Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay. Well, welcome, everybody. I think we're gonna start with our first agenda item, which is an oath of office for Trace Gumont. So we welcome Trace. If you wanna go ahead and step up, mayor McGriff.

And who's gonna be the official photographer? I'm her. Okay. Because Jared will kill us if we do not get any pictures.

There you go.

Okay. Thank you so much, Planning Commission Chair Brandon Dole. Before we get to this, I just want to take a few minutes to say, thank you for applying and thank you for coming and interviewing before the city commission. I also want to officially, again thank all of you for serving. Being on the planning commission is sort of your sort of the unsung heroes is what I would call it.

I have been on the planning commission. As many of you know, I have been staff for I have been THAAD. I have been Kelly, one time for the city. And planning is my profession and my career, something I still love and enjoy, maybe not as much since the latest round of things from the state of Oregon. But I still believe I think that what's really important about the work that you are about to embark on is that it is on behalf of the community.

It doesn't matter where we live in Oregon City, but the main role of the Planning Commission is to support the livability of Oregon City, to look at what's being proposed by staff or by applicants and see how that fits into the statutes, the planning commission, reg rules and regulations that are in the municipal code, and how it affects our community. And while that's not one of the criteria, it's something that I always had in the back of my mind about how how does this proposal increase the livability of Oregon City. So it is, it's not, you know, as as you know, you don't get to be in the teddy bear parade. You don't get to kiss babies. You don't need to do any of that get to do any of that stuff, but it is nevertheless very, very important.

And so I appreciate your taking the time to step up. I would say it's probably not gonna be as busy as it was probably about four or five years ago, but that'll help you ease into it. So, we appreciate it. So what we do is we have you raise your right hand. So switch hands. And, this is pretty simple. You say I and then do solemnly swear, etcetera, etcetera. So go right ahead. Got it.

I, Trey Skymont, do solemnly swear that I will support the constitution of The United States and the state of Oregon along with the Oregon City Municipal Charter and Code. I will, to the best of my ability, faithfully perform my duties of planning commissioner of Oregon City during my incumbency thereof. Congratulations. Thank you.

Guys? Congratulations, Tracy. Glad to have you.

We do at the commission is that everybody gets to come down and take the picture with the new person.

Let's do that. I will

give those to you to to turn off.

Alright. Well We officially have a quorum. And then, Kelly, I was gonna say, is there oh, commissioner Laws is online on queue. Great. Okay. You can we can officially convene the meeting and, call the roll.

Here.

Here. Is that right? My name. My name. Thank you.

We'll get it.

Commissioner Dole?

Here.

And commissioner?

Here. Is that also the right

way to say it? Let us know for the record what's the right way to say your name.

Or. Either way.

Okay. Perfect.

There we go. Okay. With the meeting officially started, I think there

since they're incorrect for Carla for commission our commissioner Lawton Stolls since Stolls is the president.

Yeah. Go right ahead. Go ahead, Brandon.

Alright. I think let's move into the, well, second engine item. Right? Elections. Yes. Okay. And, Kelly, I'm gonna hand it off to you since chair Espey's, out tonight.

Okay. Okay. So thank you all for being here. We do have a quorum, and most of us here would be able to do this. So the way that we will move forward with this is I will open up the nominations for chair, at which point anybody has the opportunity to to put forward a nomination of an individual.

If we do have multiple individuals that are nominated for it, they'll have the opportunity to speak as to why they want to or don't wanna be chair. And then once those are done, we would do a a vote for the chair. And at that point in time, we will then move on to the vice chair process. So with that, I am happy to open up nominations for the chair position.

I nominate commissioner SP to remain as chair.

Mhmm. Any other nominations?

I would second that nomination.

Okay.

Commissioner Laws, do you have anything to say online? Are you okay with that nomination?

I'm okay with that. Okay. Okay.

I know Paul's not here, so he might have had a different opinion. Paul has done such a wonderful job, I think, in the last year as official chair, maybe two years. So I think we should keep him in that place.

Okay. So I'll do a quick roll call. Commissioner Laws, in favor of Commissioner Espy being chair? Aye. Commissioner LaSalle?

Aye.

Commissioner Meinig? Aye. Commissioner Dole?

Aye.

And Commissioner Geimont? Aye. Okay. And since, the new chair is not here tonight, I'm happy to do the vice chair process if you will all all like. So I will now open up the, vice chair for nominations.

I'll nominate Commissioner Dole for vice chair.

I'll second.

Any other nominations?

Carla, online, any other nominations from you?

I'm okay.

You're okay? Okay.

Commissioner Laws? Aye. Commissioner LaSalle?

Aye.

Commissioner Meinig? Aye. Commissioner Dole?

Aye.

Commissioner Guymont? Aye. K. We now have a new chair and vice chair, which looks a lot like our old chair and vice chair. That's right.

They are quite similar, aren't they? We I think we make a good pair. So, commissioner will say, I think you made a good nomination on both of those. So I appreciate your effort to make. Okay. Well, we can move, Kelly. We can move into the third agenda item. Any public comments? We have a few guests in the room.

We do not have any comment cards provided to us, and commissioner Laws is the only one online.

Okay. So no comments. So we'll keep rolling through. So tonight, I believe we have a public hearing. So you'll have to help me here, Kelly. Official second official meeting I've ran for us. We open the hearing.

We'll open up the public hearing, at which point in time, you will read the lovely long script that we have to inform the public about their rights in terms of public comment and testimony. And then once you're done with that, we will turn it over to Jude for his presentation. Great. And once he's done, you guys have the opportunity to ask any questions of Jude before we, offer the applicant to come up and speak, which point we will do after the applicant speaks those in favor of the application, then those opposed. And then the applicant has the rights to come up and do rebuttal thereafter. Once that process is done, we can close the public hearing and and move on to the next step of you guys conferring.

K. Great. Thank you. Anna, you were so kind to give me your laptop, and I'm gonna need you to put your password in. Okay.

Well, I'll read the script. Let's see. Public hearings on land use applications are scheduled for tonight. Our role is to conduct the public hearing and to make decisions about the matter before us. In making those decisions, we must apply the applicable codes and laws and cannot vary from or change those laws or codes.

A staff report has been prepared for each application and has been made available to the public seven days before the first public hearing. The staff report identifies the approval criteria that apply to each applicant's proposal. Staff has analyzed the criteria which are contained in the staff report. The hearing procedure that the Planning Commission will follow is set out in state law and the Oregon City Municipal Code. The hearing procedure steps are shown on the Planning Commission website.

Public testimony will be called in the order it was requested. If you wish to testify in person, please fill out a speaker card available at the back of the room. If you wish to testify virtually, you will be called either from a request to speak email to the city staff at planning@orcity.org in advance of this meeting or by raising your virtual or physical hand when I ask if there are others in the audience who would like to participate. For the public record, please begin all testimony stating your name and city of residence. If you would like to receive a copy of the notice of decision, please state your mailing address or email address.

Testimony and evidence should be directed toward the approval criteria. If you believe other criteria apply in addition to those addressed in the staff report, identify and discuss those criteria and explain how and why you believe they apply to the application under consideration. Any person may submit written material while the public record is open on each application. Any written materials received by the city staff during the time period in which the record is open will be placed in the record. Rent materials submitted during the public hearing must be presented to the city staff in order to become part of the record.

If a person intends for PowerPoint presentations, reports, pictures, or other exhibits used in their oral testimony to be placed in the record, copies must be submitted to the city staff while the record is open. If they are not given to city staff, they will not be included in the record. Any person wishing a continuance to present additional evidence and testimony or to keep the record open to respond to new evidence must make that request before the public testimony portion of the initial hearing is closed. If the Planning Commission makes a decision which you disagree, any issue that you may wish to appeal must have been raised before the Planning Commission in order to be considered by the City Commission and in the event further appeal to the Land Use of Board of Appeals. Without raising the issue on the record with sufficient detail and accompanied by statements or evidence allowing the city and all parties to respond, the issue will not be considered on appeal.

In addition to participating orally or in writing and raising all issues during the planning commission proceeding, the filing of appeals must include the required fee. A city recognized neighborhood association may request waiver of an appeal fee subject to the requirements set forth in Oregon City Municipal Code 17 dot 50 dot 90 c five and seventeen dot 50 dot two ninety c. In addition, the failure of an applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient detail to allow the local government or its designee to respond to the issue precludes an action or damages in circuit court. Now we will open the record for Oregon City file number GLUA2547 and Mass 2506. Clackamas Community College athletic fields complex phase two detailed development plan.

Members of the planning commission are to be unbiased. As a result, I will call on each commissioner to disclose any potential conflicts, such as family, financial, or business relationships with any of the applicants or with regard to the land use the land in question. I will also ask whether any of the planning commissioners have discussed the application in question with any other parties or have independent knowledge of relevant facts, such as from a visit to the site in question. Any member of the audience may question any planning commissioner about their disclosures. At this point, does any commissioner have any conflicts of interest, ex parte contact, bias, or any other statement to declare when visited the site?

If there was a visit site visit, the planning commission must declare what he or she perceived. Commissioner a, commissioner Mining, do you have any conflicts of interest, had any ex parte contact, or other statements, or visited the site?

I do not have any conflicts of interest, no bias, no parte, and no visit of the site.

Commissioner LaSalle. I have, no bias, conflict of interest, ex parte contact, and I have visited the site.

Great. Commissioner Gamont. No bias. No conflicts. No ex parte conversations, but I walk my dog around the campus frequently, so I know exactly where they're doing this.

Great. Commissioner Laws online.

No ex parte contact. No conflict of interest. No bias. I do walk around the campus, and I do go to the Farmer's market. So there you go.

Great. Thank you for that. I too have no conflicts of interest, ex parte contact, bias, no statement declare. And I have been by the site. I've been around that track in the farmer's market many times. Familiar with it. Does anyone in the audience wish to question any of the planning commissioners about these disclosures? I see no raise of hands, so we will now commence with the staff report.

Good evening, vice chair Dole and commissioners. My name is Jude Tadeus. I'm a planner for the community development department here at the city of Oregon City, and I'm here to present the staff report and recommended conditions of approval for a general land use application number, Glua twenty five zero zero zero four seven and detailed development plan number, MAS250006, which pertain to the Clackamas Community College athletic fields complex phase two detailed development plan and requested adjustments. That was a mouthful. Alright.

So let's have a refresher here. This detailed development plan is submitted. It kind of nests within the general development plan that the planning commission heard last year, which established a twenty year horizon, twenty twenty four to '44, in which the future phases of anticipated development would be reviewed. The general development plan locked the review criteria for future development phases to the code that was in effect as of 08/01/2024, and this body approved with conditions the general development plan on 04/14/2025. That plan required that future DDPs for projects reviewed under this general development plan be subject to a type three process with planning commission review and approval if adjustments from code criteria were requested as is required by the cited, code section.

This project would have been subject to approval under administrative or staff level type two process had the applicant not chosen to request adjustments from our retaining wall height and building material standards. However, to clarify, you as the planning commission are reviewing the detailed development plan and the adjustments tonight. This presentation is going to focus on the adjustments specifically that the applicant requested and the ways in which, they meet the DDP approval criteria and the adjustments approval criteria that are cited in the staff report in this, presentation. Next slide, please. So this is just an overview of the different elements of the complex redevelopment.

This is for phase two. If you're wondering what happened to phase one, the phase one proposal, did not rise to the level of even a type two review. They were able to, get the baseball and softball field surface replacements through the type one, amendment process that, that doesn't require planning commission review or even staff level review. This is phase two, and so we're talking about, all of these different elements here. But the two that say adjustment requested, those are the elements that we're really gonna kind of hone in on tonight, and talk about.

All of these other items have been addressed in the staff report, that, that you have all, had access to that's part of that's one of the agenda items here. But we're gonna focus on the the addition of a 3,000 person grandstand structure to the west of the track. That is the grandstand isn't necessarily what we're talking about here. It's actually the retaining wall that's going under the grandstand that's supporting it. The applicant is requesting an adjustment to allow a 12 foot high retaining wall under the grandstands where the city code, the maximum without an adjustment would be eight feet.

And then the applicant's also requesting con concrete block as a material for the public restroom to be the primary building facade material, and, the municipal code says that, concrete block can't be the primary facade. So they're, they're requesting an adjustment of that standard as well. So the staff report includes the findings and conditions of approval if necessary, for all of the phase two elements. All but these two adjustment items would have been otherwise approvable under a type two administrative review. So, the focus of this presentation is gonna be on the adjustments.

However, if the Planning Commission wishes to discuss the other findings in the staff report that are unrelated to these adjustments, you may also do so. That's that's what I'm here for as well. Next slide, please. So this, so what are we looking at here? On the left hand side, that is the vicinity of the community college. You're all familiar with it. The image on the left is the aerial view with the project area ringed in purple there. You can kinda just kinda see it inside the broader yellow ringed area. The image on the right is the aerial view of the existing conditions of the athletics complex as of July 2025. Next slide, please.

This is the, one of the many site plans that they submitted to us, with their extensive project drawings packet that's part of the the agenda submittal. I just wanted to call out these particular structural items here. I've I've got rings around where the 3,000 seat grandstand is, the retaining walls going underneath that. The softball dugouts and press box, the two hitting barns, the baseball dugouts, and then it's kinda difficult to see because it overlaps the ring with the baseball dugouts, but the restroom facility is kind of there right next to the baseball dugouts, and then the press box is below there. So for more details on these other structures, you can consult the staff report and related exhibits.

If again, if you have any questions about those, I'm I'm willing to, I'm happy to answer those. We can move on to the next slide, please. So there's some items to consider here. Raya Fliszkowski, the city's transportation analysis consultant with DKS, notes that the proposed plans aren't significant enough to require additional transportation analysis given that the current build out and the campus has reduced enrollment and pivot to more online and hybrid coursework since 2020. Their build out is, that they, that they got through their previous general development plan covers, you know, any changes that they would be making to the campus now given those those enrollment trends.

This second piece here is one of the findings that I made in the staff report under the site plan and design review section. Given that the existing complex is located more than 600 feet from the nearest rights of way and that the proposed structures are designed to serve the athletic uses of this aspect of the site in particular. The requirements of seventeen sixty two zero five five, which exist to orient institutional buildings to public streets with pedestrian scale development were kind of deemed not to fit or apply to this proposal because this is an existing fields complex located, you know, a a tenth of a mile inboard of any existing it wouldn't make sense to locate a restroom for a stadium next to the street 600 feet away from the stadium. So, so the applicant did request an adjustment, from one of the standards in that section, but we've determined that, such a request is unnecessary given the lack of applicability here. So if the planning commission has questions about this finding, we can provide further clarification.

And I should also note that no public comments have been received during the public notice and comment phase of this project. So what are y'all here for? Well, you're here to consider the applicant's requested adjustment to maximum retaining wall height. You're here to consider the requested adjustment to building material standards for the public restroom building, the approval criteria for detailed development plans and adjustments to development standards in our master plans code, the goals of the Oregon City comprehensive plan, the findings of the staff report, and the conditions of approval recommended by staff. So items one through four are addressed in the staff report findings and conditions of approval.

However, for this presentation, we'll unpack the adjustment requests that give rise to the need for your review in the first place. Alright. So this is the the next slide is the detailed development plan approval criteria. The three simple approval criteria here that in the staff report, we noted their requests all comply as proposed or comply with the conditions of approval in the staff report. We we didn't find conflict with with any of those per se.

The next slide here, we're going to get into the adjustments themselves. So this slide contains quite a few different images, but they quite a few different perspectives of the retaining wall that they're proposing. On the left, you can see the concrete block sort of texture that they're proposing there, an example of an existing structure. Sort of in the middle on the upper part, you can see the rise there. It appears to be in a 11 feet three and three quarters inches above the grade at track level from from grade to to top with an additional two or so feet below, but we don't count the areas below grade in the in the retaining wall height.

The third image there to the right is the image in profile, and you can just make out that the that the grandstand structure is to be located in front of that wall for a significant portion of its width. So the wall isn't going to necessarily be apparent to areas that pedestrians are gonna gather at all, not significantly. And so and then the lower image there is is an elevation drawing of of the wall and its relationship with the the grade and that sort of thing where the bottom edge is track level, the top edge is the is grade behind where the grandstand will be. So let's see here. The next slide here.

So after reviewing all of this stat, our finding was that the purpose of the retaining wall height regulation is to promote public health safety welfare through the maintenance of adequate light and air access to public sites, ensure that sight lines for traffic safety and for building connections to public and private streets are maintained. Retaining wall heights are also regulated to prevent imposing development beyond pedestrian scale in areas that pedestrians are likely to gather and circulate. So this retaining wall will be largely obscured by the bleachers that will use the wall as a support structure. Its height beyond the eight foot maximum is proposed to accommodate a larger grandstand structure in the first place, with the 3,000 seat capacity that couldn't otherwise be accommodated with an eight foot wall. The proposed design will better permit pedestrians to access the area from both above and below, so from track level and upper grade level.

And the applicant notes that fall risk will be mitigated at the back of the bleachers and the edge of the retaining wall. I included a condition of approval in there just to ensure that that that fall protection piece is included as part of the final inspection for the retaining wall and grandstand structure. It's a fairly generic condition, but it's good to have that covered in the conditions of approval, in my opinion anyway. So does the Planning Commission have any questions or concerns about these findings or this recommended condition of approval?

Any questions from the commission? Comments, concerns? Commissioner LaSalle.

The use of the concrete blocks for the restroom and the retaining wall, could we put in a condition of approval that they'd be those decorative kind of concrete blocks rather than your standard flat surfaced ones? They they look so much better.

Commissioner LaSalle, that can absolutely be a modification to the recommended conditions of approval if you wish. I would think that that you as a commission would wanna debate the merits of that and and provide direction, and I can, you know, hash some of that language out if you like. We can get into the concrete block for the bathroom facility as well if you want and then discuss the any revised findings and conditions after that if you like.

K. So That sound good? Michelle, that's how you're thinking the split face rather than a a flat.

Well, yeah, they they have kind of a a concrete block that instead of a flat face, it has kind of a rough texture to it.

Yeah. It's flat face.

And it looks so much better than just plain old flat ugly looking concrete blocks.

Yeah. It from this from the applicant's proposal here on the retaining wall height image, that image to the far left over there, that looks it doesn't that looks more textured to me than flat. We can talk to the applicants when they're when they're doing their presentation, and maybe at that point, we can discuss language and conditions of approval for decorative elements just to ensure that they're not flat when they're So how

how do I go about getting that as a condition of approval?

So if I may, what I would recommend is to allow for the applicant to respond to the the proposal request. You listen to the applicant's response. And based off of that, we can go ahead and walk through the process of doing any modifications to the planning conditions as necessary.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay. We'll we'll move on to the next slide. So for the restroom building, these are the elevations that were submitted by the applicant for the structure. As you can see, concrete block is proposed to be the primary building facade element for these elevations. And our site plan and design review code says that that concrete block can be used.

It just can't be the primary facade element, and so they're requesting an adjustment of that. They're proposing split faced concrete block as the primary material on all elevations. And so the planning staff came up with this finding here. The purpose of these building material standards is to promote development that is pedestrian scale and encourages attractive building forms and materials. Public restrooms invite public access and use by providing a service that all humans require, so the use of the building in and of itself encourages human interaction.

Concrete block when used for a restroom building might also better block unpleasant sounds and odors, might appear to users as more protective of their privacy than other materials might. Given the small size of this of the building and its relationship to much larger scale surrounding developments with a wide array of exterior materials. The use of concrete block is the primary facade element here. Doesn't adversely impact the site or discourage it to use in light of the condition of approval that we're recommending here. To further mitigate the effect of the full concrete block facade on the restroom building, we're recommending the applicant add landscaping planters planted with native plants and shrubs from the Oregon City native plant list and seating areas, all to be located within four feet of the restroom building facade on all sides where they would not obstruct entryways into the building.

Similar alternative landscaping treatments can be proposed by the applicant, for your consideration at this hearing or approved by the community development director director and shown on the site plan and elevations prior to issuance of a building permit for the structure. So this is another condition of approval that we might revise if if if more textured concrete block is preferred, but we'll get to that discussion after the applicant has had a chance to present as well. K. Aside from that issue, were there

any questions before we move forward? Commissioner Laws, I just wanna make sure online you're getting an opportunity to speak if you want.

I'm okay. I'm listening to everything, and everything sounds good so far. I'm just trying to keep an open mind.

K. I do believe the split face is the texture block that commissioner LaSalle is referring to. Yeah.

Yeah. That's proposed.

Yeah. Yep. I do have a question. I do we have other public restroom facility, like, restroom buildings that are the concrete split face block or concrete block? I'm thinking of Wesley Lane Park. I know there's a large restroom commission concession building there.

Let let me think. I believe I know that Pioneer Stadium is proposing a cons a new concession stand area and a couple of revised buildings there, and concrete block has been I don't think they've requested an adjustment for those items, so they haven't. So so they're, you know, trying to find other treatments for that exterior facade. I'm not a I can't think of any offhand, but that I believe

if memory serves me correct, Wesley Land Park is concrete block, so that would be consistent with our public parks. So that's great. Okay. Okay.

It's not an uncommon solution.

Yeah. Correct.

Certainly. Do so, we'll go now into the adjustments to development standards approval criteria here. So we just basically went through item one here, an assessment of whether these adjustments will equal or better meet the purpose of the regulation to be modified. So I'm gonna sort of talk a little bit more about two through five here. For criterion two, more than one adjustment is being requested.

The cumulative effect of the adjustments results in a project that is still consistent with the overall purpose of the zone. Staff noted in in the report that the cumulative effect of a taller than otherwise approvable retaining wall and a building facade of concrete block could read as discouraging the use of the site at a pedestrian scale. However, the retaining wall is obscured by the grandstands it will support, and the concrete block restroom, given the scale of the existing proposed development, is extremely small. Permitting these building details does not make the site inconsistent with the overall purpose of the zone. Therefore, staff finds that these adjustments in combination comply with criterion two.

For three city designated goal five resources are protected to the extent otherwise required by title 17. In the staff report, I noted that no goal five resources are located in the vicinity of the retaining wall or the restroom. Therefore, staff finds these adjustments comply with that criterion. For criterion four in the report noted that the retaining wall is being covered by the grandstand, and both it and the concrete block restroom are located more than 600 feet from any adjacent properties. So there's no real adverse impact on adjacent properties.

The impacts of the concrete block on the facility are appropriately mitigated through compliance with the conditions of approval to soften the facade with planters and maybe a seating area here or there or some other alternative. So staff finds that criterion four is met with the conditions of approval. For five, if an environmental zone if if an environmental zone has few detrimental environmental impacts on the resource, and, again, there's no environmental resource or environmental zone located in these two project areas, There is a little bit of designated wetland area to the very, very northeast of the fields complex up by Douglas Loop there, but that area is not impacted by the retaining wall or the restroom, so complies there. And then, item six here, the proposed adjustment is consistent with the Oregon City comprehensive plan and a concept plan if put if applicable. So let's go into that.

The next slide here is the OC twenty forty comprehensive plan. I pulled up the relevant goal and policy that kind of fit with this request that acknowledge, protect, enhance, and commemorate Oregon City's historic artistic and cultural resources, provide activities and programs for residents and visitors that weave together historic artistic and cultural resources, education, and recreation. So I'm in in evaluating this against that goal and policy. The requested adjustments enable the site to include a large grandstand area accessible from above and below due to the 12 foot high retaining wall and the small public restroom that's made of concrete block to protect users and the public through privacy and separation. Athletic and cultural activities will be taking place in view of the grandstands and will be related to the educational facilities athletic department.

Therefore, these elements help the site provide those activities and programs for residents according to goal two policy 2.5. So according to according to the staff report, staff views this project and these adjustments as compliant with that criterion for approval as well. Does the Planning Commission have any questions or concerns about this aspect?

Any questions, comments, concerns? No? No. No. Okay. Okay.

Next slide, please.

Thank you, Jude.

So these are the recommended conditions of approval for the adjustment requests. Condition 10, we've already talked about that fall protection as determined by the building official, fall protection requirements need to be met prior to finalization of a building permit for that retaining wall and for the grandstand. And then conditions twelve and twenty two were related to one another. 22 is basically just that the applicant needs to request a final planning inspection before building final for the project, which is very generic for just about everything. And then and condition 22 is the is our in for checking.

The condition 12 is met that that the concrete block facade is sort of softened by the addition of landscaping planters, seating areas, or some other alternative proposed by the applicant either here or at or later date. So the full list of recommended conditions of approval, I believe there are 22 of them. They can all found be found in the staff report, but these are the ones that relate to the requested adjustments. And our next steps on the next slide would be to approve the application with recommended with the recommended conditions, approve the application with revised findings and conditions of approval, deny and provide further direction to staff and the applicant, or continue until a date certain and keep the public record open to the next planning commission meeting. So with that, with these revised findings and things like that, they're presented to you for consideration.

And we can either open it up for your questions now or have the applicant present their aspect of the project.

I don't think we have any questions, so I think we can move into the presentation from the applicant. I will make a note that we did look up the Wesley Lane restroom. It does have the concrete split phase, but as a secondary materials, board and batten as well. So I just didn't wanna get barked at later about that, so made that clear. Okay. Well, we welcome the applicant to come up. And Carla. Oh, Carla.

See, I

see you raised your hand. Commissioner, Laws.

Hey. Doesn't, Rivercrest have block like, it's painted, but don't they technically have, like, a concrete block bathroom as well?

I think that's correct. The pump house for the, all of the water play area as well. So I I believe you're right, commissioner.

Yeah. Just yeah.

Good call. Same so same thing. Yeah. It appears that it has the block in, the board in bed. So our park facilities are consistent. Okay. Go ahead, Abkin. If you don't mind making an introduction, and then we'll let you have the floor.

Thank you, planning commission and staff. I'm Colin McArthur with Cameron McCarthy landscape architecture and planning. I represent the applicant, which is Clackamas Community College. I'm joined by Ron Prince, who's the dean of dean of campus services at Clackamas. And we have Dale Kukendall with Wenah, who's a project executive overseeing the projects under construction or soon to be under under construction on campus.

And then we have Claire Dosen, who is a landscape architect and project manager with our firm. So, again, thanks for the opportunity to present this project. And, again, Clackamas Community College is the applicant, and they request approval of a detailed development plan for the redevelopment of their athletic facilities. And, again, this project was included in the general development plan that was approved by this planning commission back in 2025. So this is excite an exciting project for the the college and the campus.

They finally get to improve their athletic facilities. The project generally consists of two phases. And as staff mentioned, phase one was approved under type one design review and is currently under construction. That involves some baseball field improvements, a conversion to synthetic turf, softball field and spectator improvements, and then, some storm storm water management facilities, which were associated with with softball. This proposal involves phase two, and that includes a new track or track improvements for widening and resurfacing the track, the addition of a synthetic turf soccer field on the inside.

Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot the cue on the slides. You can move to yeah. This is fine. Grandstands, a canopy press booth, a new six user restroom, storage and hitting facilities, spectator improvements at base, both baseball and softball, bleachers, press boxes, dugouts, additional stormwater management facilities, and then pedestrian circulation, event space around the facilities along with vehicular drop off and other sidewalk and and access improvements.

We are proposing two modifications or adjustments through the type three DDP process, and those are generally an adjustment to the retaining wall, height standard, and building materials for the restroom building itself. I'll go into a little more detail on those, and you can advance the slide. Let's go to the next slide. This gives a perspective of the of the grandstands, which is the origin of the retaining wall. So the code limits retaining wall heights to eight feet.

Our retaining wall is a little over 11 feet in height. The intent of the standard is to promote public health, safety, and welfare by allowing things like light and air access, sight lines, and maintaining pedestrian circulation and scale. Our assertion is that the retaining wall itself does not conflict with light and air access given the expanse, large expanse of the site. It does not obstruct sight lines. In fact, it improves sight lines from the upper terrace down to the lower track and then will be obscured itself by the grandstands grandstand structure, and then it allows for pedestrian circulation above it in between the base the grandstand and the baseball field itself.

I mentioned that we'll be blocked or largely obscured by the grandstands, and then we just get more usable space above it or next to it through its construction. It does not dramatically or even significantly change site views through the through the site. And, again, mentioned part of its purpose is to enhance enhance views between the facilities. The the restroom actually, the the retaining wall itself, we are planning on using split face block or or texture block. Those are documented in in all of our materials.

I I did work a little bit on a condition with Ron and Dale while we were back there. That's something we can't propose if necessary, but our materials clearly show that our intent is to construct construct using non flat concrete black, decadent decorative or or split faced. So that's the that is the restroom. It's not allowed, again, as a dominant material. And then the purpose of the standard is primarily to promote attractive building forms and and materials.

The restroom will be a slip face on its exterior. We believe this narrow use of of this material for just the restroom buildings is appropriate given the setting in a large expansive open space, its location between between the track itself and softball field. And then it's it's a common material used for other common athletic facilities. It's cost effective. It does match, I guess, the other existing facilities on-site, and it's relatively easy to maintain and supports efficient use of the other site programs.

There's some seating and gathering gathering spaces next to the restroom within 25 feet of it and behind the baseball backstop itself. Those facilities were will further minimize the appearance of the restroom in in that setting. And, again, we feel like it's appropriate material given its nature to support athletic facilities on campus. We have reviewed the conditions of approval prepared by staff. We're generally comfortable with all of those.

Student staff did a great job presenting compliance with all with all the findings. Again, the the proposal on itself does comply with all the approval criteria and findings. It's just the two areas where we need exceptions or or modifications. So we concur with staff's report and findings. We are comfortable with the conditions of approval and look forward to advancing this project. I forgot to mention the schedule, but we hope to begin construction this summer and complete the project by the end end of the year. So with that, I'd be happy to take any questions from the planning commission or defer questions, any questions I can't answer to my team.

Great. Thank you for that. I'll look to my commissioners to see if there's any questions or comments back.

Are you guys planning to paint the restroom or leave it, like, the natural stone color or concrete color?

The natural natural stone stone color. Again, deck decorative or or textured. Textured. I am I do not I'm not a stone expert, so

I I just know I thought you get concrete too. Yeah.

Thank you. Commissioner Laws, we see your hand up. Feel free to

I love the way, obviously, and enjoy campus on how you've all decorated with plants and other things. Do I assume with the concrete because I can assume there's a lot of beautification that you could do with the concrete that you're looking at maybe some plants or maybe some growing some items possibly or maybe in that type of because it sounds like, you know, you're already talking about planters and other things is doing set something like that of landscaping possibly, but then it's obviously near a track and all that too. So but maybe are you looking at possibly having maybe the environmental learning center implement some ideas on that? Maybe the app the restroom or anything?

I can't speak to I'll let Ron speak to potential involvement of campus communities, but the project, it is subject to landscape screening standards. We do have an extensive landscape plan. There is a condition that requires screening around around the restroom. So we intend to fully comply with those, and that will involve plant materials. I guess that's a question on whether you have have or are considering in involving any of the campus communities in your your planting? Sure.

I can speak to that. I mean, obviously, there's the approved planting list that we're all gonna be complying with as well. With all projects on our campus, we we involve our our horticulture and agriculture departments. They have very specific programs that they that they utilize, plant, shrub, and and tree species for their for their programs. And so definitely, we'd be utilizing those those folks for for help with helping us.

Anything within the NROAD, commissioner Carla, definitely, we we get to the ELC or or closely surrounding that. We get the ELC's input with, for sure. So

You've done a fantastic job. I've been very impressed and enjoy walking on campus, so thank you very much.

And we appreciate you visiting the campus. I'm very proud of being there and and very proud of this project for sure.

Great. Thank you for that. Thank you, commissioner Laws. We appreciate your input. Okay. Well, I don't think there's any further questions. So I don't believe you've gotten any speakers to speak in opposition. So we would typically close the hearing and then go to, any discussions. Correct? No. Okay. We're gonna close the hearing. We appreciate the applicant coming up and giving the presentation and fielding a few questions. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. I'd say the hearing is officially closed, so we can either entertain a motion or discuss any of the conditions of approval. Commissioner LaSalle, your light is green.

I'll put forth a motion to approve GLUA 25Dash00047 and m a s 25Dash0006, Clackamas Community College athletic fields complex phase two detailed development plan.

I second.

Okay. Say that again. The recommended conditions. Commissioner, sorry. With the recommended conditions? The staff. Yes. Yes. Okay. It sounded like we got a second. Commissioner Laws, is that correct?

That is correct.

Okay. Well, let's call the vote.

Okay. Commissioner Laws? Aye. Commissioner LaSalle?

Aye.

Commissioner Meining? Aye. Commissioner Dole?

Aye. Commissioner Geimont? Aye. Great. The motion passes. So thank you very much. We look forward to seeing the improvements get implemented, and maybe we'll get to see a game or two in the few in the future. So thank you. Any discussions or communications?

I believe that we have no items for the February 9 meeting. Okay. But we will have one scheduled for the second meeting in February.

Okay. That sounds great. Thank you for that heads up. Well, I believe we can adjourn the meeting unless We do have a Oh, commissioner Laws. Sorry. And then we'll

Can we look at we were talking about with Aquila when she was, in the future about beautification or possibly looking at code amendments for we're seeing a lot of infill. You know? And, obviously, we need to have the need for housing, which is important. But, obviously, responsible, like, possible, you know, code code housing. We're looking at you know, I would like to see, like, more commercial possibly on Wallala Avenue because we're looking at Wallala with a lot of changes.

And I know the commission was looking at that as well, and I know they're entertaining it. But, you know, looking at possible is that a possibility with the planning commission in the future at some point here? Because what I mean, in the future here, I mean, obviously, we've been at a dead point because interest rates have been high. But, obviously, the economy is hopefully gonna start moving along. And, you know, Malala is at this point where, you know, it's transitioning. We're seeing real estate for sale. You know, obviously, some we were I'd like to see it at some point look better. Right? And we're looking at the need for housing. It'd be nice to see more commercial moving at the bottom of Malala Avenue. I don't know. Is there any plans with the city at this point? And I know that the commission wants would like to see that as well.

Right. I believe that the the planning commission does have a work plan that they were working off of, and the the Malala Street in, I think, 7th was one of consideration that has been on the plan for a period of time. And so that is something that we can discuss for the future as well. We absolutely need to to balance workflow of staff with funding availabilities if we do need any consultants for that. So, we're happy to bring forward a conversation, about what the scope of that conversation would look like and whether or not we'll need, outside assistance to help with that and the types of grants that we would apply for that.

So we we can put that forward for an item of discussion in the future. Great.

It's just exciting because I'm seeing real estate for sale. So, you know, let's get this booming. You know what I mean? Like, there's some properties for sale right now, so it'd be exciting to see what projects will come. Yeah.

Great. Well, Kelly, it sounds like maybe we'll have a future discussion item on some of those potentials. Okay. We appreciate that. Commissioner LaSalle, I think you

Yes. I'd like to announce that tendered my resignation from the planning commission effective at the end of this evening's meeting. I communicated with, the mayor as such. So I appreciate all the planning commissioners and the city staff of

the

few years that I've been on this commission. It's been an interesting process to say the least.

So thank you all. Commissioner Sall, you care sharing how many years of service, or do you wanna leave that off the record?

I think I don't know. Six or something like that.

Why? I would say my time is short compared to that, but I would thank you for your time and your effort. I know the community greatly appreciates your support. And hopefully, you'll come visit us at some point in the future. Make sure we're keeping right. Put my 2¢ worth in. We look forward to that. Well, thank you very much. It's sad to hear, but we look forward to seeing you in the future in another capacity. Okay. I believe without any further items

Commissioner Laws was raising and then unraising your hand, so I'm not sure if she had anything

Oh, no. I'm trying to lower my hand, and somehow my button keeps getting stuck. So sorry about that. Just wanna I lowered it, I think. I think I lowered it now, and it's not going anywhere. It just keeps getting stuck. Sorry about that.

You're fine.

It's a good eye, Kelly. Yeah. Okay. I'm gonna try it one more time. Good eye. Alright. Meeting adjourned. Alright.