City Council - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress.

Good evening. Welcome to the city commission regular meeting. Today is Wednesday, 04/01/2026, and I'd like to call the meeting to order, please, and ask mister Lee to do the roll call.

Commissioner Mitchell. Here. Commissioner Wilson. Here. Commissioner Smith. Here. Commissioner Marle. Here. Mayor McGriff.

Present. If you can and are able, please join us in the flag salute. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. So on our agenda tonight, we do have a proclamation. It is a it is a walk on.

Just want you guys to what you guys are So I'd like to read it. It's a proclamation for unification day. So whereas in 1829, doctor John McLaughlin established a settlement on the East Bank of the Willamette River next to the falls, And whereas to solidify this claim, doctor John McLaughlin hired Sydney Moss to survey his newly established town site. And whereas on 12/24/1844, the city of Oregon City was incorporated. And whereas in 1845, Robert Moore filed a donation land claim of 320 acres on the West side of the Willamette River next to the falls.

And whereas Robert Moore decided to change the name of the townsite from Robins Nest to Lynn City in honor of his friend, doctor Lewis Fields Lynn, who also was then senator Lynn, and whereas on 01/01/1850, a post office was established on the townsite of Lynn City, And whereas in November 1853, a massive flood swept away and destroyed Lynn City, leaving nothing but wreckage, and whereas a portion of Lynn City became known as West Oregon City due in part to its proximity to the established First city. And whereas to this day, residents across the bridge in Westland continue to rely on goods and services offered by Oregon City, and whereas the City Commission of Oregon City hereby declares that it is in the best interest of the residents on the West Side Of The Willamette River to be annexed to Oregon City, And whereas the newly annexed area shall revert back to the name of West Oregon City, and whereas the former city of West Linn will be dissolved and annexed, and all functions hereforth shall be subject to the municipal code of the city of Oregon city government, and all powers shall be vested in the city of Oregon city as the seat of full authority.

Now, therefore, the city commission of Oregon city does hereby proclaim 04/01/2026 as unification day. And as part of this declaration, we encourage all Oregon City residents to welcome and embrace our new citizens of West Oregon City with open arms. And in witness hereof, I will set my hand this April 2026. We will not be accepting their debt, by the way. We'll just take the revenue. We're only taking the revenue. Alright. So, on our agenda, we have, public comments. I have one person for item number four, which is that. And William Buford, would you like to come up, please?

Mayor and commissioners, my name is William Gifford. I live in Oregon City. I just wanna give a brief kudos to mayor McGriff for coming out to the the what's the other one? Clackamas County Business Alliance mayoral summit, whatever it was. Was That was correct. Enlightening presentation. I think we had seven out of nine mayors show up, and it was an honor to have you there. Thank you.

It's my pleasure to be able to participate with my fellow mayor. So we were missing two, mayor of Canby and the mayor of, Lake Oswego. We're unable to attend, but we had the mayor of Milwaukee, the mayor of Tualatin. As some of you know, Tualatin has part of their jurisdictions in Washington County and part of it's in Clackamas County, so they have to deal with two county jurisdictions, which I feel sorry for Frank. We had, mayor of Happy Valley, myself, the mayor of Gladstone, Wilsonville, and the mayor of Sandy. So we had quite a lively discussion, as you can imagine. What about West Oregon City? Well, West Lend didn't show up.

Okay. So there you go. Mayor McGriff is the mayor.

Yes. Yeah. Yes. So now now we we are commissioners for the city for the, newly annexed area. So we we don't have to worry about that.

Didn't sign this. You did this you you made No.

No. I just gave yes.

I will I will be signing it.

Yes. Yes. I I plan to give the, former mayor of West Linn a copy for his for his, scrapbook. Sure. He'll appreciate that. Alright. We have some presentations tonight. First one would be Metro Future Vision, and I know they're working on that project. And I've been to one of the sessions already, but I know there are many more that are gonna be happening around. So thank you so much for being here.

Thank you, mayor, and, commissions commissioners. I'm Gabrielle Blaug. I'm a Gladstone City Councilor, but also on Metro's Future Vision Commission. And, I thought I'd give you a brief presentation on what we've been working on and then ask for your participation in a survey that we have going on right now. So for people who don't know, Metro is our regional government, and it sort of works across cities and counties, to coordinate activities that affect everyone in the region.

We deal with transportation and housing, parks, outdoor spaces, and art. So, as part of the metro chapter, sorry, Metro's I'm sorry. I'm having a moment. So, anyway, we were required every fifty years to do a future vision, exercise and try to establish what we think, the region will look like in fifty years. And in this case, that would be 2040.

So I don't know about you, but, I will probably not be alive in 2040. So we're trying to sort of base it on, what we have as current reality, and, we are, going to be working, all the way through 2027. The so we're we're we're trying to base, our future vision in what we see today and what our community values are. And so the survey is asking for people from the community to go ahead and provide their input for us. And this is the first community engagement.

And then we will have another one, in the fall, to provide feedback on some of the priorities that we have been, sort of come we've come up with. If we could have the next slide, please. So, this is from Metro's, website. And, if you could just switch to the last one, which has the all important link for the survey. So this is, opened through May 15, and, it will help us to, focus in on what a broad community, thinks is important for this region, so our values.

And these will, further, sort of trickle down to provide, basis for transportation, arts, housing, all of the things that Metro does. And so, in the spring, we're doing this survey. And then in the summer, we'll have a youth summit, which I'm really excited about, because, obviously, obviously, a a fifty year vision will be the reality that they will be living in. And then, again, in the fall, we'll have another, regional priorities engagement and, with the final document due to Metro Council, in 2027 for their ratification. Does anybody have any questions?

Well, I wanna make sure that we get that information about the youth summit. We have a youth advisory commission, and we'd like to make sure that they could attend. Do you know when that is tentatively scheduled?

Summer and I'd have to go back and look at my notes to see exactly when, but I believe it's in June sometime. Yeah. And I know that there was a pretty extensive recruitment for members of that, so they're from the entire Metro Region. I haven't met them yet, but I'm very excited to do so coming up.

But we have several seniors on our group and, you know, they're knee deep in deciding what the next phase of their lives are going to be in the colleges they're attending. So I you know, if we didn't any of our people didn't respond, you can understand why they probably didn't.

Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. It was hard to find.

Yeah. But we have we have some freshmen, so we'll we'll definitely get the word out Great. To them. Okay. Alright. Any questions? Yeah. So this dovetails nicely with our comprehensive plan, is a 2040 plan that we all were able to participate in.

Right. Thank you very much for your time.

We're back to Tim. 02/2025 historic review board accomplishments and update on the twenty twenty five twenty twenty seven work plan.

Thank you, commissioners and mayor. I've got Tim Powell. I am a Oregon City resident.

Julia Sumrock Fulkerson. I sit on the Oregon City Historic Review Board.

We just wanted to take a minute to talk a little bit about this last year with the HRB and some of our accomplishments, which we feel we've we've done quite a bit of work. The the largest one, of course, is what we just talked about at the work session and that was the the compatible change. And as I said during the during the work session, it was probably 12 or more this year meetings that we had to discuss all the different ins and outs of what we wanted to see in development of new construction in the conservation district, the McLaughlin Conservation District. So that was that was a a huge part of what we what we did. The other thing we found which was interesting is that we didn't get any requests for preservation grants this year.

So we talked a little bit about that and determined one of the things we need to do is educate. And so this year, our goals were primarily based around education. And that was educating the members, giving opportunity for us to educate ourselves on historic preservation and different types of programs which we will go find some money to do. We also talked about educating the public on what HRB is and does and what preservation is. And those are all key elements I think of of what living in a historic city as we do that we need to to accomplish.

And we have a wonderful representative of of history next to us here that that will help us along that way. The we also this year, we awarded the 2025 Ruth McBride Powers Award to the Frank and Annie Bush House for an addition they made to the back of the house, put in our kitchen and a second Floor above the kitchen. Beautiful job. If you haven't seen it, please go by and look at it. 204 Jefferson Street. I'm sure they'd love to have you wandering around.

I'm I'm sure they wouldn't. It was

a it was really a beautiful They did a tremendous job on it. So we are now looking at applications for this year's and we should have that to you in May sometimes. So let's see. Anything you wanna talk about in that area before I move into the land use?

Yeah. The CLG grant, like Tim said, to help pay for education. So we were looking into some specifically for the board, some preservation conferences this year. We looked Christina was recommending planning staff was recommending the Oregon Heritage Conference. Heritage Conference in Woodburn this year, and they have a great they've a really great lineup with amazing speakers, and I think it's a more opportunities like that to educate the board are always welcome.

But no, think Tim covered it with some of the some of the initiatives we have. Beyond that, we saw some land use applications, reviewed 10 applications. Do you wanna start that, or should I Sure. Go ahead. Okay.

And before I go into the the 10 applications, I wanted to thank the planning staff, particularly Christina, Jude, and Melissa, for their daily work as full time planning staff and preservation support. So when people, you know, put in these applications, those are the those are the staff members that they're speaking with who are guiding them on what to do. And and oftentimes, these applicants come go back and forth to the staff to to get recommendations on a best path forward before they even see us. So they're really doing a lot of that that work behind the scenes, and we just wanted to shout them out and say thank you so much for their their hard work and and support to, to the residents of Oregon City. And then the other thing, the HRB reviewed 10 applications this year, and it's it's funny because I looked at that number, and I was like, wow.

Felt like more. And so I thought about that and realized that, the applications that we had this year were we had several larger, more complex projects that we reviewed. So it did feel like some of these applications were a little heavier, than than others comparatively. A couple of those that were a little bit more complex was the were the Oregon City Hospital. That was a big one that we looked at.

The Sarah Hughes house, there was a a bigger addition that they were proposing that we really they came to us several times to work with us about some of the features and some of the just the overall the the architecture and the and the planning of how to not compromise the existing historic structure in front. So that was, that was one where we saw multiple, reviews of the of the as belts. And then, we saw some middle housing infill, which was a great opportunity to kind of think wrap our minds around, a lot of the compatible change that we'd also been working on. It helped us, put that to use and sort of bridge the gap between some things we were thinking about for the compatible change and how that was going to look in a real life project, and how we would apply it. So those are a couple that I wanted to highlight, a couple projects that that felt like, just a little bit larger and more complex that we worked through.

And I would thank you. And I would say what what I was excited about this year was the ability of the group to work as a team. We, you know, we

our our

goal is to is to really help the applicant get to yes. And, know, we we work, you know, we've got as I said earlier, we have we have people on that understand the building trade. We have people understand the historical side of it. And what's exciting is to be able to have an applicant come up to us and give us a plan and have us rework it, if you will, or or give them suggestions and have them walk away happy. That's that that happened pretty much continuously through the process and and that's a that's a wonderful thing to happen because we really wanna be able to we wanted to show people that we are willing to work.

We we wanna make sure that we stay within the guidelines, but we wanna make make it work for them as well. And a couple of those projects were solar related Mhmm. Which, you know, brought us solar plans that we all looked at and said, you know, probably not. But we're able to make it work for everybody, and everybody got they wanted. You know, we we have a couple of historic homes that we had them put on and they look great in my opinion. And I think we did a really good job with that. So there's new technologies that are coming out every day and we're learning every meeting. It seems we learn about new technologies in solar. So that's that's really happening now. We're seeing more and more people with the cost of electricity.

More and more people want to go to solar and more and more people are looking to do this. And so we wanna have a plan, and and I think we've done a really good job as a team in making that work.

So if you'll indulge me for a minute, Paul and Gordon, would you guys come up? You guys participated in all this, and I'd just like to acknowledge the fact of your work as well and see if you wanted to just add anything to what your colleagues have said. Hope you don't mind. I didn't I didn't mean to pull this on you, but I think it's it's, important to acknowledge the members.

Thank you

for the impromptu call up. And it's it's important to acknowledge the work that our advisory committees do. I mean, we're not the only ones up here doing the work. Well, first Don't forget. I gotta say your name.

Paul Edgar Kanima. I'd first like to thank the team, everybody, because the team works and we accept all of the ideas that comes out and we're doing critical thinking. And I think that's positive when we use all of our thought process to come up with the right decisions. And I found I found this to be rewarding. Let's just put it that way. It's rewarding for the city. It is rewarding for those of us that are preservationists and care.

Thank you. Gordon? Yeah. Gordon Lawrence, Southend. I have been continuously impressed with the ability of the board to come to a uniform decision on a regular basis and not have to ask applicants to come back for multiple, you know, occasions.

We we can come up to a consensus on a regular basis, and it's very thoughtful and thought through. And there's a a good group of people up there that really seem to know what they're doing, and it's a diverse group. And it's it's pretty incredible to watch how different topics evolve and are constructed throughout the evening, and and it's just been a really rewarding process. And I I really appreciate being able to be on that board and then see how we've been able to get the applicants through the process and see why it's important for it to be there in the first place. And it seems like we're just doing pretty positive work. Yep.

Good. Thank you.

Thank you all.

Okay. Thank you so much. I appreciate And next on our agenda, we have the fabulous chair of the Natural Resources Committee for their annual report. You're coming up to pinch hit, miss Hart? I'm coming up to support. Good. Alright. Thank you.

Thank you. Sam Wolf, Elliville, resident of Oregon City. I am the chair of the Oregon City Natural Resources Committee, and I'm to present our annual report. Thank you, chair and commissioners, for having me. So the NRC has met six times since last I spoke. In 2025, we met six times and then twice this year. We've had a joint meeting with the Parks Recreation Advisory Committee in February, and the committee meets every other month. So NRC is now meeting in the community room at the development department, here on Warner Parratt Road. That's very convenient. Thank you.

And as always, we have a hybrid Zoom option for those who need to participate remotely. Currently, the NRC has seven positions filled, and we hope to maintain that number even, after I resign, later, next month with and thanks to having, Emily Lisbord and William Foster, renewing their appointments. Also, thanks to Doug Neely for coming back to the committee to assist us. Doug, you're always welcome even if you're no longer an official member. Your experience and wisdom is a huge asset, and we always appreciate your voice.

So current members are Brian Pfister, who's my vice chair, Emma Lugo, she's commit completing Monica Stone's term, Dakota Hufford, she's our secretary, myself as the chair, Dave Trotter, William Foster, and Emily Lisborg. Some of the highlights from last year, is that NRZ has been providing recommendations to the commission, through our biennial goals. We're grateful to see results in the city's ongoing implementation of the following natural resource priorities. So Bee City USA has been a goal for some time. So by permit submitting an application to the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, and it promotes implementation of a integrated pest management program for the city owned and managed lands.

So we've been happy to see and work with the parks managers on that. Also happy to see movement on a tree canopy analysis for city owned lands That's invaluable for promoting, broader tree canopy across the city and all the benefits that brings. And also general public awareness and outreach, regarding the emerald ash borer, which is an invasive pest, that can affect all native Oregon ash, which are prevalent across our park systems, our riparian lands as well. So greater outreach and education for the public is valuable to mitigate that pest. We are encouraged by the greater collaboration with NRC and the PRAC board on projects and mutual concern, and we're very grateful to the commission and staff, of course, for their assistance.

So some of the items on our work plan, which was adopted last September, We wish to work forward on and maintain our efforts. Those include developing an informal brochure for property owners within the NRC, sorry, Natural Resources Overlay District so that they better understand and comprehend the purposes and regulations and types of activities that the NROD controls, so what they can and can't do and how to best maintain those lands. Another responsibility that we're wanting to focus on is to promote community involvement and natural resources. So this can include a public tree inventory using volunteer populations and volunteer property participation on city properties, parks, street trees, and school properties, or other public lands, to communicate regularly with natural neighborhood associations, citizen involvement committee, and the business community to promote programs such as the Heritage Tree Program and Arbor Day. We wish to improve awareness through the city website brochures, signage, social media for awareness and interpretation of natural resources overlay district, support city efforts to inform new property owners within the Enron of the purpose of the Overlay Lake District and how to enhance their habitat therein.

We wanna coordinate with city efforts to enhance tourism. So based on natural resources. So this would emphasize local knowledge, provide interpretive signage, and education to allow people to learn about things like birding, like switch switch migrations, heritage trees, etcetera, and give people an easy way to learn. We also wish to support city partnerships with homeowners associations, Metro, Greater Oregon for habitat improvement projects within the urban growth boundary, and continuing partnerships with the Oregon Heritage Tree Council and Oregon Community Trees. Number two is initiate recommendations and review updates to the city's comprehensive plan codes and policy as they relate to statewide planning goals, which are integral to our mission.

So to support this, we provide input to the city commission on amendments to the city's tree protection and removal codes, improve public outreach and information about invasive plants and insects. We reference regionally accepted and regularly updated plant lists from the Clackamas Wildwater District Metro Portland and the Willamette Valley native plant list. We also support the city's application and in part participation in this Bee City USA program and developing in the integrated pest management or IPM, recommended through the Cerisees Society. We also promote public awareness of ways to promote and preserve invertebrate habitat through educational events, such as booths at the spring resource fair, the city websites, trail news, and the Facebook page, and other social media. We also promote public awareness of the dangers of pesticide use, cost savings associated with reduced pesticide applications, and reduced landscape maintenance.

Our third responsibility is to receive notice and comment on land use applications of projects within the city limits and within the urban growth boundary. To support this, we review and comment on type three applications, to vary from the adopted standards of the Natural Resources Overlay District, Flood Management Overlay District, and the Willamette River Greenway Overlay District. Our fourth responsibility is to conduct orderly meetings that result in good communications. All of our meetings are well and orderly. We maintain and update a natural resources committee priorities list in our work plan, and we actively collaborate and communicate with each other when needed to share comments on planning commission goals, city commission goals, other, objectives.

Let's see. We our fifth responsibility is to coordinate with the Parks Recreation Advisory Committee or PRAC and the Planning and City Commission on at least an annual basis that result in good communication and mutually beneficial results. We're also excellent at this. We strengthened coordination with PRAC with our last meeting and park staff through regular interaction and attendance at prep meetings. We also support funding initiatives and grant applications for parks and open spaces, and we always invite the park staff to attend NRC meetings as they wish. Thank you. That's all I have.

And then I'd like to add if I really quickly could. Pete Walter, our planning manager, really is the one that is the staff liaison for the Natural Resources Committee. And so he's a great asset for that committee, and I just wanted to thank him, although he's not here tonight.

Questions? Kudos? Anything? Thank you for the great work. And you said we are we are applying for the b city?

Yes. We're we're actively in the process of implementing and applying for it.

Yeah. I just got the seal of approval on our, earning our 2025 Tree City USA recognition, so I'll have to work with mister Lehman to to, get this press release out. So that's quite an accomplishment. But, yeah, I'm looking forward to the tree volunteer tree surveys because I know, my neighborhood is interested in helping participate in that. Alright. Okay. Thank you so very much. We appreciate it. Thank you. Thanks for all the great work.

Alright. Next on our agenda, we have the, consent agenda and the adoption of the agenda. Is there, anything on the agenda that, anyone has concerns about, or do we have a motion?

Move to approve the consent agenda.

Second. It's been moved and seconded that we adopt the consent agenda.

Commissioner Mitchell. Aye. Commissioner Wilson. Aye. Commissioners sorry. Whatever his name is. Aye. Commissioner Marle. Hi. Mayor McGrath.

Hi. It's okay. We're we're allowed to, get tongue tied every so often here. Alright. We do not have, item number eight is that we do not have any public hearings, this evening, but we do have two items on our general, business agenda, and that is a, is the Abernathy Bridge widening and seismic retrofit project. And I'll turn that over to our city manager.

Thank you, mayor. Evening commissioners. At our last meeting, we had an initial presentation and discussion about the request to extend the work area timing around the Abernethy Bridge. ODOT representatives were here for that presentation. The city commission asked for some clarification and additional information.

ODOT staff is available tonight to make the presentation and, answer any questions, try and answer the questions that the commissioners may have. So I don't know that we as staff have a whole lot more to add at this point. And if you'd like to either ask us any questions you have or we could invite ODOT staff to come come forward and make their presentation and walk through their information.

It's a pleasure of commission. Do you wanna do your summary now, or you wanna wait till after they when whenever it's whenever you feel it's appropriate to

I'd like to hear.

Comment. Yes. Okay. Alright. So we'll have our partners at ODOT come on up.

Thank you so much for, being here this evening. So go ahead whenever you're ready. Got green. Green means go.

Okay. Do you mind if I start? Please. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity, to be back here for a second opportunity, and thank you for having us. We have, much more information to share with you. I'm Ryan Windshimer. I'm the UDOT region one manager. And, you've met, Matt and Vidal before, so they're here again to share some additional information with you.

I wanted to start by reminding people, in the audience and viewing online, that the Oregon City businesses down near the bridge project are open. They're open for business, that they are accessible, and that they would appreciate your support, as this project continues, for the next few years. Second, I wanted to thank the mayor and county administrator Gary Schmidt for reaching out to me directly, and connecting me with several local business owners, and commissioner, Mitchell for, joining me, for some discussion with them to really hear from them directly about how this project has been impacting them, and what, we can do to help, address that. And then more for us to also be able to explain, a lot more about what to expect, in the in the coming years for this project, and what it means because, I think there was a lot of misinformation misunderstanding when we presented the first time around what five years might might mean and might look like. And so, Matt and Vidal are gonna, take the opportunity to share more with you about that.

I learned quite a bit from them. We were able to identify a number of ways that I can work with them to increase their visibility, making sure that we're, talking to the public and the media when we talk about the project, that we're also reminding, them about the businesses, which is, something I wanted to make sure I was, also doing again here today. And that the businesses are down there and that they, will really, again, appreciate the support of the community during the project. My last comment is really, before turning it over to Matt and Vidal is is to say that I regret we did not, explain more about, what we were asking for, what the, future impacts of that might look like, at the first meeting. And so I appreciate the the opportunity to come back and share more of that information with you, and I'm happy to stay and answer questions.

With that, I'll turn it over to you. Thanks,

Ryan. Hello. I'm Matt Frutag, ODOT's region one project delivery manager. So I'll go through a few more details on the project. So did wanna start with let's see. There we go. What you're seeing today and and how things are gonna be changing in the next few years for the project sites. The next five years, you're gonna see significant changes as the project evolves. In general, the work is gonna get smaller. So the work the bridge is getting as it gets closer to completion, the larger equipments needed to work on the bridge will leave the site.

Our contractor's current schedule, thanks, Mel, shows the completion on the bridge work between 2027. We expect that much of the large equipment in the river, the barges, the cranes, and the temporary work platforms will be removed as the bridge work winds down. Anticipate being out of the river by the 2026. The next phase, which is expected to run between mid twenty seven and late twenty eight, will be soil stabilization work along the riverbanks to further improve the bridge's ability to withstand a major seismic event. The work involves injecting concrete material into the subsurface soils and to withstand the impacts of an earthquake.

So so we'll inject the the concrete around the bridge foundations on both sides of the river. This work is expected to utilize smaller drilling equipment, concrete trucks, and temporary tanks to protect the adjacent waterways. This work have a much smaller footprint, and then it's currently happening right now that is under, over, and around the bridge. This smaller footprint will have less impact on park users as well. Our final phase, which is expected to start in '28, will be the enhancements to Abernethy Creek and landscaping to restore the park property to its original condition.

This will be accomplished using with small tractors and hand tools for planting will be generally low impact following the initial grading as the landscaping contractor visits the site regularly to inspect, maintain the plantings, and to ensure their establishment and long term survival. And as I mentioned, in the first two phases, as those get completed, the temporary equipment, the signs, the cones, and other, things along 20599 E and Clackman Drive will glad gradually be removed.

So as you can see on this Vidal Francis is my name. I'm the area manager for ODOT. And as you can see on the screen, those are this is what it actually looks like on the job site right now in those locations. And what we're really talking about is what's highlighted in yellow as the temporary locations that we're actually using right now as for access for the bridge. Using the temporary spay workspace space in the park there, there is less impacts to everyone, all the users, especially those on 99 on 20 I 205.

And I would even say even residents and so forth that's walking through the area because if we had to use a different location, again, we would be impacting other areas that would make it even much more difficult for folks that are traveling through. The public access to the parks, the boat launch, the parking areas will be maintained throughout construction. The contractor has maintained access along Clackamike Drive to allow users to get the sports craft park. We will continue to monitor the contractor activities to ensure access is not blocked and parking is not impacted. We will also explore the addition of business access signs to point travelers to open businesses in the project area.

And, again, we wanted to show you exactly what it looks like on the grade out there right now by those photos that are there.

And, Nel, before you leave this slide, the green is just park. Correct. The only area we're talking about continuing to lease is the yellow area and utilize. So it's it looks that makes it look impactful. It's much less of an area that it's actually being impacted. Oh, go ahead. Thank you. Can you?

Alright. So we know the delays to completion of impacted nearby businesses, but it's also disappointed that the contractor has fallen so far behind schedule, and we want to see this project completed as soon as possible. We provide our contract with additional tools to speed up their work and have been pushing them to meet their deadlines. We incur continue to encourage Kiwit to speed up their work and to find ways to get the work done faster without impacting the final product. Kiwit's an experienced contract with lots of resources at their disposal, and ODOT will continue to collaborate on opportunities for them to get the work done earlier.

Good news is the contractor is continuing to make progress, and we are over 70% complete with the bridge work. As you can see here on some of the impacts of not not being able to to use the work areas generally delays and increased costs of having to not have clear access to the bridge. In addition, any other changes that we need to have here would result in additional lane closures, which would end up having safety impacts for workers and drivers along some of the roadways near the bridge. The next one.

I think that's the last one.

One more.

There we go.

Right.

Okay. As with, oh, this is talking about the John Storm Park area here. It says this, with all federally funded projects, property owners, will be compensated for the impacts in accordance with, federal regulations, which is a way of saying, the federal rules allow us to only compensate, real property impacts. And, the discussion I had with businesses that are that are being impacted, there's a lot of conversation about this and just making sure that we were being clear about what the federal regulations allow us to do. It's similar to what the city does on a number of projects, but it's really about, leasing the the land and then previous impacts to, to the dock.

But ODOT recognizes that, this change will impact the use of property and will compensate the owners for that. And the original right away agreements from 2001, ODOT compensated, the two property owners over, $900,000 for these impacts. And we're still reviewing the value of the temporary extensions, but expect that, those will be another 300,000 in order to continue the use of that, which which means that those there is compensation being done. I think one of the one of the questions was, you're gonna do this without compensation. And and I think making sure that we're just being clear there there has been that compensation that is, that we're following those federal guidelines, that we're also restricted by those federal guidelines with federal funding in terms of what we can do.

And, unfortunately, those federal regulations do prohibit payments for business impacts, and they can only be for for real property impacts.

They can only be for what?

Real property impacts. And so, for example, early in the, when the original ride away agreements were done, there was an impact to it to the dock. And when they impacted that dock and they actually had it move, we had to we had to compensate for that. And so we we were able to impact that. It's a as as a we were able to adjust for that, which was a real impact to that actual piece of property. And the other are ongoing leases, and so we're gonna be leasing some two parcels from the city of Oregon City. And there's an additional parcel that's nearby there that is it's actually just from a a division of state lands permit.

Yeah.

It's one of the it's one of the reasons that I I wanted to go and meet with the business owners, hear what's happening, and try to figure out how we can be helpful, and what other steps we could take. Anything

else? Nope. That's great. Questions, gentlemen? Mike, did you wanna give your

Yeah.

I I do wanna ask one question first, though. So bridge work in 2027, soil stabilization 2027, 2028, and creek and and, landscaping work in 2028. We're in 2026. Why five years?

That's a great question. And I think that was another thing I wanted to make sure that we had the opportunity to address, and and and, we walked through that pretty quickly in the slide and with the comments. The five years is necessary because while we're only going to be constructing the bridge and the impacts that you saw in that area for, you know, through through the 2027. We have to do the soil stabilization, as you mentioned. But we also have to do, once we do the landscaping, we also have to then make sure that we have time for the what's called a plant establishment period. We have to still have access to the land, make sure that we're watering it, monitoring it, and can replace those things. So we're we're we're asking for time to do that as well.

Is that the two year? That's generally what it is for landscaping? I'm not sure in this contract.

It a year or two years? I think we have two.

So five? Ahead. Go ahead.

I I believe it is two years.

Yeah. Yeah.

It's pretty typical.

And and maybe in the middle there, the the soil stabilization work, that is in water work. So even though we're we're not in the river, we're gonna be close enough to it that we are limited on when we can do that. So that's where, really only in, low river times. So in in '27 and then, '28 is what we're expecting. So all the work, we'll we'll need two in water work pairs to complete that work.

So the the soil stabilization work is in water work? It's considered in water work.

Yes. It is on the slope,

but it's, below the Ordinary high water work. It's because some of the work will be done below the ordinary high, it would be considered in water work, but you're still you're still on the dry land, if you Okay.

Just a couple of questions. First of all, I appreciate the explanation, tonight that I don't think was given in such detail last time. But, in terms of the compensation going forward, it it's a or it's it at least seems semi comparable with what was given to the city for the park in the first first phase. So I I think that's that helps me understand it better, and I'm glad to hear that. The the one of the pieces I asked about last week was or not last week, whenever it was.

It's been a long ago. Two weeks ago, a long couple weeks. And I understand the clarification about compensating businesses specifically. However, one of the things that came up last meeting was the signage, signage in terms of businesses being open, etcetera. I think there was at least some acknowledgment that there could be something done with signage going forward.

I guess I'm shocked that it never happened for the first phase. I don't know any construction project that any city does that doesn't first puts up signs that say businesses are open. I actually drive drove down there for the first time in quite some time last or yesterday just because I wanted to see what was down there. There's nothing. There's absolutely nothing.

It was easy to access the properties down there yesterday, although I was down there after work work hours were over. But I think that there should be some effort made going forward with better signage. I think it's too late, but I I think that going forward, there could be an effort there. I think I also I'm pretty sure the city is more than willing to work with ODOT and and placing signs and and how to deal with that. I think there's other things that the city might be able to do.

Some of us have had some chats about that in terms of the businesses themselves, but that may be another conversation at another meeting. But, so I feel a little bit better than where we were the first time. I, just have one question, in terms of the map that shows the green areas and the the work areas. Is that are is are we saying that those green areas are accessible now, or those green areas are accessible in at some point in this next phase in this timeline? Is it, like It's accessible now.

Correct. Yep. That the green indicates park property that is currently accessible now. It's not part of the the work areas. Alright.

Here's what I'll say with that. Driving down there, and maybe that's a signage issue too. Because driving down there, there's no possible way that any there's no possible way that any citizen would believe that they could walk through almost any area of that park. And I would say probably its success, I didn't get out of my car and go walk at one of the ways because partly because looking at it, it doesn't look like you can really do that without, you know, getting into construction areas. But I assume you can access from I parked basically right there where the red the the red square is to the north of the the bridge.

I I I I think it is probably feasible yesterday that I could have walked over to the dock. I'm not sure I could have walked or at least not felt comfortable walking in some of those areas. So if it is open accessible, maybe there should be a clarification for that because I I don't think any person driving down there would think they could walk through there. So, that's the only other thing I would say to that.

Thank you thank you for that, Commissioner Smith. And I think we agree with you that the signage, one, it is it is late, and it, and we're happy to, be part of the solution at this point in improving that. It absolutely needs to happen, and we're we're committed to that. The business is also, we came up with, in addition to just having conversations about, that the businesses are open and accessible, adding to the bottom of our web our webcam and our web page and to some of our materials information to either the Oregon City Business Association or and or the chamber, but probably both, that has a link to a page that also, lists the businesses that are available, and open that wanna be part that. And so we're we we can have make sure that as people are accessing our information about the project, they're also getting information about businesses being open and how to access them.

Thank you. Thank

you. I appreciate the discussion and the follow-up over the why why this is necessary. I would I would also appreciate it if you could go a little bit into the how, the how did we get here point, because I think the public deserves to know, why we are being asked to approve this extension. I know that we're all, very used to at this point, of seeing the Oregonian articles pop up about whatever project it may be, the IVR, the Rose Quarter, Abernathy. And I would like you to please speak a little bit more about why we're in the position we are now. Thank you, and thank

you for the opportunity to do that. And Matt and Vidal may wanna jump in here a little bit too. But I'd like to start by just giving you, maybe maybe a couple of a couple of things about how we ended up here. First, one of the things that we realized fairly early into the project, through the design and having conversations with our contractors is that we had to do substantially more strengthening of the concrete piers than was originally anticipated. And so after long negotiations and conversations with our contractor about that, we had we had to enter into a settlement with them about how to compensate them for that all that additional work, which also resulted in days.

And so back in November so this is November '24. We entered into a settlement agreement that that gave the contractor some additional compensation for that and also an additional three hundred and seven days that then led to a completion date of October 21, '20 '25. So that was the completion date that we've been working with for over over a year and a half now. Since that time, we've been meeting with a contractor and talking and that was our agreed upon schedule with the contractor. So that was in November '24.

Since that time, we've been working with our contractor about, you know, what what's going on, having conversations with them about it, but we haven't actually had an accepted schedule for over a year. So we went a year without getting an accepted schedule from our contract. We call it a contractually compliant schedule with the contractor, but we had ideas that they were saying they were gonna be late, and so we were having conversations about this. But it wasn't until actually this November schedule, which was actually in February, that we accepted the contractor's new schedule and set a new you know, an a sort of agreed upon between the contractor and ODOT when we anticipated the based on their schedule when they expect to have the project done, which is more towards the middle May May, of twenty seven. And so as soon as we knew that, the next month, we went to the Oregon Transportation Commission and let them know that that was the that was the case.

And then, it was I think six days later, we were before you talking about it. So as soon as we had an accepted schedule, we were communicating it immediately. And I I wanna be really clear about that. This is not something that, you know, we've known about forever and just didn't say something about. This is something that we just came to.

We're continuing to work with this with the contractor, and we had high hopes over the last several months of of talking with them about how to recover schedule, and we're continuing to do that. I think you heard Vidal talk about, a couple of steps that we've taken, but, one of the things that, the contractor is working on right now is, sole plate fit ups. And so when you work on a when you work on a project like this, particularly a retrofit project so if you're building something new, I think it's pretty sometimes it's easier to say, here's the spec and here's what we want and this is what you're gonna see. And in this case, when they were removing the sole plates, the the underside of the bridge is like it's curved a little bit more than what was shown in the plans. And so they're having to match up plates to these to the curvature of the bridge in every in every case.

And so we provided something called,

I call it epoxy. Liquid shim. Liquid shim.

They call it liquid shim. But it's an epoxy that goes in between those plates and the and the and the bridge in order to help figure out how to move that process faster. So instead of machining all those plates every time, you can use the liquid shim. We're we've deleted some work from the contract that we can be deferred into another phase. So that's again shortening that time period. There's a number of those things that we've done in order to help manage that. We're continuing to talk with KeyWit, and I think Matt mentioned it. They're a very experienced contractor. They've got a lot of skills. We we want them to help bring those to the table. We're working with them to

do that to try to speed this up. Okay. Thank you for that explanation. I appreciate that, and I know that the public appreciates that as well. I have no issue with us working with ODOT and and trying to find a way to to get this important project completed.

What I do have an issue with is when we have people or jurisdictions or governments coming to us asking us to work with them when that spirit of partnership has not felt like it's been there reciprocally for us. And so I know that there are a variety of projects that, in in Oregon City that are very important to us. The the two big ones that come to mind are the quiet zone along the the railroad in Downtown Oregon City and having to work through ODOT as our fiscal agent for the federal earmarks that we received and how, a lot of the delays, a lot of the bureaucratic red tape that we've had to deal with has led to inflationary, increases to that project, which at this point has made that project unfeasible without an additional injection of, what is it, $1,700,000. And that's not all on ODOT. I want to recognize that.

But there are issues that our jurisdiction has had trying to get some really important projects completed as well, and the spirit of partnership needs to be going both ways when it comes to our ability to work together. And then the other project, I guess it isn't really a project, but more of something that we've been working toward is the the issue over the old 82nd and the rights of way and easements over there to help facilitate redevelopment of a parcel of land over in that area near the Home Depot area. So I would be willing to move forward with something so long as, we are able to allay the concerns of our local businesses and if we are able to, come to some sort of agreement on a variety of projects that are essential for our city's infrastructure and community development, in moving forward.

Thank you. Just one Sorry.

Go ahead.

Oh, I was just gonna say, I I appreciate those comments. Thank you. And, I'm sorry if you don't, haven't had the feeling of of a continued partnership between between ODOT and the city. We worked on countless projects together over the years from the waterfront project that we helped deliver, the trail projects that we're doing on, the roundabout and other trail connections that we're doing. We did one way Marine, one way Main Street to two way Main Street.

When we did a a quick a quick grant in order to try to help figure out how to help those businesses that felt like a two way Main Street was a better option than a one way Main Street. Willamette Falls legacy project is something we've been on the planning side and development side and working with the tribe and working with the city on what does that traffic look like. We've come to some agreements and settlement in the tribe, and we're ready to now move forward with the intersections that we see there and the things that we've been working on. We've got slight activity that we've been working on with the Rock Fall and other things that we do. So I think we've been Forget about the party.

Oh, yeah. Yes. And we would do we do parties. We've, done permits for, nine eleven celebrations on the Arch City Bridge and worked with the community on that, making sure that we get, the bridge cleaned up and and prepared for those and provide some traffic control. Yeah.

If the city is interested in delivering their own federal aid projects, there's a process that they can go through called getting it's becoming a locally certified agency and can actually do those on their own without having to go through ODOT on that. If if if you're thinking that ODOT's not somehow being a good partner in that, there's a way to do that. And several counties and cities, city of Portland, for example, is certified and delivers their own. So there's a lot of ways that we can keep those conversations moving in terms of how do we work together on, on those projects, how do we work better together into the future, and, what things might you wanna take on on your own into the future.

Oh, I I think all of those are great, great suggestions. However, the two projects that he's mentioned, we're already working with the agency on those right now. We just need to have a little more urgency, particularly with the quiet zone. I would say that's you know, I had hoped that that might be done by now. So if there's a way that we can work with your staff to make that project a little more expedient and then also get the get the right away vacated, we've been told we have to pay pay for the property that we want to take.

It's like a little sliver. I mean, nobody's ever gonna be able to use that for anything other than joining it with our property. So those I I would agree with with what you said about that. It's not that we have not been working together. We have a lot of we have a lot of cooperation. There are I think what the public doesn't understand that there are there are different moving parts to this agency. They handle a lot of things from soup to nuts. So one is ODOT Rail. We've got that, and then we've got the property acquisition. So if we can just get some some more understanding from the project managers there that we would like to move this faster, that would be really helpful. That message is received right now.

I'm happy to receive that, and I'm happy to, to try to help with that. And, I also encourage you to reach out to, to Matter, myself, the area managers, and we're also also accessible to be on not just those projects, but anytime you're running into those kinds of issues and have, additional things you'd like to work through us, don't don't hesitate to reach out to me directly and have a conversation about how can we maybe do this differently or what might that look like. I'm happy to, engage in those conversations with you.

Yeah. And and I appreciate your going over the historical projects that we've worked on in the past that have gone well. I think the problem I I was not on the commission during that time, and so relationship with ODOT has not been defined by those milestones as positive as they have been. But I do want to acknowledge that I I I recognize that the structural deficiencies at ODOT are not your fault. I know that a lot of the interactions we've had with your agency in the past five, ten years has focused a lot on the tolling, and I recognize that that was not your choice.

It it was legislatively directed. So I wanna recognize that there is the opportunity to build those relationships and and make them stronger. So thank you.

I look forward to that. Thank you.

K. Did you have anything

else? Yep. Go ahead.

Rocky has something in there.

Okay. Just just one more question about the work areas and and and and the open space. So so yes. And I guess the question really is, is there a way to better delineate on-site which areas are open to the public and which are not? Because, I was about ready to say I don't recall seeing any fencing.

I don't recall seeing any kind of even caution tape that says this is the work area and this is not. There's in most construction sites, there would be that. I'm now looking at my photos and correcting myself briefly because there's at least a couple cones with some ropes on them, but that only really delineates what looks like the driveway, construction driveway down into under the bridge. So there should be at least some visual, I think, on-site, if there are areas that are accessible to the public. Because without that, you just see stuff all over, and I don't think it's something that most people would say I'm comfortable walking into these areas without something more specific. And I think that'd be pretty simple.

Yeah. Unfortunately, that's part of responsibility of the contractor, and they have not done that.

So I think that would help on too.

That would help a lot.

I took a I took a note, commissioner, when you said that because I also when talking with the businesses, had this that conversation around, it didn't feel like it was Right. And I think you've you've actually hit on one of the key points of that is how do you delineate it? Right. How how do you make sure that it is accessible? And that's that's something we can follow-up with the Okay. Contractor

Yeah. I did have the opportunity a couple of days ago to meet with mister Windshimer and mister Francis, and I and I thank you for taking the time to do that, along with mister Dai and mister Dribo who operate the two businesses that are most affected, and some members of the River Assets Group. It it was it was a very good meeting. It was productive. I believe that, though that representatives heard clearly from the two business owners, that it's more than just access to the businesses.

It's the desirability or nondesirability of of people wanting to be on the water in the middle of that project. And I think, honestly, that has had more of a negative impact on their business than the access. So it was it there was a good sharing of information. It was helpful to me to, and I believe to the business owners as well to get some more clarification on on what ODOT is federally allowed to compensate for and not, and that has helped at least helped me a little bit in the process. I'm not gonna let you off the hook on the fact that I two things.

That kind of a meeting should have happened much sooner and should have been happening on a regular basis. That's water under the bridge, not to be corny. But It's a And and and the other, gosh. I just lost my train of thought. The signage should have happened already.

And I know that you did not have an agreed to schedule until just before you came to us a couple of weeks ago. But you certainly knew that you weren't gonna hit the original schedule, And that would have been a good time to, you know, raise your hand and and inform the city that here's where we're at. We don't know exactly where it's gonna be, but it's not gonna be on the original schedule and delay is gonna be significant. And that that to me is just is being a good partner, and we didn't get that information. There are still I I think we have a lot more clarity on now on on what ODOT is able to compensate for and not.

There were some other issues that I believe that you are you already are aware of and and are gonna help us figure One is, discussion of some parking time limits in the parking lot and why those are there and can they be eliminated to make more parking available for those businesses. There was there are questions about easements or clearance space necessary around the new piers or or I don't know. Piers is exactly the right term. But after the construction is done, is there are are there navigation restrictions around there that are gonna affect particularly sport craft? And then still the the signage issues.

But again, it was it was a good meeting. Should have happened much sooner. I appreciate you taking the time to be there, and, appreciate that you've listened, to what the businesses had to say. And I hope that that's something that can continue over the next phases of the project as it goes forward.

K. Well, I am cognizant that, we have a lot of people that wanna say something about this, and it is it is not a public public hearing, but it is a a business item that, we would appreciate, comments. So I'm gonna call you up two at a time, and, then we'll have our ODOT staff come back along with the city. And, just for those of you that are not familiar with our wonderful process, so it's, you have three minutes. And, say your name and city of residence for the record.

And if you've already submitted something in writing to us, please be respectful and do not read it because we did read it. And we appreciate your being here. So I'm gonna call up William Gifford and Betty Mohn. And since we have a lot of people, if you could come up quickly, that would be wonderful. So, William, if you please go first. Thank you.

Hello again, commissioners and mayor. I am William Gifford. Still live in Oregon City. Thank goodness.

As a still William Gifford.

As the founding director for the Oregon City Business Alliance, I've been in, email communication with Kent Ziegler who was at that meeting or some of those meetings. And I wanted to confirm the fact that we already have plans for putting a link on our website for the to direct them to to ODOT's listing of businesses that are open. It's kind of a small token gesture, but it's it's better than nothing. And, and I also recommended to him that we that we encourage, Chamber of Commerce, of which I'm also a member, and, the Downtown Association, Oregon City Downtown Association also put a little something on their website. I did have a a a clarification question that I hope that that, our representatives here will be able to answer, and that is, have there been any economic incentives or penalties offered to the, to the contractor to get this done by a particular date?

I know that a lot of contracts are written where, you you say if it has to be done by this date, and if you get it done sooner, we'll pay you more. And if it gets done later, we're gonna pay you less. Or we're gonna pay you what we said we're gonna pay you, but we're not gonna pay you anymore and you still have to finish it. And I just don't know if those carrots and sticks have offered to the

I'll have them back. Definitely come back. Yes. There has been some penalty they didn't get paid for several months because they didn't do what they were supposed to do, but there may be more. Thank you so much. Thank you for, being here for Kent.

Betty Mum, I live in Oregon City. I thought your questions were great, commissioner Smith and Adam and Mike Mitchell. You answered you were asking questions that I wanted to ask, and so I appreciate you doing that. I appreciate ODOT coming to clarify. And you're right.

It should have happened months and months ago. The businesses should have not been down there without the signage and have to suffer through what they have. So I know I'm a I was a small business owner in a different city, and that road would have probably killed my business. I could tell you that. So I appreciate businesses hanging in there for as long as they have with the negative impact of ODOT.

I would also encourage ODOT to make sure they have someone following the contractor and making sure the contractor contractor is doing exactly what the contractor is supposed to do. So, the other idea I was thinking about was putting it on the ballot in November so the citizens could vote on that. I haven't heard any of your comments about that, and I would like to know what your thoughts are. We did it in May when this originally came up. So it may be a good thing because citizens wanna know what's going on.

Why is it taking, you know, years and years and years when a a private developer could probably come in and do it in half the time. But the the citizens wanna know, and I think you guys, could put that out on, the ballot and explain it to him. Thank you.

Sam and, Raymond.

My name is Raymond Rendleman, and I'm a resident of Oregon City. I'm also on the Transportation Advisory Committee, although speaking solely for myself. I've, two specific requests for the commission. One is that you don't, vote to allow the extension to that tonight. ODOT didn't provide any solid reason why they need the five year extension right now. There's a

lot

of unanswered questions that they have. There's a lot of things that they could be completing, like the signage and all the negotiations that could be happening between now and August. We'd have to talk with the city recorder about the exact date for referring to the November ballot, but that would be an August deadline. So between now and August, we could see some progress made on the signage, all the other things that they've promised in discussions here, and some additional things. Like, I'm I'm glad that you all are bringing up the quiet zones.

For example, let's see, something in writing, and hopefully a large check from ODOT to, complete the quiet zones. I was looking at this article Abernathy Bridge project continues to stall raising costs. And in this article, they talk about how it's a $672,000,000 project originally. It was that's what was budgeted. So, exactly 1% of that is about what we've budgeted to, the project on Highway 213, which is an ODOT Road, $6,500,000 going to that.

So it'd be a drop in the bucket on what their original cost is for the overall bridge project to provide that $6,500,000 to fix the Beaver Creek And 213 Intersection that was originally, messed up by ODOT. So it would be great to see that fixed, get the quiet zone fixed, and get something that is similar to what happened over in the West Linn Side because West Linn got a really nice set of sidewalks. They've got nice sidewalks that were newly built over there in a new traffic circle, and that probably cost at least $5,000,000 to construct all the nice stuff on West Linn Side. So we should get something approximating that for the five, year extension.

Thank you. You understand that was part of the project. So go ahead, Sam.

Okay. Thank you, commissioners. My name is Sam Dribo. I live in Orange City and work here. And, again, we're kind of as important inflection point, I think. I appreciate you guys pointing out that we're a little late with a bunch of these conversations. I I will say at the very beginning of the project, I was on the horn trying to get ahold of somebody at ODOT and really working to to try to understand the project, see if there are resources. As a small business owner down right underneath the bridge and an anchor tenant at Sportcraft, you know, we felt these effects. I'm not gonna go into the details. I did submit a letter.

And, you know, I guess what what I'll say is, originally, I thought it was a, you know, a four year force we're going to the fifth summer here. So in the four summers, you know, we've just watched this this trend happen. Obviously, decrease in visitation and in revenue in a dramatic way. And I'm gonna get a little bit more pointed with the conversation because just understanding the ball the ball field here, and and I appreciate Vidal and and Ryan and commissioner Mitchell and the Oregon State Business Alliance and the Rasset Opportunities group for just coming together and having this discussion to try to gain more clarity on a high level and then figure out what's possible in this moment. And what I will say is at the very beginning of the project, you know, we had some other challenging issues that we're dealing with down there and and directly relating to rent, which quadrupled for Sportcraft and doubled for us, which was, like, the very beginning of the staging of this project.

So it was like, all of a sudden, our cost went to here, and then our revenue has just been going like that. So that was really challenging. And and I do remember James Graham looking over the project and being like, oof, man, I I hope you're still around at the end of this project. And I'm I'm an optimistic guy, so I was just like, oh, we'll outlast them. You know? And then we'll hold our breath, and we'll see how it goes. And we're four, you know, four years in, and now it's like, oh, we're just gonna double the the duration of the project. So that's what was really caught my attention. It's like, oh, man. Five more years, really?

And the reality is every moment down there and all the impacts are related. I mean, we we run, you know, thousands. We have hundreds and thousands of people and also children, and we do walk to Clackamas Park from Sportcraft. You know? And there there is not an easy way to get through there.

So, again, I you know, you've read you would probably read my letter. I think that there's at this moment, the biggest recipient of this extension is the city of Oregon City because they're gonna receive $300,000 for the future use of the park. So I'd love to see a mechanism to support the small businesses with that money directly. And, also, I think a reduction in rent for the duration of the extension five years is totally within the purview of this of this moment. So I appreciate you all for considering that.

Thank you. Charles Galia and Gordon Lawrence.

Mayor of commissioners, my name is Charles Gallia. I'm a resident of the of Oregon City, actually right on the edge of the boundary, unincorporated adjacent. We do have a residence inside the city limits. One of the things that I participated in was developing the task force that created the marketing association for the downtown area using the revenue that was coming about. And it triggered some thoughts about when I was living in Milwaukee.

And Milwaukee City Waterfront had Vic's Tavern, some old apartments that looked like they were gonna fall down. They were right on the edge of McLaughlin and, dilapidated cars, and you could not see the waterfront. So when I started to work on that task force, and thinking about what was possible in Oregon City, I got pretty excited when I heard about the connection to the, water, the kayakings, the boating, some of the other activities that were there. And thinking like, well, this is a stream of revenue that and business that doesn't exist in the city in strength even though it is one of the greatest assets. And while I understand that ODOT is limited in its ability to reimburse businesses directly, what you're witnessing and experiencing, I think, is a lost economic opportunity for the city as a whole.

To have that vision and the connection to the waterfront, the source of vitality that it brings, and the other kinds of businesses that are possible. Reimbursing a declining businesses and the Waterfront Marina is only part of the story. The not allowing access, and I and I understand nobody was blocking it, but the but frankly, I know you took a drive down there. You look you feel like you're in a construction zone. The signs say it's a construction area.

The parking against the marina is all occupied. It looked to me like workers. It may not be construction zone activities, but the parking and the access was very limited. There's an asset that needs to be revitalized. There's a vision that needs to be elevated, and partnership includes helping other people meet their objectives. And I would hope that the city would insist on maybe referring the whole question back to the voters to get their buy in once again. Thank

you.

Go ahead, Gordon. Thank you.

Gordon Lawrence, resident of Oregon City. People say that there are two fantastic days in a boat owner's life. The first one is buying the boat. The second one, of course, is selling that anchor. I actually sold my boat because I lost access to putting in the river and wanting to use it.

So that's been a part of me that is gone, and it is directly correlated to the project that's been going on. I'm a contractor. I'm a project manager. I've been contracting for twenty plus years. If I ran a project the way that this has been going, I would be out of business, period.

I am held accountable by my contract. I am held accountable by the contracts that I write, and I am held accountable to the people that I write those contracts with. If I showed up in the thirteenth hour and said, hey, guys. I'm sorry. This is gonna be two, three, four times as much money. This is gonna be five years past what we're planning on doing, and there was no correspondence between then and now. There there would be no repercussion for that. I don't have the benefit of saying, what else are you going to do? I would just be fired. I am responsible for employees.

I am responsible for families. I am responsible for families that live in Oregon City. I don't have that benefit. I cannot sit back on my laurels and say, I know that we said one thing, but we're gonna do another. And that's what it feels like here.

And I think it was thoroughly disrespectful to the city of Oregon City. I think it was disrespectful to the city commission that at the last meeting, ODOT presented being thoroughly unprepared to answer questions, and it was obvious. So I would expect that moving forward, we can expect some more clarity, better partnership like what was discussed tonight. And, of course, we wanna have a great relationship with the people that we work with and the things that are gonna provide the things for the community that we need. However, it can't just be a situation where somebody says, I understand.

We hear you. There's nothing we can do about it. Let's move forward. I think that five years is egregious, and I think that at the very beginning of the presentation, what was said was, we're asking for a few more years. A few is three, not five. I think that commissioner Mitchell said, I'm looking at the time frames, and this is two to three years. Where are you getting five? And I don't think that it's a You're positive thing to say, let's watch plants grow for two more years.

Thank you. You're Thank you.

Turn the buzzer off, please. Paul Edgar.

Paul Edgar. Thank you, chair and, commission. Adam, you're a 100% correct. We need to see action, and we need to see it over a period of time where they prove themselves working with the city, working with the businesses. The Sportsman store in Oregon City shop, etcetera, sales because the fishermen don't come into town.

The boat activity, the tourism, all of the the the hotel, everybody's paying a price. And what was said just recently, this is should not be five years. I sat through the meeting with commissioner Mitchell and the people. I understand the issues. I'm I'm pretty knowledgeable in transportation.

There's things could be that can be done concurrently to shorten the time frame. Those things need to happen, but we need to see them pulling the chain. They've been pulling the chain, but trying to. They've actually withheld some monies from Peter Keywood to make sure that they could get some action. But this thing has been a a a a something they could milk, and now we gotta get it bring it to an end.

And so anything that opens the door to make it again go out longer, giving them some excuse to not get things done. They've got real financial problems. So the money that's gonna be needed to do that injection process, to harden the soils around the pillars, Where is that money gonna come from? They go they've point blank said all preservation and maintenance money in Region 1 has been disappeared out through '30 2030. There that's what's now being said.

So you people need to I I agree 100% with Raymond. This should not be finalized anytime soon. You we've gotta see something happening that's positive for Oregon City, positive for the business community, positive for tourism, and we gotta get it end to an end time as soon as they could do it. And I think that's gotta be the the real pressure point. You gotta put on to them and say, we'll work with you, but you've got to bring this thing to an end as fast as you can do it. Thank you.

Thank you, Paul. And thank you for not making the buzzer go off. Gentlemen, do you wanna come back up? Whenever you're ready.

Do just want me just to kind of respond to some of those?

Is that what You would

like would like to hear? Okay. There's a number of point well, there's a there's a number of points made, and some of them are are right on, and some of them are really relevant. So one of the questions was around incentive disincentive, and does this contract have that? And this contract does have that. Our schedule right now is still the the the contract completion date for this is still 10/21/2026.

And

the schedule we told you that we've that we have an accepted schedule, this is it gets complicated fast, so appreciate the time to just explain a little. The accepted schedule is showing May of of twenty twenty seven, but the contract completion schedule is still, this this coming, October. We have a $70,000 a day, disincentive or incentive for this contractor. So for every day that goes beyond that, we're, entitled to ask for liquidated damages. And so that gonna be something that is part of the conversation, between us and the contractors as we move forward. And I think it's in all of our

best

interests, Oregon City, Oregon City businesses, ODOT, and our contractor. The the number one thing I think we should all be, you know, shooting for and agreeing upon is that we wanna get the project done as soon as possible. That's the least cost, least impactful, thing that we can do, and that is that's our goal. That's what we, as a management team have been pushing for with our contractor, this whole time. So we're gonna continue we're gonna continue to be pushing for that. So I appreciate, that that's also being asked for.

Brian, can I also add to that too as well? As we said earlier too, when the contractor doesn't follow the contract in certain aspects, we do have the ability to withhold payment or hold back payment to get them back into compliance. But, again, we do not control their means and method methods because it's up to them on how they, actually manage their manpower, their resources, their equipment, and so forth to get that work done. So we do have ways, mechanisms, if you will, to ratchet down or apply pressure to them from a financial standpoint to get what we need out of the contract. It's just that, you know, this is a challenging project like Ryan mentioned before. Yeah.

I guess the last one that's just sticking in my head is was Paul mentioned the the thing about not having payments or money set aside for paving over the next several years. That's true. We don't have money set aside for that particular program, but this bridge is gonna get done. We're gonna get this bridge done. We're gonna and we have we are gonna move forward with getting our seismically stable project done, the the soil matrix.

So that those are things that we're gonna get we're gonna get done. There is there is money currently programmed for that. It's like gonna need an increase, and we have told the commission that, and they understand that. So this is a conversation we're having with the commission right now too. This is not gonna have any permanent additional permanent impacts, which is something we had some good conversations with your staff about. Does it need to go to a vote again or does it not need to go to a vote again? And our understanding is that it does not. And I think that's what we presented in the in the document. I think that, the staff concurred with that. We're asking for your concurrence in that.

But this project, was also, overwhelmingly approved by the voters when it did go to them. So I I think that's known. This is not asking for a new thing. This is just asking for an extension of that time. So I I would ask for your, consideration of that.

Wanna add anything?

You there there's one other clarification I do wanna make too as well. You know, as Ryan mentioned earlier too, and I think everyone here agrees with it, we really wanna get Kiwit out of there. And this five year extension that we're talking about is not to keep Kiwit there for the five years. Again, like we mentioned, KeyWit with all of his equipment and so forth. The the contract right now says October, but we based on what we're seeing, it's gonna be May 2027.

So at that point in time, for sure, KeyWit with all of their equipment, barges, cranes, etcetera, all out, such that we could actually focus on the next aspect of work, which has a much smaller footprint. We're talking small tractors like Matt kinda mentioned earlier when we do this soil stabilization work as well as the planting work, you know, folks coming up with hand tools to be able to get that done. So what you're seeing out there right now is not what you're gonna be seeing for the entire five year. No. We really wanna make that clear. We want Kiwit out of there just as much as everyone here in the room does.

Thanks, Val. And maybe to follow-up on, yeah, those those that last phase of the the plant establishment. Yes. We we aren't gonna be out there daily watching the plants grow. But when a plant dies and it hasn't reached, you know, the three years, it's on the contract to replace it. We need to be able to legally access the site to replace it. So that's why we need the additional time to be able to go in there and do the work needed to make sure the park is back to the condition it was before we got there.

And if we can get done sooner than that, we'd be

happy to. I hope you're planning on fencing it because I have experience in another area of Oregon City where a a volunteer group that I have participated in planted a bunch of stuff, and somebody came with their truck and they dug them up, which was really not good. Any more any questions, gentlemen? More questions? Please go ahead. Is online wanting to speak. Okay. She now decided she wants to speak. She now has decided she wanted to speak. Yes? Mhmm. Sort of Are you saying yes? She does? Yes. Okay. Then put her on. Sorry. There's somebody online that just made up their mind that they wanna say something. So let's get them in.

Didi.

Hi, guys. I'm sorry. I just text somebody because I don't want to pass me by. I wanted to speak on nine a and nine b. Thank you everyone for speaking up. Raymond, you're right on target.

Dee you have to identify yourself for the record.

I know you forgot that. Oh. Sorry. Sorry. Thank you. I'm DD Dolster. I've lived in Oregon City for fifty years, and and I I support the right to vote. I'm I'm sorry I got called back up because everyone has so addressed all of our concerns, but They just need to come up with something better than what they offered before. And as a business, when you lose 65% of your business or 61 or even 50% of your business, it takes it's worse than starting a new business all over to capture that business again. Anyway, thank you very much. I'll save the rest of my time for nine b.

Thank you, Didi. Thank

you. So, I think based off of my comments, it's pretty clear that I'm not ready to, vote to approve any extension tonight. However, if in the future there is an IGA that comes across our desk that outlines key deliverables about not only the Quiet Zone and Old 82nd, but also the public access, the signage, and the other business concerns, and we are able to sign that and come to an agreement, then I would be happy to move forward, with the extension. I I recognize that the answer to a ballooning budget is not necessarily asking that you give us more money to do other projects. But the ask, at least for the two that I brought up, I don't believe would be a an unnecessary cost burden on you all.

It's more of a a time line and deliverables type of expectation that we would like to see there as much as I agree with the sentiment that you brought up, Raymond. So that's where I am, and I would be happy to move forward with this very important project so long as that spirit of partnership that I talked about earlier is there in the form of an IGA.

Michael?

Well, I'm not ready to go forward tonight either. For some of the things that I've already brought up, the questions that came up the other day that that haven't been, answered. But and this is just just came into my head when we when you started talking about, how significantly scaled back the presence will be once two it leaves. I'm leaning toward a two phase extension. One that would allow the in the water work and the, all the equipment associated with that through that May 2027 date, a little longer than a year from now, and and then a an additional time extension for the soil stabilization and the, creek restoration and landscaping and such.

We we need a way to continue to put pressure on getting that mess out of the river. And I know you wanna do that. We get that. But we've got businesses that deserve that. Our city deserves that. We deserve to get our park back. And yeah. So I that for me tonight, there are there are still too many open questions. Would wanna see in addition to what commissioner Marrow talked about, you know, let's see the signage that you're talking about, and let's get answers on some of those other questions that are still out there.

Mister Smith? Oops. Oh, sorry.

I I guess the the the question that what is the firm deadline that if we were to not take action or not decide to refer to the voters either way, that this ex that this current agreement ends, and they would have to vacate the the park property. Which even if they do, does not help the business access part of it. Wanna make that point as well. It it expired prior to November election.

Think when we discussed this, it expired before the November election, which meant it need need to be in the August, election in order to because the expiration is between the August and November elections. So it'd be a special election in August, which we'd have to look to back up at Clackamas County tax assessor. That's probably coming up pretty darn quick Okay. To get it on the ballot.

You can get an accurate number on that

for us? I'm sorry? You can

get an accurate date on that for us? Not not right now. Because it does I I think we're not going anywhere with this tonight. It would be my guess.

Rocky?

I'm not sure I wanna tie this up with a bunch of other projects and confuse it even more, but I I do think that we need at least some, plan to address the signage, to address the delineation of the work areas, things like that, which I think are pretty simple. We had some plan and and idea of that. I think I'd be, you know, close to being ready to go forward.

So I do wanna thank you for answering some of the questions we had tonight. I I definitely had in the the last meeting some frustration with my feelings of of really lack of of preparedness for the questions we had, last time we met. Where I'm at is is truthfully where I left off at the last meeting. I'm struggling reconciling the fact that, yes, this did get approved by our voters for four years. And I'm struggling with the idea of taking that and saying, well, I know you approved it for four years and I, you know, being on the commission, am I gonna say, hey.

We're gonna go ahead and extend. I don't feel good about that. And I I feel in this horrific position truthfully of understanding the value of this project. I want this project done. I think all of us agree this is a a very important project to be completed. But I don't feel right to my constituents, hey. I know you guys voted for four years, and I'm an approver for another five. That's kinda where I'm sitting.

Well, I'm at this point in time, I'm leaning towards this side of the table. I agree with you that trying to convolute it with a couple of other things, you know, as I tried to explain to my friend Raymond that that was mixing different types of fruit that didn't go together. I appreciate all of the comments that I've heard tonight plus the ones I've heard, being out and about in the community. Appreciate the fact that staff came in to clarify some of the misinformation that I've been hearing out there because people bless your hearts, but there's been a lot of misinformation out there. And we all know how things are today where people get one fact and then it goes off somewhere else.

So while I appreciate the comments about running a project, being a project manager, I don't think there's anybody in this room that can tell me that they have experience in doing a, retrofitting a bridge. So let me just leave it at that. I don't think anybody in this room does. I don't think ODOT did before they started doing this either. So we're all kind of in this together.

This is a project that is of of statewide significance, not just us, but we are the ones that are being impacted. So I guess I would like to, go with my opinion somewhere between where Mike is and where Adam is and see what we can, we still have time to make full decision on this, but I guess I would like to see some of the things that they talked about. Can we get a commitment that those things are gonna get done, in a very specific time period like yesterday? Again, I feel the pain of the businesses. I had, I will say this, Holly, that I had a family member recently stay at the Best Western, and I asked them about whether or not they were they were aware of the noise.

I told them that before they went, and they still wanted to stay there anyway because it's closer to where I live. So it wasn't super impactful, but then again, this is a very unique person there. They they knew what was going on with the project. So I'm I'm sensitive to that, and I understand that. Again, I think ODOT has done a good job of explaining to us real property impacts versus the other impacts, and the city does have impacts.

I'm sure that our parks director and, assistant director could tell us about some of the things that have impacted our, facility down there that, you know, is eventually going to get rectified. So do we need to make a motion, or do you have you have enough direction from us? What would what would you recommend?

I ask you one more thing?

Oh, please. I

I I gotta get this out there. I'm not as much as I agree with, in theory, with what commissioner Wilson said, I don't see any way that I can support a public vote, to be perfectly honest. The a number one capital letter giant text sizes get this done. ODOT does not have a good reputation. And if this goes to a vote in the fall and it is turned down This will be based on this project will take even longer.

Guaranteed. And that would be the worst possible outcome. So for that matter, I and I'm I'm gonna get it out there now. I I just don't see that public vote as as being workable. Philosophically, yes. As a practical matter, the possible outcome would be exactly what we do not wanna have happen.

And on that comment, I I did not say this in my last comments, but I agree with talking about this partial or this two phase funding.

I mean, two phase approval. Extension.

I think that's a good thought, and maybe that's something we could consider.

Is that something we'd like to consider tonight, or do we want to think about it somewhere and have staff come back,

please? So I'm I will move that we direct staff to begin negotiations with ODOT to construct some sort of agreement that outlines our expectations for signage for public access for the two infrastructure projects that I brought up and and about how we can possibly expedite those timelines and exploring a two tiered or two phased approach that would be contingent upon those milestones being reached. For

purposes of getting it discussed, I'll second it. Anything else, or shall we vote?

Call the roll, please. Commissioner Mitchell. Aye. Commissioner Wilson. Aye. Commissioner Smith. Aye. Commissioner Marle. Aye. Mayor McGrath. Aye. Motion passes.

And I will say just as an added caveat that We need to get the second phase of whatever we're going to do done, within the next couple of months as well. Not just this one phase part, but let's get the other part so that it is in place and we have something to hold people's feet to the fire. Yes. We will. Okay.

We're going to take a, very brief break. Is is it that's a tin till on there? K. So we'll come back at a little before nine. Get the show on the road.

No. Yeah.

Oh, there's a tissue.

What? I was keeping this from condensating on my, on my, on the counter here. Oh, I was gonna say I was I hope you weren't crying. So alright. We Are ready?

Yes. Yes. I'm about to be in this next.

Apparently, mister Bonington has replied. Somebody sent him the video.

My bad. It's gonna be sticky, though.

Ready whenever you are, Kevin. Okay. We are called back to order, and our, next item on the agenda is item nine b. And, I'd like to turn this over to our assistant city manager, miss Troutman, please.

Yes. Mayor and commission.

So we are back this evening to continue our discussion about the McLaughlin Promenade. In your packets this evening, you'll see that there are the draft acknowledgment letters for the remaining properties where final decisions have not been made. They're relatively similar to the versions you saw at the last work session, with a couple minor changes based on feedback from you all. Additionally, you'll see that, the parking options that were previously discussed are still in the staff report. So option a is unchanged. For option b, you'll see there is a note that OC Garbage confirmed that the dumpster, which appears to be blocking the last parking stall, can be moved. Option c, the note that's added was just simply that this

was That belongs to the apartment complex.

Yes. Okay. They said it can be moved. Okay. Option c, this was the preferred option of the work session.

Just wanted to highlight that, and that's what the note at the end of this one. Then I did want to, speak briefly about the discussion on closing Promenade Street and South Bluff Street and installing bollards. So we did speak with, Clackamas Fire. They don't have an issue with the city using bollards both on Promenade Street and South Bluffs Street, and you'll see there's an attached map that shows the approximate location of where those bollards would go, as well as well as end of road markers where appropriate. There is a possibility this option could necessitate a new driveway on the Northwest Side Of 4th Street for the placement of bollards to allow access to their property without the need for another driveway.

There is a map showing this, and you actually received a letter at about 04:30 or 05:00 this evening from this particular property owner. I did

not see that. You what was that? I said I did not see that.

So think Jacob I saw Jacob forwarded that. Yeah. So it it did come in at the last minute. So, apologies for that being last minute. But when I spoke with him today, that was the soonest he could submit it.

Additionally, I would did wanna note that if Promenade Street were to be closed, that garbage pickup would need to be moved to High Street. And then the other thing I wanted to point out about, closing down Promenade Street is that the property located at 421 High Street has a parking lot with angled parking spaces. So there'd be two spaces lost, and then the remaining spaces essentially wouldn't function very well at all because any vehicles in them would have to back out completely onto High Street. Again, there's

a map. Are you pulling those maps up? Somebody? I have the hard copies here. But

Give me a minute. They all are in the packet.

That's okay. Yep.

That's a cool The map with 421 High Street is prom Promenade Ballard's page two.

While he's doing that, you know, my question last time was hope beyond all hope that those last remaining property owners, did any of them get back to you at all after all of this time?

We did not hear from every single property owner. However, thus far, all of the properties where final decisions have been made, in a couple instances, contact with code enforcement did have to happen, but as far as I know, everyone has complied, and, you know, removed whatever items they were asked to remove.

I'm just talking about the ones that are in the last few that are in the packet.

So the last few that are in the packet

Some of them had had things that had to be removed.

Correct. But these last few that are in the packet, final decisions have not been made, so final acknowledgment letters are still in here for approval. These were ones where, they were impacted by the decision on parking Okay. And just other minor details. So these have not these final letters have not gone out yet even though I have had communication with most of these property owners at one point or another.

Prom. 406 prom.

So 406 was the property owner that actually contacted us today. Okay. 408, no. I don't recall speaking with them. I do recall speaking with, the owners of 110, 112, 114, and 116.

Yeah. I'm not worried about the DFW. I know we've been in

touch them. We've spoken with the owners of 311 High Street, 118 Promenade Street. We have spoken with them. Okay. I haven't heard anything from 306 Promenade Street. We have spoken with the owner of 302, and we have certainly spoken with the VFW, as you said.

So Thank you. Mhmm.

Are you gonna sorry. Are you

pulling up the maps? Okay.

So this is this is the, particular section

that

I was speaking of where 421 has the angled parking. You'll see, I guess, on the far right of the image. Yes. And so these spots.

Okay. Yes. You would

lose about two here, and then these ones effectively wouldn't be usable if you come in like this and you have to back all the way out. So not impossible, but not likely. And this is the lot I was speaking of with that could have a blocked access.

Which one?

This property here owns this lot. They use it for parking.

Four o So if you

put the if you put the bollards here and block this entirely, then they lose access to this lot and may need a driveway here. Or you put the bollards in here, it allows them access to their driveway, but then other people can get in this way.

I'm sorry. I'm that is a vacant lot, not a parking lot. So somebody's been using it for parking even though it's not a parking lot.

So the owner I believe it's the owner next door at 406, and, yes, he uses it for parking.

K. Well, it's not a parking lot. He wants to use it for parking, and he can develop it as a parking lot. But so you're saying that if we put the bollards where they're showing on here?

That would still allow them to access that lot for parking. Otherwise, we would be blocking access to their parcel.

And we wouldn't wanna give them an access off of, 4th Street?

We could.

We could. That is an option.

Mhmm.

So we just wanted to point out that those things came up when we looked at adding bollards. These were just things for your consideration. So with respect to the parking options and the potential closure of Promenade Street, This was the information we wanted to make sure you all had for consideration this evening. And then the other part that we wanted to bring to your attention was that when we go for the designation process for the charter park, you know, we will need a legal description of the property. In that discussion, we recognize that we do think there should be a dedication of right of way, 15 feet West of Singer Hill Road and then the entire area East of Singer Hill Road, which is essentially the Rock Cliff.

The 15 feet, West of Singer Hill Road would simply allow for the potential expansion, say, of the road or sidewalks if that were to be necessary and also for us to maintain utilities in that area. And then there's one other final area of right of way at the opposite end of the promenade that the chief actually wanted to quickly present, that would be potentially used for emergency access.

Yeah. Mayor commission, good evening. Public works, myself, and ODOT have been having several discussions of emergency routes through the city when there's, say, Rock Falls that we've had or something in the tunnel, and and when they need to shut down ninety ninety for whatever reason. We currently have plans in place for if there are emergency shutdowns from South 2nd all the way to South Bend Road. However, there is no plans currently for South 2nd to all the way to 205.

So with that, most recently, we had a rock fall where cars are backed up for many miles, and so we've been having discussions. One plan in that we are exploring is to make a turnaround on Old Tumwater, for, semi trucks if there's a 99 e closure for the northbound lane so they can go around. So with that, we looked at the map, and you could see it's attached. There is a section of the park on the South Side Of Tumwater that is not even usable, but we'd like to dedicate that as a right away so we can explore these options and have a possible truck detour route, for trucks if we need to.

So right now, there's not enough room there for trucks to get around the corner?

So it's currently designated for if southbound traffic is shut down, that they'll take a left on South sec or, yeah, South second, turn left onto Tumwater, and then continue back northbound onto 9090 to 205. Currently, the way the angle of Tumwater is, there is no way for a semi to make that angle turn. And many, many years ago, Tumwater used to be open to the public. That's now shut down, and it was designated for an emergency turnaround for for semi trucks. However, we wanna explore the option with engineers and turning radiuses to be able to reconfigure that, maybe use bollards, but also to allow for trucks to head back southbound on 9990 if for some reason 99 E gets shut down between South 2nd and, say, the tunnel or Main Street.

But this

But currently, there's no way for a semi to make that turn without reconfiguring that intersection.

So what about would this, in any way, affect the BFW's crazy driveway?

No. It would not affect that at all. It's just that and what we're exploring is putting up ballers in there so people can't use that, being able to remove those when there is an emergency, and we have to make that as a designated truck wrap.

Okay.

K. Can we get back to the bollard issue with the two proposals here? So what is the so if we change the parking, the I don't know which one's number one and which one's number two, but I'm looking at both of them together. So you have the property that's oh gosh. I can't even read that. Is it 42421? 421 is

the office building. Is that what your

My eye doctor's gonna be excited about that. Yeah. So if we change the parking there, both of those proposals have the ballers in the same location. But if we adopt a different parking configuration, that helps alleviate some of the issue. Correct?

So the parking configurations in that we've outlined in the options Right. No. They those would not be impacted by the bollards. We're talking about the parking that is around the building currently. Yes. I'm not talking about

the bollards. I like where they are. That's fine. I'm just looking at the parking layout that would help alleviate parking lot. That angled parking that they they wouldn't be back now.

So none of the parking options presented would change that parking lot. It's not our lot. Yeah.

Oh, so they still well, okay. Alright. I was trying to solve the problem there. Okay. Never mind. The one that you that you show on the moving south, so the one that's got the angled where it shows garbage dumpster, I like that one the least. I like the other one where it goes right by the garbage dumpster and then goes across. And then going on down, you've got let's see. It makes the turn. Those both look okay.

And then you've got the top one there where it says, oof, promenade. Yeah. All those going across, that all seems fairly reasonable. I guess the the big issue is where it is on 4th Street or there's a concern about 4th Street.

And are looking at the maps for the bollards or for the parking options? I'm looking at,

well, I'm not looking at anything at the moment. I'm looking at them both of the maps, but I'm trying to process yours your comment that you said that the law office would not have access to the lot where there is parking.

Right. There are lots. Yes. If the bollards were put in a certain place. Right. Unless we added a driveway on 4th. Right.

Are you on Promenade Bollards page one? I think that's the one

So, unfortunately, this leads to another Yes. Right. Unfortunate circumstance. If that person wants to continue to use that as a parking lot, because I thought it was a developable developable lot. It's not developed for parking So meet our city standards.

So the one on the screen right now tends to shut down access to the park.

Well, to the lot. The lot.

Yeah. I'm saying. But yeah. Yes. But if you look at Promenade Ballard's page two, we allow some access. I think that's really, you know, some of the the difference here. How much where would the commission like to go concerning vehicular access into the park?

My preference would be no vehicles in the promenade.

And my feeling would be be consistent. Either it's not at all or it's open to everybody. Yeah. Because this half and half, you know, I don't understand letting one person use a lot and not the other people. It it makes

no sense at you, Promenade Ballard's page two really isn't an option with the ones on the screen right now.

Yeah. Not for me.

Can we go back to the other one, please?

Yeah. I think that's been the con consensus all along is that we said no no access no parking, no driving, no whatever on the promenade. So you're right. We can't have one person have it and the other one not.

So then I think we're down to kind of this proposal here where we're limiting all ax all vehicular access into the park. Or if that's not acceptable, then we're not gonna bother anything because then everybody would have access Right. To avoid one person or or or a certain loop having it, not another. I think that's kinda, I think, where the decision point is here then.

And I could go either way. I know that the majority of the commission would not agree with that, but I would go either way on that.

Do you want us to look at the parking options?

Hang on. A question. If if you look over the angled parking clear over on 3rd Street, there there is some area right there where you've got the cursor. Up.

Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. There's some area to turn around. Mhmm. If you look at the one over on next to the next to 421 High, if there's a car in that last spot, there's nowhere to turn around. Mhmm. So what would happen if we slid those bollards up so that right in that area, you've got the full width to turn a car around? You're

talking about Evan, can you move the cursor up there where you I think I know exactly.

I'm talking about right there. I'm talking about moving those bollards up to that area so that the area where he's got the cursor moving right now is the full width of the street where somebody can turn around because I would hate

to see somebody have some stuff. It's private parking lot. It's not a street.

So it's not any of our property.

Who it? The the parking lot. The parking lot. Okay.

The parking lot is not public. I so they just need to straight or you'll have

to restrain that.

Is it right where your cursor is pointing now? Is that park property?

Yes. That's part

of the promenade.

Okay. That's part of the promenade. Yes.

Okay. The bollards are right on the property.

Right on the line. Okay. The bollards

are on the property. This was that one section that was vacated, but then it kept a bike and ped easement over it for some reason. Right. This was that one section that was kinda odd relative to the other areas that had been vacated. No.

It shouldn't have vacated that.

I'm just I'm just suggesting moving that that line of bollards up. Right. So now there's that space right where his cursor is for those cars that are parked to turn around. So the solution is

they lose two parking spaces because the alternative is we are being inconsistent with what everyone else except for me has said about having no vehicles in the the park, and that would allow it to compensate two parking spots for a private parking lot. So my opinion is all or nothing. You'd go right on the line if you guys wanna have no parking in the park or the other option, which I'm also okay with, no bollards at all.

Well, that's not my preference.

Well, I

know it's not. So but but this halfway

Yeah.

I wasn't decision isn't He's just making it he's trying to make a suggestion Yeah. To allow them to

turn Commissioner Smith, I didn't think about the inconsistency. So yeah. I would be I would be okay with this one.

So then the property owner will have to just eliminate two spaces Right. To match the other. If if if if their choice. But Yeah. It's their choice. Adam, any thoughts?

No. I I agree, with commissioner Mitchell. Okay.

Okay. Does that help? Yes. So bollards throughout. Bollards throughout. Okay. Alright. And then as far as parking options, is the general preference still then to Stripe according to the plan we have in option, I think, it's c?

Well, let me, before we get further discussion on that, let me call up, Jim Nacita. I'm not for sure which part of this he would like to comment about, but he has the option to do all of the above before we make any con excuse me, any consensus. And then we also have Dee Dee online. So you wanna give me a quick minute, Jim, while you're sitting there if we get Dee Dee on? Thank you so much.

I'm here if you are.

We are ready for you, miss Galstrid.

Hi. This hi, missus Didi Galstrid. I live in Oregon City. I have a little bit of concern about vacating. The bollards are strictly up to the residents.

But the vacate of the little area for turnaround, I didn't realize there was gonna be bollards there. I didn't see that on the plan. However, I remember when there were when it was an active road, the one I'm talking about is the turnaround by Moot, where you wanna put it for trucks emergency turnaround by DFW. I consistently see people going is nor north southbound towards Camby? Anyway and up towards Camby, I see them cut across head on traffic traffic to to go go off off that that road road consistently.

I see that about once a month. If they widen it to make a turn, I'm afraid people are going to cut across that 99 to get on that little loop. It's just we'll only turn it into a circle of emergencies because you can turn around. But if it's a whole bunch of people turning around, it will just get stuck in a donut because it'll get gridlocked. However, didn't know there there are gonna be Ballard's there and only open during emergency.

Ballard's. Yes. Mike. Thank you. Sorry. So Yeah. We need to look at that.

I really hate to vacate any any any park properties without a vote. However, the the the ballots ballots are

In my opinion.

A consideration because that should not be open to traffic coming through there. I've almost been hit coming out of the DFW more than once. Well, kind of. Almost hit. I have to go out there very carefully, but also Damon. He commented, woah. There was a car. It happens frequently. Cars going through there illegally even though it says not to go through. The vacate the the vacate Mhmm.

I think

we're The vacancy considered for Singer Health, I don't agree with all. So I will leave it at that. I really don't think we ought to vacate city property. Thank you. I'm sorry. I wasn't very clear. Thank you.

So Scott pulled up the aerial, which is a lot clearer than that. I mean, I I know what you're what we're trying to do there,

but That's not that's the real.

Is that what? Yeah. I know. That's different. So, anyway, pull if you can we pull up the aerial for Tom water?

The Tom water one. Yeah.

The Tom water one. Yeah. Not that one. Yeah. Okay.

And

so where would the bollards go?

Oh, just for that little section. Oh, that makes

Why don't we put the bollards where it says Tumwater Drive and

We would we would still need to negotiate with this with ODOT. I think I'm I'm pretty you all probably remember. This used to be open two way. Oh, yeah. Yeah. As part of some of the Danger. Sure which project it was, but it ended up going down to one way Yep. The do not enter sign. And it was, you know, essentially part of turning around some trucks depending on which direction they were coming in. So if this was something that the commission would be interested in, you know, we would still need to negotiate with ODOT on design, access, bollard, signage.

It was just an idea as we've had a couple closures lately on ninety nine e, and we're, you know, just trying to struggle with some of these large trucks coming through, especially once we get a quiet zone on on on on bottom of Singer Hill. Like, we're just we're just trying to identify a little bit better routes to make that go a little bit smoother. Because once we get those semis up into the neighborhoods, it really bogs things down even worse than just having the cars come through. Okay.

So this would be for, like, any big truck or this is just the ODOT trucks coming from here?

This is

a This is large trucks during an emergency closure. We see sometimes we've seen them where rock falls or they're doing work on 99 E where they've shut it down for a week at a time, and we have to get those trucks around. Sometimes they're shut down for a couple hours, so it all depends on the length of time, but we're just trying to explore, as the city manager said, a way to get very large trucks back onto the highways and the interstates instead of onto our city streets. They get stuck on Singer Hill because their GPS takes them that way. They're not supposed to. They go up South End. It's weight restricted. They go up South Center. That's weight restricted. They go under the bridge at Washington And 12th.

Like, they don't know. So we're trying to come up with a way to get semis back onto the freeways and the interstates

and avoid your semis. Onto the onto the highway?

Go on the

other around. So the the master plan, which they have, is we have signage in place. We'll have flaggers depending on the length of the time to direct trucks to get her back around. So they will if they're for this route, this is for trucks that are going northbound, and there's a closure between, say, Tumwater and Main Street. Those semis have nowhere to go besides going up South 2nd onto our city streets currently. There's no way for them to turn around and get back to, either 9090 or or an interstate. So that's that's what we're trying to

Okay. So you're saying the red line, they're coming down. Let's locked up somewhere. They come down Tumwater Drive. They are on Tumwater, and then are they trying to get back to the end? Are you trying to No. Go back

to South 2nd. South 2nd and then

back down to McLaughlin.

And we'll send them back to Camby. Yep. Back to Camby. And they'll figure it Yep.

And and ODOT's exploring because now they have some of our emergency routes that we had planned for, like, Central Point. There's now way restricted bridges on there. So ODOT is working with the county, us, to figure out some different ways to get, to get these very large vehicles back onto the interstates and off of these way restricted roads. Well So this is one solution that we created.

Okay. Why don't we just solve part of the problem and don't allow vehicles to go on there either? Just block that off at Tumwater and McLaughlin and only have it open if you have some emergency because I haven't seen what Didi's talking about, but I can only imagine people do dumb stuff.

I I would imagine during rush hour, people shoot across there to

to jump in. Yeah. And we should not they should Well, I that's why

I say we need to talk to ODOT. There's probably a reason we haven't bothered it, and it's probably an agreement with ODOT so that somebody doesn't go flying in there and hit a bunch of bollards would be my guess.

Well, that's their problem. Then it becomes our problem.

It's it's

all about flying over there. Yeah.

I It's it's a concept Yeah. Where you

can discuss with them for that conversation. Yep. I mean, I I know what you're talking about. I saw a a trailer with a big truck, and he was carrying steel beams on 7th Street. And I just thought, what are you doing up this street? He was going up the hill. He went to Warner Milne. He went to Warner Parrott, and then out on Central Point Road. I don't know where the guy was going with that stuff, but he was taking up all the road.

And that's what we're trying to alleviate. Yeah. The other alternatives is go up, Center Street, take a right on 5th, either go down Washington or go up Lynn Avenue. I don't have my street either.

So that that's

this is the this is the

the best solution that we can come up with during an emergency closure. Yeah.

Okay. We'll get us some more information on that after we talk to our friends at ODOT. Okay. So what do we wanna do about this parking? We got option c. Yes.

We still have

Oh, yes. Waiting. Okay. So, Didi, are you done? She's done. Go ahead, Jim. I'll say, before

I start to commissioner Wilson, I'm not speaking on the bollards for the parking at all. So if you if you all wanna discuss that, that's fine. I'm just talking about my house.

Yes. We'll go with your house.

Now or do you wanna

Now. Okay.

Okay. Okay. Fine. Thank you. Madam mayor, commissioners, Jim. I live at 302 Bluff Street in Oregon City. You've got my email from this afternoon. I said I'd review some past meeting tapes. I apologize. I did if you sent it

at 04:30, I did not see it. I'm sorry.

I can't remember what time I sent it.

I was not even home.

So my my draft letter says that if my, stairs get destroyed, I can't replace them. Okay? I object to that language. And the reason I went back to the past tapes. So this destroyed language, as far as I can discern, originated on August 6, 123 High Street.

There was language in their letter that if their shed got destroyed, they would not be able to rebuild in the promenade. So 214 Bluff Street was, later. A deck was allowed, and there was no destroyed language in that letter. I was, later, and, my property got, discussed twice during the first discussion. Mister Conkel suggested that the destroyed language be in my letter.

The commission did not agree. Later, in the second discussion of my property, mister Mitchell commissioner Mitchell said that I should have the right to rebuild my stairway. And the mayor said, quote, I have no problem with that. In the January work session, there was no destroyed language in my draft letter. Now there is.

I don't know what happened. I've watched that tape too. I couldn't comment in a workshop session, but I did watch the tape, and I didn't see anything about this destroyed language. I have to point out that, in in addition to 24214 Bluff Street that has no destroyed language, I know of at least two of the licensing agreements that have no destroyed language either. There was a vote on my property, that was two to two.

It would have passed without the destroyed language except for commissioner Smith voted no, about his general overall concern about parking, not about my property. So if if this destroyed language is included in in my letter, it's going to cause me a huge hardship because I'm trying to maintain the property right now, and I've removed, I've removed my steps because they weren't in good shape. Even in the future, if a tree were to fall on my property and destroy the property, a future owner wouldn't be able to reconstruct its steps and get out to the 2nd Floor. So I would request that that language be removed and the January language be used. Thank you.

Thank you.

We wanna deal with this particular issue first before we get into the parking.

Okay. I'm fine with that.

Yeah. But I I just have a question. If if this is I did read the the email from mister Nasita, and I am curious if that is in fact the case that we have not included language about if it's destroyed in other decks, we are intending it on, mister Naseed, as I I do agree with Rocky about this concept of consistency.

So I would just point out that my my recollection was that this was brought up and asked for at the work session, but it wasn't mentioned before. So to the extent that there's inconsistency I mean, we've been working on this for almost two years now. Mhmm. Yeah. So, yes, admittedly, I think there is some inconsistency.

I've done my best to follow the direction given during these meetings, but there has been a lot of flip flopping back and forth on what's been decided. And I understand that because this has been very difficult to to address. Each situation is unique. But, yes, I can't sit here and say that we've been perfectly consistent on everything, that we've done. I mean, even just the format of going from encroachment licenses to acknowledgment letters, like, there has been a lot of changes over time as this has been worked through. So, no, I can't sit here and tell you everything is perfectly consistent because I'm sure it's No.

I I appreciate it. I know you've put a substantial amount of work into this, and and I think over the last two years as we've had meetings that are, you know, inconsistently held where we discussed it, it is a little bit of wait. What did we say at the last one? Yeah. What did we talk

about at this one?

So I I absolutely wanna acknowledge that too. And clearly highlight.

We we can go either way. Like, for example, 306 Promenade, mister mister Creech. Creech. Deck extends 8.7 feet into the Promenade. In addition, this area has been into landscapes and it's being used for vehicle parking.

This letter serves as formally acknowledged that the city is granting you permission for your deck and stairs to remain in the encroachment area, provide there is no alteration or further expansion of the promenade and if destroyed, are relocated within the boundaries of your property. I mean, we we can go through each one of these. We've been back and forth on what can be replaced, what can't. Some encroachments were acceptable, some weren't. But here's an example where that language exists for a different property concerning it, you know, the the the the the the the depth of porch is on the prominent property. So this this indicates it's destroyed. We can go through each one of them and change it to whatever you'd like it to be.

Okay. We have the one at 408, and that is access deck and portion of deck that extends in the promenade. I gotta go find the letter. Maybe that one isn't maybe that one got resolved, and it's not in here. Oh, here it is. 408. Okay. Yeah. That one oh, that's it does say, if destroyed, these items will be located within the boundaries of your property. Yep. 406Bluff,

Same exact language. Right.

Yeah. So you got 4 yeah. I'm looking at 408.

So we got

it's right next to 421. Yeah. I I agree we need to be consistent. My bigger concern about 406 is that it is on the city's inventory. Find the picture again.

I'm sure the stairs probably have some significance. I'm not sure about the deck part, but we wanna just be consistent with all those three and basically say that they can remain. But if they're re if they well, there's two options. Let's say the tree falls and and kills the stairs, so then could they be rebuilt? If the whole house gets destroyed and it has to be rebuilt, that's a different story because then you're you might have the option to move stuff back out of the promenade. So do we wanna change the letter to say that the encroachment for the stairs on those three properties can remain?

They can remain.

That's what I said.

It's can they be rebuilt if they're

Yes.

That's the second question. Right. They can remain, and do we want to allow them to

be rebuilt if they're you know, if it's being repaired? And I I also hate to do this.

Is there What's what's the difference of of

I I I see there's a difference, though, between destroy and repair.

Yeah. I mean, they can if if Jim said that his stairs were rickety, so let's say he has to come in. He has to repair them. Mhmm. They're still there. They're not being expanded. They're not being they're gonna be done in the same manner, as they were. If it's just I yeah. Destroyed, I don't know what that destroy means the whole thing's gone. You know? There's not any remnant left. This one's 5.3 feet. The issue has to do with the fact that there isn't that's part of their access to get into their properties.

I don't know. I I don't know how we've, you know, we've done all the back and forth on whether or not it destroyed or not. But Let's just say it can be rebuilt

to exactly the way it was, not anything further.

Yeah. That I think that was what I was gonna say.

Yeah.

Whether it's repaired because it's in poor condition or whether it's destroyed by a tree or whatever, I don't have a problem with it being replaced as as long as the footprint doesn't get Doesn't change. Yeah.

As as the footprint doesn't change.

And I think we can be consistent with that across all the properties.

Yeah. The one at 406, I think the property line is, like, right where the right there. That's what the previous owner told me. We have consensus on that? K. Yes. I got a yes. I got a yes.

I do still struggle with the idea of because there's a difference between a stairwell that's an entrance to your home and a deck. I would agree. So I have a hard time with that. With the deck? Well, if we're going to be consistent about allowing the stairs, I do have a problem with maintaining that consistency for something like a deck that is not as necessary to the household. You're you're talking

about a deck that does not provide access that that is not the access to the house. Right.

Yeah. Yeah. I don't think any of these are that.

Well, mister Nacita is here.

It's a

what? You need to be on line. Sorry. Hey. Nope. You need to be on You were used to be up here. You know, you can't talk from the audience.

Sorry. So I wasn't talking about mister Nasita's property. I was talking about that's one of the ones where I would want to see that. But if we're maintaining that consistency for the other properties with encroachments that include something like a deck, I have a problem with that, allowing including language that would allow it to be rebuilt substantially similar.

I don't have a I don't have a problem with the stairs. This one is goes up to their front door or their door door. Is this like a secondary entrance? I thought the entrance was over on the other side.

We could say something like structures that lead to the primary entrance of the residence. Maybe that's some sort of middle ground. But I think if I'm recalling how I voted in the past, one of the reasons why I supported the inclusion of the destroyed language was because I wanted it to be consistent across the structures, including things like decks that are not as necessary to be rebuilt. But I would be willing to go somewhere in the middle of recognizing those that are more necessary for the dwelling than us.

Primary access. Yeah. Okay. I'm I'm good with that. Yep. Me too. K. We're all with that.

Perfect.

You gotta be on the mic. You have to come up to the Well

We decided that in cases, which I believe is yours, that if if the stairs were destroyed, they would be allowed to re be rebuilt because they provide the primary access to the

home. What about the deck?

I think the deck is a landing. I think we just use deck generically throughout this. Right. I think you're gonna you're gonna you're gonna have stairs attaching to what we call a deck, which could also be called a landing. Right. My understanding is you want us to change these letters and go house by house. And if you have you have stairs or a deck or a landing that's on public property that leads to a front door Primary. You could rebuild it forever. Could you just Oh, during the time of the license agreement.

Could you just nod when I asked this question? Worse. No. I'm not gonna have you come back up.

And and to a substantially similar footprint.