and based on a lot of work that we have been doing for two years. Including the three points that I highlight here, which is the basis of what is in the plan. This is the glass house gas inventory for the entire community, as well as future condition studies that see what the impact is coming and the impact at this time from Then the broad community involvement, which sees what is appreciated by the community and what they worry about. And so all of that, you know, forms the basis of what is planned, which takes a perspective that is largely narrative. There are many texts in this PDF document, but it has a new structure that is regulated in a hierarchy that focuses on the measured goals that are not in the first plan. Each strategy and purpose in the plan contains background information and the reason why the strategy is included. This plan is also designed to be more flexible than just a list of checkpoints. Conditions continue to change. Many things have changed. Between the adoption of the first plan in 2019 and this plan in 2024, I think your voice is a bit too slow.

Sometimes too slow for us.

So you can be stronger and more consistent.

Thank you very much for your information.

Thank you again.

Sorry about that. I didn't mean to be harsh. How far did it go? So, the flexibility of the plan, right? The conditions change, the budget changes, the staff changes. So, we have designed this plan to be more flexible and not too rigid so that it can last longer than just a list of tasks that we only want to complete. In this plan, you will also find various additional benefits from the existing strategies, including community health improvement, budget savings, or stronger community development. In my opinion, it is important to note that this plan is not a solution for everything. This plan focuses on the most impactful way for the city to achieve two main things, reduce emissions and be ready to face climate change impacts. So, what else besides the structure and metric that I have mentioned? This plan also more clearly identifies the location and influence of the city to consider when the control is in the hands of the city government as well as how or whether we can influence it. And if yes, how is it in line with other efforts at the state level or regional level. Another new thing is that this plan quantifies the cost of failure in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Finally, there is a new BAP that focuses on organizational capacity. This BAP focuses on better decision-making about climate change and achieving city climate targets. When I say better decisions, what I mean is that in all lines of city work, not only sustainable programs, but also through the council and city commission or when the leadership and council consider decisions so that the impact of climate change on them and their impact on climate change can be calculated. This slide shows when I reviewed the plan to see where there is a meeting point between the work in the climate action plan and maybe the work that you handle. There are many things in this plan about population density and transportation. There is also enough discussion about green spaces and vegetation, as well as the decision-making aspect that I mentioned earlier. So there are seven things I want to say. First, in terms of capacity, the organization has two different strategies to ensure that the staff and staff are ready and have the equipment needed to make better decisions or be informed. And to ensure that there is a feedback mechanism so that we can learn from and develop the decisions that have been made. After that, we have two strategies, you know. We have three strategies in transportation. about building an environment with a dense mix of land users, then one about active transportation infrastructure, then two about the filling of electric vehicles and natural resources. We have a strategy about city trees, the closure of city trees with parks and natural areas, as well as one about green infrastructure, and others about city heat mitigation. So instead of reading a document or a PDF of 100 pages that may not be too interesting for anyone, we decided that the document would just be a reference document. And as a replacement, we have organized a series of story maps that have been worked on amazingly by my colleague Natalie. And this is a way for the community to to explore this plan. We call it the BCAP Navigator. And this is a series of eight different story maps that we will see. I don't know, three of them tonight. Not entirely, but I want to see two that are more oriented on the basis of thinking, namely about greenhouse gas emissions and future conditions that are expected for Biverton. And then we will see one of the topical areas. We will see the one about natural infrastructure. So, you can access it, I have to say, by visiting the city's web site, then there is a guide to the BCAP navigator, and it will take you to the main page. Here, which contains 8 different story maps, and if you click number 1 to the Carbon Beaverton track, it will take you to the story map to see the greenhouse gas emissions and explore it. And when you go there, you will see various graphics and other items to try to make it a little more interactive, as well as various ways to see, understand, or discern from where the emissions in Biverton come from. So there is a screen capture that shows that almost half of the emissions come from building energy and the other half comes from transportation. And then, select the menu at the top, you can click it if you want to see which emissions are only imported or which are from the city operational. And when you scroll, there is a different graphic. I like this one, maybe it's a bit difficult to read if you don't use your own computer, but this is basically a general picture of where all emissions in Beaverton come from. On the right side, which is reddish-yellow, all of them are imported emissions. All of them are emissions from the outskirts of Beaverton, but they are the result of activities that take place in Beaverton. So food is the best example for that. We don't plant a lot of food in Beaverton, but there are a lot of emissions from food production. It happens outside of Beaverton, but the fact that there is a demand here is the reason why the emissions are displayed as imported emissions. Meanwhile, local emissions, which are the first four bars on the left, all occur within city limits. So you will see, like the green one, passenger car emissions, that is a very large part, or electricity or natural gas to heat and cool buildings, which is a big part. And then when you scroll further through this story map, you can delve into one of these fields and see more graphics, more information to try to give a more detailed picture of what you are considering. And we have also tried to include a guide in these small green buttons that will immediately jump to the part of the plan that discusses the handling of the emissions. or to a relevant city project, such as here. At this time it is about transportation, and you will see that there is a location there, to renew TSP. So if you click it, it will take you to TSP, because TSP also cares about things like this. Next, I want to see A story map that observes the impact of climate change in Beaverton, which in my opinion we have seen and felt. Not that the weather is quite cloudy and the color of the people is outside. I think last week, right? This image, from last year, I think, but I can only take it a few days ago. This is a study that sees how various things have changed in this region. And this study divided it into different times throughout the year and what we can expect, such as longer and hotter hot seasons, more intense drought conditions, more persistent, more forest fires, and the impact throughout the year on many different things, such as changes in plant and animal access, as well as population changes. So once again, when you travel further, you can delve into various topics that exist about heat. Then there is a support portal for training in regional heat mapping, which is followed by Metro, Washington County, City, and many other partners a few years ago, where we used Sukarelawan to map heat at various times throughout the day, which was then modeled to show the location of the heat island.

Let's continue, there are still many more.

This is just an example of various other sources of power included here. This shows the relationship between the canopy, the city, and the heat, not the sliding roof in the middle. If we are on a slope now, I can slide it over there and you can feel it. How does heat appear in the area that lacks canopy and vice versa? Or click on this different area and it will take you to a different case study that has been done. So those are two chapters of the general picture story. Then there are six more for each section of the topic in the plan that we call the focus area. We have organization capacity. We have one that focuses on building energy, because as you have seen before, that's where most of the emissions come from. We have another one that focuses on transportation, because that's where most of the other emissions come from. Then we have one about food and goods, which are originally a lot of imported emissions. And we have two that are more focused on preparing for the impact One is about the survival of the community, and the other is about the survival of natural infrastructure. So, I just want to share a few things from those with the theme of natural infrastructure, because in my opinion this is related to the next discussion about trees and canopies. So, with whatever, as soon as you enter the storyboard, you will have This is the same menu. On the top right, you can click the map and get a lot of background information. Or you can scroll down to the destination or target. So what is in the goal section is the objective for each section. This section has one objective, namely natural infrastructure and green is used to clean the environment, manage the water, support the diversity of life, and improve the quality of life. This one is a little different. However, in the goal section, you see the objective and also what we want to achieve. And these are the things we want to see as an indicator to evaluate our performance. So, for example, the increase in tree coverings in the whole city. Then, the reduction of the surface proportion of groundwater in the center of the city. We will also see proxy indicators about our performance, such as how many citizens participated in the program, such as the Pekarangan Habitat program, or how to manage rainwater to improve water quality, and things like that. So, these metrics are presented in a way that is easier to understand in this story map. Then when you continue to roll down, you will enter the strategy that is our way to achieve that goal. Not like the goal of natural and green infrastructure that is used to cool the environment, and so on. Then the strategy to achieve it. The first strategy is to expand, maintain, and strengthen the closure of cities, parks, and natural areas. Next, you will get the background, why is that? And we have included various potential activities. Once again, back to the idea of ​​not making a list of solid item checks. That can only be influenced by many factors. We have provided an example of potential activities that can support this strategy. It does not mean that there is no other work that can be done. This is good because if a program or project contributes to the strategy, we want to be able to record it and not limit ourselves to these four potential activities. Anyway, this is the potential activity that is essential for each strategy. Then this is another strategy. Increase green infrastructure and rainwater systems to reduce the risk of flooding, manage flooding, and improve water quality. There is a background and then another potential activity, such as how we can use rainwater management solutions to improve the river corridor. I'm sure you've heard this topic before or will hear it in the future. Maybe, about river restoration or prioritizing green infrastructure and building approaches that have a strong impact on rainwater management. So, through all of this, you can continue to roll when you are on your way. And finally, you will reach the area that fits what is currently being done by the city and the dashboard that we are working on to complete all of this activity. And there is an area that shows how the individual play a role in this work with more resources and knowledge and more to promote the interest as well as helping the community to understand why this work is important and what is the way to really achieve some goals that are quite noble and sometimes feel heavy, which is to overcome climate change and be ready to face its impact. So, that's all from me. Once again, you can find it directly on the City Continuity website or at beavertonoregon.gov. And that will take you to the main page. Any questions? Any questions for the staff? So you said you are developing a dashboard. And in that dashboard, will there be any kind of calculation or modeling, especially if we do X, Y, and Z?

This is what we have to expect.

There is modeling, I think I will call it a static modeling at this time. There is modeling that we do during the development of the plan that states that if we do this, this is how to change the graphics. At this time, it is not prepared for real-time modeling, as we have done this so far, and it has shifted the graphics by X, but that is an option that we can consider. The problem is, is it only appropriate to have a direct model? It depends on the number of activities that take place or the number of...

Thank you. I just want to know if you can explain a little bit about how and where you see this plan being put into action in the city. How is the acceptance of this plan? Is the committee, council, and other committees actively interested, involved, or contacting you?

So I can say that the acceptance of this plan when we develop it is very good. We visited, I don't know if we visited all the committees and committees, we visited many of them. And you know, I can say that there is a lot of support for the work that we try to do. Since adopting the plan, you know, people are still interested. We try to keep the momentum. We try to make it easier for people to read, because it's impossible for people to read 120 pages, right? So now that it's here, we plan to carry out a kind of socialization to get people back involved. And then, you know, be prepared for the annual report on what we say as what is planned by the plan to be achieved. The plan asks for a report from the committee every year. This year, I don't know if you all feel it, but it's already August. It feels like, wow, time flies so fast. So this is the time for As part of the development of this dashboard, we are collecting all the basic data for the things that we will measure. And then we will have a presentation that can be presented, you know, here is our position and this is what happened over the past year and here we need to put in more effort and here you know these are the things that are planned to happen in the future. Any other questions?

Does the staff have any comments? We will continue to the next agenda if so. Thank you very much.

The conclusion of tonight's work session is as follows. We will start with the presentation of city staff, followed by discussions and questions from the Commission to the staff. Now we will start with the presentation of staff that was delivered by the Manager of the Planning Division, Anna Slatinski.

Thank you, Chairman Adams and all members of the Commission. And thank you, Kevin, for that amazing presentation. It feels very natural to put on the presentation of the innovation of the climate action plan by talking to all of you about the landscape of regulations for trees and natural areas in this city. Oh, I think most of you are here for one or the other thing related to land use related to trees for the past few months, for the past few months. So you have a responsibility that may be a bit dubious in implementing the city code regulations as it is happening now. And I'm sure there are a lot of thoughts and feelings about it. I know the staff has a lot of thoughts and feelings about it. So what I want to do tonight, and I think I can show this on the full screen here. How do I make this full screen? Here it is. The echo is different from the usual. So tonight we will give a general picture about the context of the regulation of the nature of the trees in this city. There are many layers in that context and many details in it. So I want to clarify that we do not plan to discuss it in depth. If we do, I am not the right person to deliver this presentation. Here is our planning manager, Jana Fox, to discuss it if necessary. However, for tonight's conversation, I focused on a wider context at the state level, the federal, regional, and local parts, and then gave a general picture of the current regulatory instruments. and look ahead from our current position. One of the materials I sent before this meeting is the tree audit survey conducted in 2021, which I don't know if you all have seen it. In my opinion, this is a very well-calibrated survey. There have been some changes since then, but I think this generally catches the challenge of our approach at this time and what we need to consider to change it. So those are the two basic goals of this presentation. Provide the context and give a general picture of how the city is doing various things at the moment. So, the federal context is really at the highest level. Earlier this year, Robin McIntyre, city councilor assistant, gave a good presentation about the exactness. We deliberately scheduled it to be related to one of the land use requests related to trees because the request focuses on the protection of trees and city limits in setting additional protection at certain locations. And part of the conversation is related to constitutional limitations on what the city can do to limit private property. So that's part of it. We also have a comprehensive species law that of course focuses on habitat and its impact on registered species. Then the Clean Water Law, which is an important law with a broad range that is implemented through EPA to the level of regional and local states. And besides that, there are various institutions at the federal level that are involved. FEMA has recently begun to be involved in habitat management. With their new regulations affecting the landscape of flooding and vegetation, Corp Zeni Angkatan Daerah also has a role. This is not a complete slide, but to give pressure on the federal level. Hmm, there is the federal law aspect, the state and regional, which affects the choice of the city in setting up trees and natural resources. The context of the state is important in determining the purpose of planning throughout the state. Listing the purpose of planning throughout the state. However, what I emphasize here is because it addresses the five goals that specifically discuss natural resources and are actually the basis of the inventory for trees, small forests, and natural areas, which is an important part of the current approach to regulation in Biverton. The purpose of housing is there because in the cities that make legislative changes to regulations and policies, we must make arrangements according to all the goals of planning throughout the country and goal 10 for housing has become a special focus. And there are laws in the IRS as well as in the Administrative Regulations of Oregon that basically require us to maintain the housing capacity in order to provide the housing that is needed in the city. So, every time we make a legislative change that can reduce the land housing capacity, we basically have to prove that we can do it. And that is one of the challenges when it comes to regulating the area that has been developed in the city. Part of our obligation in the process of adoption is to make a meeting based on goal 10. So that is the challenge. And goal 14 is actually a broader context. Goal 14, which is related to urbanization, basically describes the decision-making process in Oregon regarding whether the city growth limit can be expanded and related again to the capacity within the limit for housing and workplaces. There are many analyses that have many nuances and many assumptions about what is considered a land plot that is within these boundaries. And there is a pull, isn't it? Expanding these boundaries means that we have agricultural and forest land that was previously not urbanized, which is not ready to be urbanized, On the other hand, if we build more densely within the borders of urban growth, then there can be a space conflict between things, such as trees that are within the borders of urbanization and outside. So once again, all this is just a context. This does not give us the rules of what we have to do, but this is part of the landscape of the region, regional, and local countries to understand how to fulfill various goals, policies, and obligations that the city has. and it is possible to record how many state-owned entities. The Department of Conservation and Land Development is a kind of land use agency for state-owned entities. The Department of State-owned Entities regulates wetlands. The APU is a kind of special quasi-instance for housing. And there are many other state-owned entities involved, but they are the main ones. In the regional context, for the Metro, we have a functional plan for the Metro City, Title 13, which was adopted in 2005, which specifically discusses the placement of certain natural areas and its regulations. So, some of you may remember when we were working on the Community Plan, Gunung Kuper, some nuances about how the Overlay, the Power Sources, are listed in reference directly to the 13 Metro Regulations that determine how cities identify natural areas for preservation. And there is a very specific language that makes the city based on the overlay on the data from the date when the UGB expansion was agreed, which is 2018. The owner of the property that has planted the tree after the date feels frustrated because when it is planned to be adopted, some areas that are displayed as forests are no longer forested due to tree planting. However, the Metro Functional Planning Regulation states that the natural area must be identified as of the date of the UGB expansion agreement. So this leads to a very specific level of detail that can shape how we approach the arrangement of regulations and the identification of power sources. So that is something that continues to be an important factor in how we approach these things. Also here in Washington County, we have clean water services that provide rainwater services and regional sanitation waste channels. They hold federal permission to throw water into the water. They are the main responsible party for the provisions of the Clean Water Act and also some of the species law that are threatened to perish. And we are a partner in implementing the standard design and construction of clean water services that apply for the MS4 permit. So once again, layers and layers. Local context, and sorry, I know this is too much talk, we will continue to the things that are more interesting, I promise. We at Beaverton have a program, Kota Nan Kota, Arborist Kota, is someone who we often ask for consultation for application for the use of individual land, as well as policy questions. However, the program does prioritize trees in public lands such as roads, crossroads, and other public properties. Then we have the Biverton Development Code, which you all know. The main part of the local code, you will find the rules for trees and natural areas are the agreement criteria and section 40 for the design assessment and application of the tree planning for the public through section 60 which is a kind of general rule but has design assessment standards and guidance as well as a special section that discusses tree and vegetation standards. The Comprehensive Plan also discusses trees in the elements of land use, housing elements, and elements of natural resources that include inventories for national planning, section number 5, as well as including historical resources and other things. Okay. The rules in Biverton, you are already familiar with some of these mechanisms. I want to emphasize that the Cooper Mountain Community Planning Area has an approach which is really different from what happens in other cities. That's what we want. And it is needed. It is needed because of the vast natural area and the ravine, which is part of the Cooper Mountain. And it is wanted because we are very aware of the lack of closeness of tree codes in other cities. The approach there and me, we haven't had the opportunity to apply it, but it's really focused on the use of the waste resources to preserve the trees during land sharing and development. And then after development, there are new criteria for planting trees and tree mitigation, where once again there are new criteria that are different from those in other cities. For other parts of the city other than Kupar, we do have a tree planting requirement during development. It is usually in the landscape area and roadside trees, as well as the island in the parking lot. These things are usually in the Home Standard Design, and we also have a tree planting mitigation requirement. However, if you see the tree code audit, you will see several clear descriptions that really show facts. that there are only a few strict restrictions on planting trees, even for trees and significant plants that have been identified. And as we have just discussed, there are some tree protection measures during construction, but it is quite limited. So there are many other concerns and criticisms. which is more nuanced and detailed about the codes that exist today. I will not discuss it here now, but once again, the audit did its job well. This is actually something that I think is a bit exciting, even though there are other sides to it. Kami memiliki peta di situs web kota yang menampilkan foto udara dengan kanopi pohon yang diidentifikasi untuk tahun 2007 dan 2019. Warna hijau menunjukkan cakupan kanopi pohon tahun 2007 dan warna kuning adalah cakupan tahun 2019. Ini cukup menarik menurut pendapat saya karena ini adalah area pengembangan, ini adalah progress rate. Dan Anda bisa melihat bahwa segera setelah pengembangan itu dibangun, hanya ada sedikit pohon kecil. Then when you look at 2019, you can see how the trees planted during the development grow over time and create canopies in places that previously did not exist. On the other hand, of course, remembering our tree code is the limit of the removal of mature trees is not strong, so it can also happen the other way around in certain cases. And in my opinion, one of them was erased with several photos in the tree code audit. By continuing the existing regulatory framework, we have a significant indicator for the area of natural resources. I tried to find out when this area was established, and there was one year in the 1980s. Maybe there are some other areas that have been set up. But Jana, who has worked in the city since 2008, admits that she doesn't know that there is a new SNA that has been set up since she arrived in this city. So the condition is a bit unclear. But once again, it's layered. So we have a sign of significant trees and shrubs. There is partial renewal for this through the GL5 inventory in 2009, but the renewal only eliminates trees and grass areas that have been developed. So the trees have been there for a long time, no longer added. We also have vegetation corridor requirements from CWS. This requirement was actually identified during the development. There is no map that shows it, but roughly speaking, this is basically a corridor around the river. And within the corridor, there are significant boundaries for the development and protection of additional trees. And finally, we have floodplain requirements. This only applies to the flood area that has been marked But since FEMA began to deal with the problem of habitat, there are quite a lot of mitigations that are required for tree planting with a height of 6 inches or more on the ground. Because it is one of the three proxies for endangered fish habitat species that they use in the new rules. So once again, these layers are wide and interact in a way that cannot be fully predicted. And because of that, the planning staff really have to apply it based on case by case by case. So it is difficult to understand all the nuances here. Some of them are under city control, and others are not under city control. So by looking ahead, it is necessary to note that we certainly have a 2021 tree code audit. There are several renovations that are being carried out after that. Of course, the cover mountain plan has been adopted. There are new planting conditions that have been adopted for the housing selection project, which implements a middle house in Biverton, where there is an additional tree planting for the development of a middle house. Then there are also additional conditions for planting trees in parking spaces that are implemented through the provisions of the Executive Community Order, which is inclusive and fair. However, it is very clear that this city is too late to make a comprehensive renewal of our rules on trees and natural areas. This is something that is already in the list, very close to the top position for some time now. In fact, it needs to be a project that is supported by resources. Significant. And there are other things that become a higher priority, partly because of the legal conditions of the country related to housing, but also because the city budget is in a four-year or more reduction mode. And I think one thing that needs to be acknowledged is that our code at the moment does not have It is unclear what its purpose is in terms of the policy of what is identified by the city to be implemented through the regulations. It is really one of the first discussions that must be made as part of this effort, namely what is wanted to be achieved by the city through the regulation of natural forest and area. I think the climate action plan has taken the first step, which is by acknowledging that the benefits of trees have many forms. However, regarding how it is translated into our tree regulation, we do not yet have the opportunity to combine these things with the statement of a very clear goal regarding tree regulation. And also, you know there is a strong technical analysis and of course the communication of the community is very important to be done as part of this. So unfortunately, this is not the kind of thing that we can do with limited budget. And that is part of the reason why there is a delay. I hope we can identify some small actions that can be taken without having the resources to do a comprehensive large project. However, I think that the possibility will be very limited. And that is a rather sad conclusion. But now, I leave it to you, and we can share concerns, questions, comments, and discussions.

Thank you, staff. Are there any questions for the staff? Thank you, the time is very precise. You know, this often occurs lately. I have a few ideas related to this recent request, but one of the last ones that appeared related to the identification of something that I think will be recognized by everyone as a very significant tree, but is not a registered significant tree or officially established. So what are the limitations to create a path for identification and recognition of significant trees during land use requests compared to relying on what it looks like now we rely on, that is, a kind of lost audit to identify the trees?

I mean, when the inventory is adopted, it looks like there is no consideration for inspection or renewal of the routine for the inventory. I mean, at least we know that trees grow over time, so it looks like it will be very reasonable. That's right, the city limits also change over time. We do have some criteria for trees and significant tree trunks. The arrangement explains the criteria used to make the inventory. However, we do not have a mechanism for someone to produce so that trees or tree trunks are added. Maybe that's something we can do. In my opinion, the question is a bit like chicken and egg, which doesn't mean we can't move forward with that kind of thing. But I don't know if the approach of trees and important tree groups will be our choice in the long run. Does it make sense to focus on that? I see Chelsea turning her head. Focus on that approach. That's my personal doubt. However, sometimes what you have is just a box of plasters and it might be better to use it rather than not at all. I am interested to hear other opinions about that. But a number of small-scale actions that we can take to help mitigate some things that clearly fail to enter the category that may not be reasonable for the long term. Should we still do those things?

Any additional questions, Commissioner?

I'm not sure if this will lead to a more relaxed discussion. I mean, I feel that for an important tree or an important fence, an important fence may be more reasonable from the perspective of protection in general. An important tree can be very challenging. I agree. That's why I sweep, because it's too difficult and unrealistic to hope that people will continue to do data. But you often go to communities where sometimes there is a mechanism for someone to They are willing to place the tree they own as something important and it provides certain criteria and protection. That's one way. In my opinion, what is usually more useful if combined with that is not allowing mass mining without mitigation or if there is limited mining without mitigation must remain very limited. In my opinion, one of the weaknesses, and it was mentioned in the audit, is the ability to split in half or sometimes all trees in your location without mitigation at all. It depends on how the tree is categorized, and sometimes more looking for size criteria. And some cities can do it. If you are in this range, the mitigation is X, if you exceed a certain limit, the mitigation level will increase. That's where you can start protecting large trees that have been around for more than 100 years to truly provide real protection. And yes, it's a bit like forcing incentives in an effort to encourage people to protect it. And in my opinion, it starts to direct us to what we hear about climate action plans, which is to find a way to take advantage of the goals of those plans in order to re-develop your code of ethics so that you have more leverage. It doesn't mean that you can't do development, just so people think twice. You know, maybe I'm changing the layout of this building so that I can still get the unit that I want without having to plant those trees.

Yes, actually I haven't mentioned this, but there are also requirements from the state that requires a clear and objective standard for the development of housing, And that is something that is always a bit complicated for tree management. But Lake Oswego has recently adopted a clear and objective process for tree planting. So we will see it to learn what we can take. Interestingly, as far as I understand, they are not erasing their structure right now. They are adding a clear and objective tree planting route. So, just like if you don't like our clear and objective standards, you can go back to the description below. But it gives an opportunity. an addition that can then provide the ability to become more intelligent with the discretionary option. Once again, I'm just talking while thinking hard here. However, this is one way to balance various considerations when we have to fulfill not only the policy priorities at the city level, but also the obligations under the law of the state, which sometimes feels a bit cumbersome.

Any additional questions?

If you are organizing, have you thought of any priorities for your goals? If you can only take small parts, not in full, like are there certain aspects that you want to change to help achieve the goals of the city? In my opinion, we have learned a lot from listening to the opinions of the newest planning commission related to trees.

That really undermines the integrity of tree protection in neighbors' property. Also, Commissioner Macken, this is similar to your comment, isn't it? We don't have to make a significant tree inventory to identify the characteristics of trees that can get special protection. Either by making the development difficult or by providing protection during the ongoing development. So in my opinion, it will be a very good place to start. In my opinion, the approach that is taken in Guber Mountain, even though we haven't really tried it. The general approach is to prioritize power sources, trees on limited land or public land such as access routes are very reasonable because in that area, the city has clear access. Then the other part is canopy approach, the approach that focuses exclusively on each tree. In my opinion, all of this makes sense. What I want to mention is along the country's efforts to limit regulation. Trees in jurisdiction on the one hand create Beberapa peluang bagi Biverton karena meskipun pendekatan negara, bagian tidak selalu sejalan dengan tujuan Biverton kode at. Penebangan pohon di Biverton yang sangat longgar justru membuat kebijakan negara bagian nantinya mungkin memberi Biverton kemampuan untuk menjadi sedikit lebih protektif. So that's the kind of opportunity we're looking for and thinking about what we can include in the ongoing text amendment project, which can basically be incorporated into it alternately into a full independent project. I'm curious about you. How many times have you commented or pointed out doubts to try to use other codes to make it possible for Biverton to change its own code? However, as you said, the Biverton code is very loose and almost every city in this country has tighter rules than Biverton.

So my question is why is Biverton so skeptical? I mean, does Biverton doubt to change the code or is this purely a power source problem?

This is mainly a power source problem. We have done several efforts that failed to renew the tree code comprehensively. This has happened more than 15 years ago. However, at least there are two efforts, where the work reaches a point where the council must make difficult decisions to balance the ability of property owners to decide tree planting with the effort of preservation and there is no political courage to continue the discussion. I think we are in a different political and policy context now than it was then. I'm not too worried about that, except for acknowledging the importance of involving the community in this matter. Because there are some things that need to be balanced. Everyone likes to keep trees in other people's property. However, although in the end we see owners of properties who really want to preserve and protect their trees, often it is not what we hear. So this is quite complicated. And from the perspective of the city's resources, it is very difficult to regulate what happens in the residential areas.

Yes, actually I would like to continue that matter briefly. When we talk about capacity and additional capacity to do the work, can you be more specific? Is it the capacity of the staff planning to connect the rules with policy? Is it the involvement of the public to increase awareness and build support? Where do you place the capacity? Where do you really put it?

Our planning team was reduced to about four FTEs over the past few years. In addition to handling additional work load, TSB is now part of the long-term planning, even though there used to be a separate transportation planning division. So we lost staff and got additional work load. this year when the arrangement of the budget for the association's planning position in the long-term team was cancelled. So, the source of power problem is very real, and the city budget challenge is not over yet. So, the problem is not only the staff, but also the funding for professional services to hire consultants. Kami rutin mencari dana hibah saat mengerjakan proyek besar, tetapi program hibah biasanya berfokus pada cara memperlancar proses pembangunan. Housing is not focused on trees and natural areas. It is not too difficult to put these things into a larger project. However, I have tried to find out if there is a program that is suitable for breaking the rules of the tree and does not get many positive responses that are in line with the goals of the program. So this is enough for the staff and funds to hire a consultant.

Do you think the budget will be a little longer in the near future, or how far can you plan the development?

So unfortunately in Oregon there is a kind of problem in the whole country related to how public income is structured. There is no sales tax. And property tax income is limited by the law adopted in the 1990s. This, basically, is a basic problem where the output continues to increase and the income is in a different path and the two are not close to each other. So, even though there is a lot of efficiency and significant budget cuts, the fundamental dynamics still exist when looking at the future. Diverton is not alone in this. There is one independent analysis that concludes that a very high percentage of jurisdiction in Oregon will face bankruptcy in the next 10 years. So, there is a structural problem with income in the country, the part of Oregon that may be outside of Biverton's ability to solve it on its own.

The reason I raise this is because you are talking about the protection of the forest and the area of the river flow, which is important, and along the system of the Tualatin Park route, which mostly follows the river flow area. Recently, there has been a significant tree expansion along the area of the Vanocreek river flow, and I have not heard of any public access to get an opinion on that. So I'm curious if this will start to inform several other institutions.

So, the Taman and Recreation District of Tualatin Hills is a government entity that is separated from the city. So that's the first thing I want to say. When tree plowing is done in the city, the area remains subject to the NCWS city rules. I don't know anything about tree plowing. If you plow invasive species or damaged and dangerous trees, then the story is different. However, once again, I am not used to the specific situation. There is a partnership between TPRD and the city. I will specifically outline the park plan and the open space of the city center and also add CWS with the Biverton city center sub-district strategy, where we really see the city center as an area that has three rivers and many floodplains. There is a real need to manage rainwater in a much more strategic way than in other areas of the city because the soil is flat, tends to be flat, and is close to floodplains. Things that will become effective green infrastructure in other contexts will not work well here. However, there is also an opportunity to see this river corridor as an opportunity for the regional rainwater infrastructure to reappear in the river that is currently in the pipeline for habitat restoration. And that is very ripe for collaboration between THPRD, CWS, and the city government. And there is work going on in a project to help lay the foundation for this. And I mentioned the sub-district river flow strategy. That's actually a very important part of Teka Teki, because it allows developers in this area to pay for replacement fees instead of building rainwater facilities in the city center. And that is very important because we want a solid development in the center of the city. Building something big may not be the best land use. In addition, because of technical reasons, it is not necessarily a good technical solution, but the collected funds can then be used to fund a regional rainwater project that can improve the habitat and make the river function better. So that's the combination of goals that we want to achieve through this. And in my opinion, I feel quite optimistic that this will be a very effective approach in my opinion.

Is there any other questions? Does the staff have any comments?

No. Thank you very much.

Honesty Planning Division Manager The purpose of this is only to ensure that the use of land from the previous meeting is consistent with the intention of the Planning Commission in making the decision. We have the habit of doing this, especially when there is a comparison or there is a renewal that is made on the determination. Agreement as long as it is close, we want to make sure that the land use order is correct. So what we are looking for tonight is the voice of the Commission that asserts that the land use order is indeed reflected in the decision made by the Commission, the planning for the previous meeting.

Is there an emotion related to the land use order? Commissioner Risma, please. I have to find the right words. No. Chair, I request to approve Order No. 3 of the Regulation. Good. Is there anyone who supports? I support. Thank you, Commissioner Risma. Is there any discussion about the motion? There will be no discussion. The hearing will be held with a call. When your name is called, say yes if you agree or no if you reject. Commissioner Riz Makan.

Yes.

Commissioner Riz Makan.

Yes.

Commissioner Riz Makan. Yes. Commissioner Riz Peck. Yes. Commissioner Riz Winter.

And I, Chair Adams, also state that

The meeting is adjourned at 7.36 PM.