Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Acting Chair McCann, you may take over. All right. Thank you very much. Greetings. Now is the time and place for a meeting of the Beaverton Planning Commission. For the record, I will do roll call to verify which commission members are participating this evening. Commissioner Holmes? Present. Commissioner Speck? Present. HERE. COMMISSIONER MACKLOR. LET THE RECORDS SHOW THAT COMMISSIONER ADAM IS ABSENT AND EXCUSED THIS EVENING AND COMMISSIONER WINTER IS NOT HERE AT THIS TIME. SO WE ARE NOW AT COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS. COMMISSION, ARE THERE ANY COMMUNICATIONS TONIGHT? All right none. We will mo

All right, thank you very much. So we will move on to new business. The first item on the agenda this evening is a public hearing for the application for LU 3-2026-00094, Scholz Heights and SVH PUD boundary mods, case file numbers PP2-2026-00085, PUD 3-2026-00093, PUD 32026-00100, RP 22026-00080 and ZMA 32026-00081. Before we move to the substance of the hearing, I will ask the staff to cover the pre-hearing matters.

So we will now begin with the staff presentation.

All right. Thank you very much. Are there any questions of staff with regard to the proposed application? Commissioner McAvoy. Okay.

All right, any other questions? All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. So we will move on to the applicant presentation. Yes. All right. The applicant will now have 20 minutes to present. Please begin by introducing yourself and stating your name and address for the record.

Thanks. All right. Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the applicant with regard to the proposed application? It does not appear that they are, so thank you very much. We will move on to public testimony. We are now at the public testimony portion for this agenda item. We will call for testimony in groups starting with those in favor of the application, then those in opposition to the application, than those neither in favor nor in opposition. We will take testimony from those attending in person first, followed by those attending via Zoom webinar. As a reminder, testimony is limi

Okay, thank you very much. Let's close that portion of the public hearing. With all of that completed, we'll close the public hearing. So now is the time for deliberation. Do commissioners have further discussion on the proposal? No, okay. Then is there a motion?

It's a lot of numbers here, so. Yeah, based on the record findings and conclusions in the staff report, I move to approve application LU-32026-00094, Shoals Heights, and SVH PUD boundary mods, case files number PP-22026-00085, PUD-32026-00093, PUD 3202600100, RP 22026000880, and ZMA 32026000881, subject to the conditions as presented in the staff report. Thank you very much. Is there a second? Second.

All right, thank you very much. So a vote will be taken by roll call. When your name is called, please say aye if in favor or nay if opposed. Commissioner Holmes? Aye. Commissioner Speck?

Commissioner McEvoy? Aye. And I vote aye as well. The motion passes unanimously. The Planning Commission's decisions will be memorialized in land use orders provided to all parties who testified. Appeals must be filed in accordance with the Beaverton Development Code and LUBA rules. Thank you very much. Okay, um Because we did just receive a kind of late-breaking memo We were gonna take a quick recess so the commissioners have a moment to read through this. How long do we want here? How about five minutes we'll make it quick I Thank you everyone for allowing us that moment so that we had a cha

Thank you very much. So we will now begin with the staff presentation.

All right, thank you very much for that presentation. Are there any questions of staff with regard to the proposed application? Commissioner McAvoy.

I believe you're asking about protection, though. Is that correct?

Are there additional questions? I am curious, and maybe this is getting slightly off topic, is I believe from experience that some areas of Beaverton, the trees have been identified, but that is sort of a moment in time when certain trees have been designated for various status. So given that there is a very significant tree on an adjacent property, which is part of one of the arguments in this conversation, What is the process for someone to acknowledge that that truly is a very significant tree and may require special treatment?

And is there anything in the development code that allows for, you know, I assume that when the state or city officials are going around to designate the trees and groves, you don't necessarily see every single tree in the entire area. So is there anything in the code that allows for, say, you discover a tree that is significant in size? bigger than 48 inches in diameter or something that actually sort of triggers beyond what someone who designated trees

OR SIMILAR TO SAYING A COMMUNITY TREE IS A CATCHALL FOR ALL TREES THAT DON'T FALL INTO THIS BUCKET, WHAT IS THE CATCHALL FOR WHEN YOU COME ACROSS A TREE THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT SPECIMEN OR A SIGNIFICANT SIZE, AGE, THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN SEEN BY

Okay, thank you. I do have one other question which is to better understand what the process that the city has for identifying alternatives. You noted that one of these, you know, if we preserve the tree that's straddling the property line and the plan as designated, you know, as shown, the duplex doesn't work in that lot and still preserve the tree that you're now suggesting we need to keep because it's on the property line. you suggested that there is the potential that the developer could modify the building footprint. So was there any other sorts of alternatives displayed for these duplexe

Okay, thank you. All right, I will rest my questions. Anyone else? Okay. Oh, sorry, Commissioner McAvoy.

All right. We will move on to the applicant presentation. The applicant will now have 20 minutes to present. Please begin by introducing yourselves and stating your names and addresses for the record. They're online. Yes.

Thank you very much. Commission, are there any questions of the applicant with regard to the proposed application? Commissioner Speck.

In terms of reallocating space on that property, do you ever consider were there any options for the stormwater runoff area being relocated elsewhere to allow you to adjust some of the placements?

And then you guys inherited the plat layout. Was there ever any consideration about adjusting that or was it always the intention to move forward with what you inherited?

Thank you Thank you Are there additional questions? Okay, thank you very much we will move to the appellant presentation So the appellant will now have 20 minutes to present. Please begin by introducing yourselves and stating your names and addresses for the record.

Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Commission, are there questions of the appellant with regard to the proposed application? All right, I don't oh Commissioner Holmes.

Yeah, the only question I wanted to go back to is though you can restate the Section that you said was not existent just so we can get confirmed.

Oh, right, yes, because that is going to be confusing.

I EXPECTED IT MIGHT BE GOING THAT DIRECTION. THANK YOU. All right, we are now at the public testimony portion for this agenda item. We will call for testimony in groups, starting with those in favor of the application, not the appeal. Then we will do those in opposition of the application, which sounds like some of you will be raising your hands for that. And then those neither in favor nor in opposition. We will take testimony from those attending in person first, followed by those attending via Zoom webinar. As a reminder, testimony is limited to the criteria that apply to the application. S

Thank you very much. All right. Thank you. OK. Next, this I will call Arianna. Thank you. And I apologize if I mispronounced your name.

Thank you. All right, thank you very much. I neglected to ask if anyone had questions for Robert, but I will first ask here, did anyone have any questions for Arianna? Thank you very much. Robin, may I go back and ask if anyone had questions for Robert?

Please come back up. I apologize. Commissioner McAvoy.

That was it, okay. So we will move on to Zoom, sorry, online testimony. Do we have anyone, well, I guess for those viewing via Zoom webinar, please communicate by using the raise hand feature on your Zoom menu bar. If you're calling in, press nine to alert the chair that you would like to speak. Do we have anyone online who would like to speak in opposition to the application? No, we do not, okay. So then we will move on to our third category. Now is the time for testimony neither in favor nor opposed to the application. Do we have any yellow cards? We do not. Then we'll move to the Zoom. Agai

Hang on just one second, please. It sounds like. Yeah, why don't you come on up? Apologies, we're going to back up. We do have additional testimony. Will you please state your name and address for the record, and you have five minutes.

Thank you very much. Does anyone have questions for the speaker?

Thank you so much. Okay, I will ask again before I move on. Are there any additional yellow cards floating around this room? Okay, then now we will move on to the applicant's rebuttal. So now is the time for the applicant's rebuttal. The rebuttal is limited to five minutes and must focus on issues raised during testimony.

Okay. Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions of the applicant? No, we do not. So we will move on to final staff comments. Staff?

Are there any final comments? Commissioner McAvoy, you look like you've got one.

I'm going to ask one more question. Of course, please. I think one. as far as I'm back to this I'm back to this massive walnut because I I understand a lot of things about trees and I understand what some of this presentation has been what is I'm trying to understand because I've worked in other jurisdictions where we do have to take into account trees on neighboring properties. And it seems to me that there is a risk here that portions of this development, regardless of whether they are in the area of these trees being removed, have the potential to damage a neighbor's property. by damaging t

for the neighboring property okay that's a lot easier when it's someone's garage door versus a living tree so or something so okay understood thank you are there any additional questions yes kind of in that vein um i know again kind of a little bit off of like what we're actually asked to do right now but

other projects that I have been on as part of the permitting process it has been identified that trees need to be protected or and to your point boring backtracking around them or having an arborist like is that something that will come up through the through their permit processes they continue to get this developed because they don't have the permit to build what they're asking for yet that's correct it's in process And is that something that Beaverton does have the ability to kind of put into the notes to make sure that the roots or have an arborist come out and get some verification

I know that's not totally related to this, but it may be piling on, but if they're already having to reevaluate the property line tree, is that a condition that they need to do some additional research for this additional tree that belongs to the neighbor?

So there is no approval criteria that says that you can't damage your neighbor's property?

OK. Thank you. OK. Are there additional questions of staff? Yes, Commissioner.

This is actually a question or it's more of a statement. It sounds like the community's been very vocal about the development plans for this parcel for some time. And I'm curious, at what point does a judgment call get made as opposed to just a black and white code? Because that's kind of the mantra of what I'm hearing here.

Any other questions of staff? Thank you.

All right. So we will move to close the public hearing. And with final comments completed, now is the time for deliberation. Do any commissioners have further discussion on the proposal? Commissioner McAvoy. Sure.

Based on this middle, I do would love your thoughts on this. I do have some concerns and it was raised by one of the community members that there are some additional trees that are right next to the property line, both on the south side and I think there's one in the northwest looking at the plans. It's kind of near the corner. Given that there's already been one tree that was identified to be crossing a property line, is there any additional sort of conditions we could put on this that or maybe a continuance if the applicant was open to that to Survey those additional trees and make sure ther

I just wanted to make sure that that information was was clear So yes, and and I apologize on a for clarification There are trees that are drawn as though they are within the property that are very very close to the property line similar exactly the same kind of condition of the one that has been determined that it is crossing the property line and That one too. If you look at the plan and the tiny little symbol on a survey, it looks like it's in the property And it turns out it's not, at least not entirely. So the question is, these other trees, what kind of confirmation has been made that th

Is there more discussion? Thoughts, my fellow commissioners?

I don't know. I'm kind of uncomfortable about this whole conversation that's going on here. I think that there's a lot of history here that we don't fully understand with this property that I'd like to know more about, but I don't know that that is something that can weigh into our decision tonight.

Just the history of the development, yeah.

It does. And even when I was initially reading this, I was kind of questioning why there wasn't an appeal made for the development as well, because then you get the overlay of the trees and the site plan as part of that conversation. But I guess that's not on the table for what we're making a judgment on tonight. Correct.

I mean, I would agree that at this point, we can't rule on a lot of the stuff of concern. But I think this is one step we can do to make sure that we can preserve any trees that might fall across the line.

So I guess Ana to your question, you know, should we take a moment so you could look at if the intent that the commission is trying to do is to confirm the location of those perimeter trees that are currently on the survey and shown to be on the property line to confirm that none of them are straddling the property line similar to the one that's already been identified. Can we add that as a condition prior to kind of finalizing things?

How much, 10? 10. Okay, we will take a 10 minute recess, thank you. One minute. All right, we're approximately one minute. We're almost there. A recommendation?

Does it need to pertain to, sorry, I'm not looking at a map. Are all of the perimeter trees among the 12 or should it say any tree that's straddling the property line as opposed to any of the 12?

Understood. Thank you. Okay, are there any additional final comments from all of you? Okay. All right, so is there a motion? keeping in mind that approval of the application is denial of the appeal, but you could approve the application with the added criteria. There's also, if you deny the application, that is approval of the appeal.

Do we have a second? I'll second. OK, we have a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? Okay, a vote will be taken by roll call. When your name is called, please say aye if in favor of the motion or nay if opposed to the motion. Commissioner Holmes.

And I will vote aye as well. The motion passes. The Planning Commission's decisions will be memorialized in land use orders provided to all parties who testified. Appeals must be filed in accordance with the Beaverton Development Code and LUBA rules. Thank you. I'm sorry. All right. I believe staff had one more item to throw on our agenda.

Thank you very much. It sounds very relevant All right. Well with that we are now a joint adjourned at 9 o 8 p.m. I