Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I can take that. Thank you. police. recording in progress. Call

uh call to order the city of Sherwood Planning Commission meeting for March 24th, 2026. Roll call. Chair Simpson here. Commissioner Tatson here. Commissioner Vance here. Commissioner Kai here. Commissioner Barnes here. Commissioner Widola

present. All right. Excellent. Uh the consent agenda uh consists of two items. The October 28th and the February 24th minutes. Um I spoke to staff prior to the meeting on the October 27th minutes. Item seven. Um the recording was not clear and I just wanted for clarification. I did not have a meeting with the applicant. Prior to the meeting, the applicant approached me and I directed him to staff and so they're going to uh correct minutes cut out. So I would propose edit on item number seven on the October 28th minutes. Are there any other corrections or additions before we call for vote? All right. Is there a motion to approve the amended consent agenda? So move second.

All right, it's been moved and seconded to approve the consent agenda as edited. All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries. Um is our council leaison on this evening remotely? Do we know? Nope. All right, proceeding on to item four, staff announcements.

Um, as the commission knows, we have a vacancy on the plan commission. So, we will be advertising that uh come April and hopefully seed a new commissioner by the end of June, end of July. Okay, that's all I have.

Oh, wow. Moving right along. All right. Uh, next agenda item is community comments. These are comments that are limited to those items that are not already on the agenda. I do not have any blue cards for anybody if you wish to speak on something that's not already on the agenda. All right, then we'll move right on to public hearings. All right. The public hearing on Oldtown strategic action plan is called to order. The purpose of this hearing is to provide the public with an opportunity to testify and provide information to the planning commission concerning the Oldtown Strategic Action Plan. The commission will conduct tonight's hearing in the following order. Staff will present a brief presentation of the plan followed by questions if any by the planning commission. We will then open the hearing for public testimony and each person's time will be limited as follows. Um the applicant which is the city this evening will have 30 minutes split between presentation and rebuttal. Persons in favor of the application four minutes each. Persons opposed four minutes each or neutral four minutes each. There'll be rebuttal opportunity from the applicant which is the remainder of their 30 minutes. We will then close the public hearing. Final comments by staff, questions of staff if any by the commission, discussion and deliberation by the commission. A recommendation to city council may be made at the close of this hearing or the matter may be continued to a time and date certain. If the matter is continued to a certain date, this will be the only notice of that date you receive. Staff will recognize people who have signed up to speak 24 hours in advance to provide testimony virtually. Um, for this hearing, staff did not receive any

notification in advance from anyone wanting to provide testimony virtually. If you wish to speak this evening, please fill out one of the blue testimony forms and submit it to the planning staff. The planning commission chair will recognize people who wish to speak and any questions should be addressed through the chair. When you come to the microphone, please state your name and address for the record as this hearing will be recorded. And please speak clearly into the microphone. Please note that failure to raise an issue with enough detail to enable the commission and city staff an opportunity to respond to the issues precludes an appeal to city council or the land use board of appeals. on that issue. This evening, the planning commission will make a recommendation to the city council. The city council is the final decision maker. A tenative city council public hearing date on this matter is scheduled for April 7th. I will now turn to staff to present the plan.

Thank you, Chair Simpson. Uh good evening everyone. My name is Sean Conrad. I'm the planning manager with the city of Sherwood. And tonight the plan commission is holding a public hearing on the Sherwood Oldtown strategic action plan. So the strategic action plan covers that area in Sherwood Notin's Oldtown that is highlighted um with the yellow dashes on the right side of the screen. Um city hall sits in about the center of Oldtown. And the purpose of the Oldtown strategic plan, uh, as stated up here on the screen, is to promote the ongoing revitalization of Oldtown as the traditional heart of the community. The strategic plan should reflect the interests of Oldtown businesses, the community's vision, and that of decision makers to be the roadmap with actionable steps focused on a five-year time frame. uh my presentation will be um more of a higher level on this plan because there's there's a lot to this plan. So um please feel free when I finish my presentation to ask any questions. U moving forward. So the plan really reflects a variety of um community input that's been acquired over the last year and a half. So as part of the plan, the city council established a project advisory committee and that project advisory committee helped steer our consultants on the uh the important aspects of what really should be reflected in this plan. Uh that project advisory committee was made up of both council members uh planning commissioner commissioner uh planning commissioner chair Simpson uh as well as business owners and property owners. We also had representatives from the cultural arts commission, the main street organization, the Oldtown Historical Society, and the Chamber of Commerce. In addition to the project advisory committee, two open houses were

held at the Sherwood Center for the Arts. They were held back in February and August of 2025. Um, our consultants as well as city staff presented the Oldtown Plan. um really uh solicited feedback from the residents and business owners and those attending and again a lot of that input helped shape the priorities in this plan. In addition, a business retention and recruitment survey was sent out to businesses and property owners in Oldtown and that survey information again was included in the Oldtown strategic action plan and helped shape the plan. uh staff and our consultants met with Sherwood Main Street and um the planning commission has also held work sessions as well as the city council. The city council has held several work sessions on this and really helped the consultants and staff on the priorities that the council wanted to see as part of this Oldtown strategic plan. So all of that has culminated in the draft that is b before the planning commission tonight. So the plan is comprised of three primary elements. Business health and growth, sense of arrival and infill and development. So on the sense of arrival, this uh the plan talks about improving access, wayfinding and streetscapes to strengthen Oldtown's visibility and identity. under business health and growth. The plan talks about supporting existing businesses, attracting complimentary new businesses and uses in Oldtown, expanding events and programming, and ensuring highquality compatible development in Oldtown. Under infill and development, this section talks about leveraging city-owned properties and targeted infrastructure investments. That would be streets, uh, roads, park spaces, particularly along Southwest Pine Street and Southwest Columbia Street to

catalyze redevelopment housing while maintaining design and character expectations of Oldtown. So, one of the directives in this Oldtown plan is to um consider initiating zoning updates and standards to modify the current zoning requirements in Oldtown as well as the design standards in Oldtown to really reflect what um the planning staff and the consultant heard from the community. So focusing on things like uh increasing more brick um as this photo shows here, prioritizing brick uh corners features uh vertical window bays, really getting elements of older oldtown buildings and having that reflected in new development and redevelopment when that occurs in Oldtown. Uh you see also priority would be canopies so weather protection um for most of the buildings and then uh a good transparency level at the street level. So trying to avoid any sort of blank walls at the street level, pedestrian level and really give um a better attractive uh retail interaction between the pedestrians, the street and the businesses in each of the buildings. In addition to to uh focusing on the design standards. One of the primary goals of this plan would be to uh look at redevelopment along Southwest Pine Street. On the right hand side here of the screen, you see Southwest Pine Street highlighted in orange, and it's got three different nodes, one at the the north, the middle, and the south end. and um the consultants um with the council's support really looked at Pine Street as being more of a catalyst for redevelopment in Oldtown primarily because there's several city-

owned properties here that the city could help with reinvestment in. So, as you uh as we look at reinvestment in Oldtown, this area right here, this is the south end of Pine Street and Columbia Street. on the right. This is the Sherwood Center for the Arts and Henry Square. And this is what it looks like today. So, this plan would encourage redevelopment and focus development that um encourages some uh multi-story buildings. Uh incidentally, site F, the city uh planning commission just recently approved a three-story apartment building for site F. So, that is actually under construction right now. but also encouraging redevelopment of city-owned sites here next to Canry Square and redevelopment, excuse me, and new development for this site um just uh adjacent to the Sherwood Center for the Arts. So, this is the focus of these um vacant sites in Oldtown and this is really what the the plan would steers us towards. In addition to redeveloping sites, the plan also looks at the sense of arrivals, so access ways and improvements into Oldtown. Um, you see here, uh, one of the things this plan would call for is an extension of Columbia Street from its current terminus here, right by the public works yard over to Southwest Oregon Street. This plan would also encourage extending the streetscape. So, the uh the streets in Oldtown, many of them have zero curbs and uh you know, the curbless streets going um right into the street, extending those up Pine Street and then including those street sections in other areas of Oldtown. So, continuing that pattern

and in the plan, this is just um three examples of of potential connection from Southwest Columbia Street here on the left up to Oregon Street. And you see each of them uh you know the intersection here at Southwest uh Oregon Street and the railroad is all slightly different but the intent is the intent is the same to extend Southwest Columbia Street over to Oregon thereby opening up development uh opportunities in this public works yard. Um the city is actively working on um relocating the public works department out to southwest Oregon Street and thereby allowing redevelopment u to happen in the future in this current public works yard. So um the plan would call for future studies to extend Columbia Street up to Southwest Oregon Street. Now as part of the plan like I said there were um there were three primary elements sense of arrival, business health and growth and infill and development. And under each of those primary elements of the plan there is actionable steps and this is just one of those uh actionable steps and you can see here under business health and growth. So the plan um offers a variety of incentives to provide additional investment into Oldtown. One of them, the first one there is to amend the Sherwood urban renewal plan and expand that urban renewal area into the uh Oldtown area, thereby bringing some additional investment dollars from the city potentially into Oldtown. Um activate an uh and refresh a facade grant program. Um offering permit relief. Uh number four, launch alley activation and mini grants. Uh this is an interesting one because we have received um public comment from some property and business owners in Oldtown

that would like to see some of the alleys actually u activated and maintained or upgraded I should say with paving and activating them with businesses actually fronting on the alleys instead of using them for uh you know typically trash and and back of house type of things. Um so this is just one of the actionable uh steps that's within the overall plan. This is just a snapshot though. So many of the other actionable the elements including sensor arrival and influent development also call for a number of actionable steps. But um this is just a snapshot of that. Um and really with that I that concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions the commission has, but um yeah, I uh Does anybody have any questions for staff before I call on testimony, public testimony? Okay. Um I have one blue card that someone signed up. Has does anybody um else want testify. Um, this person is uh neutral or other. So, any proponents or opponents that wish to testify? All right. Then we will call for neutral testimony. David Murray and is the microphone on when it's red there.

Hello. Oh, yay. Okay.

All right. Hey, my name is David Murray. I'm the executive director of the Sherwood Chamber, area Chamber of Commerce. The address is 16273 Southwest Railroad in Sherwood, area code 97140. Uh I'm here tonight to uh not object to anything. Uh just to make it clear, here to make an observation on several of the businesses and the chamber itself that the intersection of Colombia and Pine Street um appears that it might be a traffic jam and not facilitate uh traffic into the Oldtown area. So, um we couldn't find anything in the plan addressing traffic and that type of a concern, but want to take that opportunity to address that tonight. Am I done?

I'm done speaking. end up getting questions. Um well the question is will that be addressed and yes

we like the plan. It's it's really well thought out. Uh everybody's very much enthused about it and the development. We just found the one problem of okay you're teen Colombia right into Pine two lane traffic and how are you to facilitate traffic in that area as well as encourage um traffic into the Oldtown area for economic reasons. Right. Very good questions. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity. We'll be sure to answer that during the follow. All right. Thanks, Eric. Thank you, D.

All right. All right. I have other members in the audience. Does anybody else wish to testify before we um close the public hearing part of it? All right. Um I'm going to go ahead and keep it open till we ask all our questions. So um would staff like to provide information or rebuttal to the questions asked?

I can take that one. So yeah, thank you. Great observation, Dave. So um talking actually about that intersection that we can see there on the screen Columbia and Pine. So the just to clarify I think the expressed concern as we make that new connection to the proposed connection Colombia into Oregon Street there's going to be a new entrance essentially which is a key aspect of the plan. And the concern is as drivers make that connection into Oldtown on Colombia, eventually if they don't make another turn, they're going to hit that intersection of Columbia and Pine and potential concern about uh traffic backup. I think it's a valid concern. Um at a very basic level, the this this level of planning document simply doesn't get into traffic analysis. and not not to not to punt uh I guess for the future. Um I guess the other thing I'd say is you know we are proposing um a new connection from Colombia into Oregon Street which frankly is going to be a much more complex intersection. And this plan doesn't address that either. Um, and that's I think that's that's okay from a from a planning level given the the the the level uh of this of this. It's it's a very kind of high level visioning type. With that said, um prior to any type of um TSP, transportation system plan amendment, which is really where these ideas would get uh teeth, if you will. So, this action plan would lead to a transportation system plan amendment. Um and that's where it actually gets teeth. So if development happens, you know, the the intersection around that area would actually be constructed with development or the city at that point would have the ability to spend actually spend funds on those projects um with those and after

that transportation system plan amendment. When we do that amendment, we will absolutely have to look at fe you know actual feasibility including traffic analysis. So the short answer is it's a f it's it's intended to be a future step is the short answer. Um if there actually were any traffic um concerns in terms of like queuing backup the the short answer is that there would have to be what we call treatment of the intersection to address it. So whether it's I mean I don't think we're looking at a signal but um you know uh stop control potentially um turn restrictions you know things like that. So there could be um you know mitigation that would happen at that specific intersection at the Colombia and Oregon Street. We are it really is kind of a uh an open question as to what that looks like. Is it a roundabout? Is it um a reconfiguration of the signal? Is it a signal and stop signs? I think that's totally open and that frankly is a a fairly heavyduty traffic analysis by a professional traffic engineer. Um and so that would happen in the future. Um just in terms of like public input and transparency prior to doing a transportation system plan. So before this actually gets finalized, uh we would do public notice for that. it's a city council action. Uh there would be public notice and in a meeting just like this where if your property is along those routes or impacted uh you would get you would get notice and the ability to um to to testify. You know that what's showing here I understand there's um some some houses in there in this area in this vicinity. Um and so you know we don't while this is high level conceptual I think we you know appreciate the the impact I that any of

these lines would potentially have. And so there'd be a lot of engagement um and input prior to finalizing through the chair if you'd like. I think that's great. Thank you. We have time and it's, you know, nice to get it right the first time through.

Haven't used my four minutes yet. Um and and we love CNB. That's But you're doing such a good thing. We're routing all that traffic in new development and we get to a dead end and then we ignore how to get over to Oldtown. That's the concern. So, just plain and simple and respect what you say. I know it's going to be taken care of, but I just wanted to add that one point of clarity. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Um, commission have questions on or comments or additions on the plan itself? I had a couple of notes that I other people might bring up before I got there. Just as a followup to that, what what do you suspect will come first in order things? Would that development of the road and the infrastructure you're talking about come first and then everything else comes into place or do we start, you know, allowing development, building all this other stuff, then oh yeah, we also got to do that Oregon Street, you know, redevelopment as well. How what would you expect for order and that to just kind of make sure it all works out.

I I think we'll get some development along Columbia Street on the city-owned properties either before or with the transportation improvements. Um and well, let me clarify the the study to determine the alignment should be done before we get any significant development. So, the study will happen first, but oftent times the development is going to help pay for the improvements. So we the first step is to is to follow up on the on the study and figure out the the exact uh alignment as it makes its connection to Oregon Street and the configuration of that intersection and frankly a rough cost estimate as well. We put that into our transportation system plan as I mentioned. Um and then development could happen. We'd have a a reasonable estimate of um If we do, for example, a development agreement and it's a significant development, you know, there may be a development agreement to help pay for for those improvements. If they're smaller developments, you know, we'd be able to kind of call it a fee in get a fee in L that would ultimately help pay for that. Um, my hunch is that there's going to be developers that are interested to to do something like that. Um, if the economy slows down, uh, you know, there's a slowdown um in in interest in Oldtown, the that's when the city could step in and would be more appropriate for the city to step in and do a capital project and then try and encourage development because the infrastructure is, you know, more in place. So, um that would, you know, a project of this scale would likely need to be funded through an urban renewal amendment. You know, it's going to be a fairly expensive project to reconfigure that intersection. So, um we would likely need to find a source of money To me the the lowest hanging fruit would be

agency. So answer the question. Yeah. Most of the property owners city itself. Well the big the big the big questions I have are the rail crossing and the fire station. Those are two big elements just sitting there that have to be addressed before.

Yeah. And to be clear, to circle back to Commissioner Bansite, the city would be um potentially selling those properties. And so that would be revenue to the city plus there would be development fees and maybe a development agreement. So it wouldn't be the city um you know developing those that there would be a real estate transaction uh with developer interest and uh we have been doing tours. I mean it's not it's very common for all sorts of uh communities. We have an economic development manager. not here tonight, but um you know, we get phone calls from uh developers who are interested in and looking for uh opportunity sites for apartments or commercial or retail. So, we'll walk them around and there's a there's a lot of interest the the um climate for construction is not good right now. And so, we we haven't seen, you know, full follow through, frankly, just because interest rates, um construction costs, etc. It's really hard to get projects Um, but I think once that climate changes, there's going to be a lot of lot of interest. So, and then yes, uh, Chair Simpson, fire fire department and the railroad. I think we we and certainly in planning, but also specifically in the engineering department who are going to be responsible for designing this thing in the end and and the traffic engineers. Um, I think we understand it's it's um it's going to be a difficult task to design this and to work with the with the fire department to relocate. Uh, what I'll say is those conversations are already happening. There's there's ongoing meetings with between the city and fire department um to to figure out a plan to allow station 33 to stay in the area is is the short of it while the road connection while we plan for the road connection. your question about

I remember right from our work session in December sites DNA were the priority sites. Is that is that still true?

Yeah. And then that's it for now. I have a few questions. So, sorry. With respect, thank you for the conceptual plan. This is great. And I know we just lost some of it there, but the to Mr. Murray's comments um with Colia and the potential selling of the site G, I believe, um are we going to for traffic purposes and we are going to have, you know, restaurants coming in and things like that that are going to attract crowds and attract more traffic base. Are we going to require or is it an option to require new development at site G to have public parking available, maybe underground parking or something to that effect as part of an agreement?

Um, potentially. And that's what I I just love the amount of opportunity and um ability to to guide what happens here. You know, the city's in a great position to to consider our concerns and the community's concerns because it is fairly unique and but it's a great position to be in um owning the property and also you know, frankly having the the development code sort of authority as well. Um so, you know, the the through the planning commission um with final decision by the city council, um those things can be worked out. So, if if you know um backing out a second, another element of the action plan is a parking study. And so, I think actually at the December meeting, uh the planning commission said, "Hey, let's do that parking study as a priority," which I think is a good idea. Um, I think um, as we're talking about growth, we need to address the concerns of the community. And I think parking is is a is a common concern that we hear from residents and from businesses. So, I think it would behoove us, frankly, to get that parking study done early at the development intensities that we're anticipating. Um, and that study then should inform us pretty well as we move forward. And if specifically that area of, you know, of Oldtown and of this plan is lacking, which it may be because a lot of our public parking is is there's one here. We do have stuff. We do have a a public park and ride area um south of the art center. If we felt like that was too far away or quate then we want to identify another site. So um I guess in short we have the opportunity

to require it. Whether or not it's appropriate I think we it needs to be determined.

Great. Thanks. And more followup questions on that for site C I believe where symposium is now currently would and based on the conceptual plan you know we replace symposium with the developer replace a symposium with a larger development. Would symposium for example have a first right to you know maintain or expand into a new facility there or how do we maintain our local existing um businesses and give them the hey you are you know like one of our gems that we have out here everybody goes to you.

How do we maintain that with

Yeah. So I think that it was um a little a little confusing in terms of how we kind of showed the plan because we actually did show in terms of redevelopment at times. I think we showed both publicly owned sites and privately kind of in the same area. So the symposium site is owned by symposium. Um and so if they you know the city is not going to force anybody to redevelop. So if they chose to redevelop, I think they they would need to figure out an interim, you know, plan. To the extent the city can help with that in some way, absolutely, we're happy to do that. U but they they would redevelop and then I assume they would relocate within their their own new building as well. U to the extent that we have space available that we can host them, you know, in the interim and that sort of makes sense, then, you know, I think we want to help uh all businesses transition, you know, construction.

Thanks.

Yeah. Backing off of your comment there, um if if there's any way that we as a city have um mechanisms to incentivize property owners to um either kind of uh try to work with older architecture within Oldtown. Um you know, I very much appreciate the presentation of it. And I think that um just the nature of where we're at um in the process, you know, I think we're kind of looking at what kind of like uh just like a generic version of what Oldtown could be. And the only concern for me from that is I don't want this to really end up being like a downtown in any city anywhere in America. you know, I wanted to maintain being um like Sherwood Oldtown Main Street and keeping that kind of unique smaller scale character. Um and even if that's encouraging that maybe more along Pine Street versus Columbia Street having kind of like a newer um kind of bigger redevelopment feel, but I think that's something that we should kind of keep in mind as this progresses. Yeah, I was respond to that quickly. I mean, I I think that's that's great. Two quick comments. Um, part of the plan is to work with businesses to do a little bit of branding um with with uh with the businesses for Oldtown. So I think you know it's not getting necessarily to the development and and architecture that you're talking about but I think in terms of the keeping Sherwood Sherwood right and who does Sherwood want to be and who does Oldtown want to be I think that's that's a really important conversation. Chambers should definitely be a part of that as well. Um and you

know figure out how we want to you know how how should Sherwood sort of look and feel and talk about itself. um you know the the sense of place of keeping Sherwood Sherwood. I think the the events really play a huge part of that as well which I don't think is going away which is awesome. I I hope none of those go away. Um chamber you know puts on a few of those. Um and then interestingly the the the code right now is kind of set up how how you described it where this side of Oldtown is the old canary area which is intend the standards kind of already lean that way of what you described of newer a little bit more leniency in terms of not being modern but um it just acknowledges just a little bit more intensity of development is four stories versus three stories. A little bit more flexibility with architectural styles, things like that. This side of Oldtown is the true historic grid, right? Is the 1800's plat. And so the standards are a lot more strict on this side. And I think you know what you heard uh from Sean and what the code calls for is reinforcing the strictness on this side and potentially allowing more flexibility on that side because we anticipate more more development. actually. Um, and I think we want to address some of the the holes in the code that we've seen in new buildings lately as well on this side. So hopefully we get to exactly what you mentioned of, you know, um, addressing addressing the the design um, on on this side in particular and having a little bit more intensity on that side.

Part of the plan is that I don't see it as an actionable plan. I see a tab four that has calls out a couple of specific things. So in in this process to Commissioner Kai and Commissioner Barn's comments to ensure that we have that development, do we need to add an actionable item in the actual plan itself versus enhancing the memo that's in number four in tab four? Because in terms of the distinction between the two, are you talking or

or filling the holes? There's there's comments in tab 4 that says do this, do this, do this. But that is, you know, the appendices is not necessarily incorporated into the action plan that's in the meat of the strategic plan. Oh, I don't feel comfortable. Can we can we go to the action list of actions? Yeah. So, I want to ensure I want to ensure that the actions that we're discussing are a as strongly worded as you shall do a parking study. It says reszone parcels provide.

Yeah. So, this is um I I'm sorry I didn't get to the parking study, but to your question about um architecture and I think updates to maybe the the Smokville area of Oldtown. So, this is the actionable step where we this would direct staff to basically do these things. Reszone key parcels, strengthen storefront designs, um ensure architectural compatibility. These are all things that would initiate code amendments that would come back before you uh for consideration of how to strengthen up what old town should be or what we should be directing development towards.

And I I think Jean Go ahead.

So these are your actionable. You would say that a combination of these would facilitate a revisit of the Oldtown design standards. Yeah. And I I think what you have here is the consultant going through the code, taking the feedback, the specific feedback that was expressed during some of the public meetings and in reviewing some of the past development. If you can go back one John and they've actually through like for example uh number three there started to um give you specifics. So they've started to actually give you some specifics which I which I think is good, right? They're saying like here here are the specifics that of the of the elements that that you should be considering. So actually on number number five is probably the good one the best example of traditional roof forms, right? Pitched or flat with parapits, uh prohibit shed roofs, eliminate the the false materials, you know, and so they're kind of starting to give you an idea of where this should go. So

Okay. And for spec specifically calls out transparency and it was confusing the way they um stated it. So I would just say because it says standardized 75% transparency requirements etc etc. But when you read the tab 4 it talks about up to 10 feet or up to 9 ft and I was wondering what they meant if they weren't going to be looking at the second story in the transparency. Um um it it wasn't as clear as I would have wanted it to be. So, if we could look at that before we adopt it, that'd be great.

And then specifically on number two, reszone key parcels. I have a great concern about the parcel that they're looking at reszoning. If it's if I'm looking at it correctly, it's the high density residential being reszoned to commercial. It is adjacent and from medium density low. So, we're going from medium density low to retail commercial across the street.

Do you have a just to to bring up the map is do you have a particular page that you were or was this just I was on tab four so I don't know where that is in your world. I know. Um, yeah, I will go to Yeah, I'm go to a map. Yeah. So, it's the site. That is the proposal for the where H2 is

the the proposal. Oh, I see. Can we And Sean, I'm gonna send you back to the action item where I can pull it up. Oh, yeah. And maybe I'm misreading it, but I I'm just thinking if that's medium density low across the street and we change that to retail.

Let's see what the action item is because if it says basically reszone all of the HDR. Yeah, I see. You're right, Gene. I apologize, Chair Simpson. So, it does say convert all of the HDR to RC to ensure active storefronts. So, I think it's a great it's a great comment. I think just to cut through this potentially a solution is to do something like um allow uh keep it HDR but allow the Colombia Street to have some element of commercial. Right. So, we're street front.

Yes, exactly. On the street front. kind of not have the entire site beh the the concern there was that if it's a pure HDR zoning there's no guarantee that we would get an active storefront and so there's concern it would just be pure residential and so it it could be that we u have some type of overlay zone that that incentivizes on one end to requires on the other end storefront commercial Columbia

and and I'm in agreement doing something, but I just want to buffer the existing neighborhoods from not being retail commercial right across from low density residential. Um, and then can you help understand the VHDZ, which is the vertical housing designation zone, and the design criterias that we try to put into Oldtown, how we are going to be impacted by new state legislation that so we intend to have three stories in Oldtown and four in Canary Square. And if we are now incentivizing people to put extra stories of residential, then could we end up with a bonus story where we would have five stories going down Colombia and have four stories in Oldtown because we've incentivized additional stories.

It's a great great question. So, the vertical housing incentive uh program um does not allow. It could, but it is not a requirement and it um just to be direct, it's not a proposal in this plan to allow additional stories beyond the code. Uh what it is is a incentive um through a tax abatement program. So for uh every floor Yeah, I understand that. But but the way state legislation I understand what you're saying. I have a good answer for you, Chair Simpson. Oh, good.

That that is that

the city um has the ability to set criteria under that program. So, we have to it's it's a state program um in terms of, you know, it's a tax abatement, so it's got to be blessed, if you will, by the by the state revenue department, whatever the tax, you know, uh department is of the state. So, got to go through kind of a formal process. The city sets it up, but the city, the local jurisdiction, in this case, Sherwood, can set the criteria under which the specific um property owner or developer qualifies for the incentive. So we can say this is the part I love. We can say you have to meet this these criteria in order to qualify for this program that the city is offering. So we could say it only uh the only uh properties that qualify are those that meet the base zone. The only properties that qualify are those that um meet the design standards of the Oldtown plan if there's a waiver under SP 1537 or whatever it is. So, it's it's a great way actually to offer an incentive and actually incentivize them to meet the expectations that this community has while giving some tax break. It's not a uh state program that is just kind of being pushed out, you know, with with no strings attached. The state needs to approve it, but the criteria is set by the city and it's a voluntary program that we can choose to develop or not. So hopefully it allows us to get development under the terms that we're looking for. Actually, the kicker is

that we're going to give up for 10 years 20% of of local property taxes uh for each floor that that development provides of housing above the above commercial. And that that would be the the tradeoff is we get the development in potentially earlier or we get the development at at all uh with the understanding that there's a tax exemption on 20% at 20% per floor. Not much different than how urban renewal dollars work is that you're deferring taxes. Very very very similar

in le of some other benefit in this case district is the benefit of critical mass and revitalizing very similar. And so just to just to elaborate further like when we set up this program it would probably come to you but then probably go to city council. you know, it's it's full-blown ordinance to set up this type of program. We got to do it. We got to do it the right way. There needs to be analysis on, you know, the correct properties, the correct locations. And during that time, the city council or the city would establish the approval criteria for qualifying for one of these programs.

Address your concern about Yes. Well, well, if five stories over there can because we allow four stories and with the

with the state law of SP 1537 a developer could get five stories today without this plan in in on that side of town. Um what I hope happens is the city could offer a um vertical housing and then they opt for four because it pencils at that point at four if that's what the community um vision is for the height limit. Yeah, it just kind of goes back to I guess by the way parking is covered. Just thinking about that side though down there. It does seem if we get these giant fivetory masses down there seem like this huge area over here as a bunch of stuff and then kind of redevelop the soil over here and that I don't know that seems kind of tricky. Um so I'm glad have the kind of outs of looking at the traffic impact component and definitely parking because that was the other thing glad you brought that up brought that up last time too of my family like especially when my kids are little we're we're not if we can't find a place to park and walk around a little town we're just not going to go right I just can't get there have a place to park you know so anyway I I'm glad about those the other the only other comment um I wanted to bring up was on Canary Square itself Last time we talked a little bit about using some of the land adjacent to it to expand canery a bit and I keep kind of

going back to our our Christmas celebration or holiday where we call it last year which is jam-packed people everywhere and if we develop more around there that's get more packed and if it's truly community space to see that expanded a little bit um or at least considered in the plan somewhere um and we had talked expanding kind of eastward into I think it was site E a bit. Um so using some of that space instead of another building or even going just south of Columbia Road into that other was it G right there site that is um just to create a little bit more gathering space for central community area. So I don't know if that was worked in or considered at all kinds.

Just curious about that How necessary do we feel that is when that space is pretty empty the whole rest of the other year? Does it make sense to to take more space for a space that's empty most?

It depends on what we're doing under business and health number two. events and programs. There's a lot more stuff happen. I don't think your idea is bad. It's just it's worth considering. Yeah. Makes sense. Um this plan would not preclude that from happening at all. I think um it would be I guess site G actually maybe site E as well, but likely site G. And I think how this would happen is the city would you just actually go back up

a little better. Oh, perfect. That's great. So, there is a lot of space on site G as you go all the way down Columbia Street. And um when we release those properties for an RFP, either city-led development or developer kind of offering for a for sale or for a long-term ground lease. Um I'm sure planning commission would have some input, but city council as well. And that would be the time where we would address that. And so just to be I guess direct, the plan doesn't say absolutely expand the the um Canary Plaza, but it has been discussed at city council. Um there there have been similar comments of we uh we may need more space for Canary Square in the future. Um and so I think we would um frankly make the call at that time as to as to the as to what was needed. maybe an opportunity to partner with a developer, you know, a development agreement would would require them to expand that, you know, under the city approved design, something like that. Um, I also understand where Commissioner Kai is coming from. I think I've said it during one of the work sessions is just from like a planning and and placemaking and an event sort of approach. uh assuming that you could address in a in a safe way the the traffic circulation, the streets are a great a great uh opportunity for more space during specific times. So, if it doesn't get expanded, you know, you close um close uh Colombia and portions of Pine and have the spill over into the street with, you know, traffic circulation like we do for other old town events at times.

A quick comment on that. Um it is a good question how much use like pretend site E as we see there did expand into site G or I'm sorry not site the Canary Square would expand with the new apartment that's already going in and if we have a lot more residential dwelling units over the course of the next 10 20 30 years there will be a lot more people who live downtown And so you will, you know, you can always take site G if it's if it's if the Canary Square is expanded, you can always turn that into a building. Once it's a building, you can't turn it into consider actions under just the one action. And to the point of Columbia becomes a major thoroughare, we may need to expand Columbia to make it a third lane into the Columbia Square and make so

well. Is there a way to condition it so that that doesn't happen? like a some type of common mechanism so that the intersection of Columbia and Pine stays just the way it is. Guess it's going to be traffic. Yeah. If it's going to be the new entrance to the city, it's the expectation there traffic. Are we talking about the physical dimensions of the intersection? talk about control physical dimensions. If we have to add a third lane for

turn or make it a right turn only the first time you have if it becomes busy you got a T intersection at Columbia and you got one guy that's trying to turn left now you got a backup so it becomes a right turn only right across the railroad tracks and to get back across now you're it becomes I mean most likely that would turn into a roundabout. Well, not even just roundabout. I mean, at minimum a three-way stop to facilitate traffic coming from

that kind of good point. Thank you.

One more question and so It was mentioned that city council is working on an interim architectural kind of policy and in between time of you know from now until when this gets adopted plus you know get to that full plan we might be you know five years plus based on what we have here and the illustration of the building that went in next to symposium being the architectural kind of um with the interim kind of policies under consideration. Is is there any retroactive mech mechanisms for that facade type work or is it we just have to wait till the next construction comes in, next development proposal comes in and hope that they lean into an interim plan until we get a policy in place for architecture.

I'll start you jump in if you'd like. Um, uh, Sean works pretty directly with all the the developers as they come in. They're, you know, the way that the the the law the regulations at the state and local level are set up right now. Just to be honest with you, there's not a whole lot we can do in terms of requiring something that's outside the code. Um, unless they are going through a process of like a discretionary review, they opt for discretionary review then then we can negotiate um a lot of um you know we uh yeah uh clear and objective standards which I know you guys know about um basically you know we have to apply the code in effect at the time in a clear and objective manner and um we of course at the staff level and here at planning commission always encourage the the best design and and I I think this building here um that we recently got approved is a good example of where the developer was willing to give a little bit more than what the code required. Um, and so I really appreciate that that approach, you know, taken by that developer. Um, but the short answer is like it has to be adopted in order for us to require it. Um, and so there's not much we can do uh in in the in the short term without an actual hard and fast code code amendment.

And just for clarification, not the adoption of the strategic plan, but the adoption of the code because actual code. Correct. The adoption of this strategic plan doesn't put into place any mechanism that allows us to point to it during development review. Correct.

Correct. And I guess the just uh I've mentioned it a few times already, but your question and my response assumes that it's a privatelyowned property and a private developer. As soon as you know we start releasing city-owned properties, absolutely. Like I I would Uh my assumption is that city council would want to put terms um on the development agreement regarding the design of those properties if they were to be sold. And so it's a great opportunity to sort of get the vision early if the code hasn't been adopted yet. Great. Thanks. One more comment. This is page 38 and I I saw it from um looking back at some of the other doc documents. The statement is lack of downtown residents to support an 18hour environment as I guess I just I don't envision Oldtown being an 18hour a day activity center and so I would ask plan why why is it important that we have an 18hour environment that presumes 6 am to midnight it's a bustle in place and it seems out of I mean just out of left field that that 18-hour environment is what we desire in Oldtown Sherwood. Yeah, great great feedback. And I think that's what we're the feedback that we're looking for is that if this through the planning commission uh hearings tonight and then in the recommendation that you make to city council, I think that statement was getting is getting at uh morning and evening activity, not necessarily 18

hours though. 18 hours is is kind of a planning term to kind of talk about uh a full day, you know, of activity. But if that is not uh accurately describing what we're going for here, no, no problem revising that. I think the key is that there's more activity in the morning and more activity in the dinner and take it as far as you as you like. um the the activi the main activity right now with with these sort of public buildings and the workforce in these public buildings being the anchor is that it's like a lot of lunch activity and daytime activity and so there was trying there it's an attempt to acknowledge morning and evening but if 18 hours is too many hours we can roll that back and I just I'd just get away from any type of hour I would just say morning and either evening or morning and dinner, whatever, you know, however, however you'd like to describe it. If you want, we can take a stab at redescribing that in a more appropriate way.

Well, creating a more vibrant 18our district just makes no sense to me. I mean, a 14-hour district makes a little bit more sense because you're 7 a.m. to 900 p.m. or whatever. 900 p.m. is my bedtime, Chair Simpson. So, I'm I'm supportive of that. Or 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. or something. Yes. But yes, that kind of follows the what Sherwood. We don't we don't have the midnight disco balls, right? We we we shut down things at 10:00 and so to have an 18hour district is is a complete misnomer in our community. But I appreciate I like the way you describe morning day

coffee coffee coffee shops um you know breakfast and then you know uh evening dinners and maybe events at the art center but fully understand um the the the late nights is not necessarily what the vision is. Um, so I have a question. You were you were talking about city own versus private own. Obviously a very key distinction. And I was wondering throughout this entire strategic action plan. I believe I can infer what the city would ideally in the future like to not own anymore versus what the city would like to maintain ownership of. But I wanted I was wondering if it is clear enough. So wanted to ask I think it's on page 62 there is a section about tailoring I'll see if I can get the word exactly right but tailoring the development approach by site um yeah so number two there tailor approach by site the my understanding is that site um D the city plans to maintain ownership of that for the word forever kind But site A, for example, is a city-owned property, but our desire is for it to become like in an ideal world, it would become privately owned, it would be privately developed. Is that correct or is that not correct?

You know, I I don't know for sure. And I think it's I think it's going to depend on different factors. Um, policy preference of the city council first and foremost. um implementation of the plan. So, you know, we're we're looking at various uh funding mechanisms for infrastructure and for plazas and for other things like that. But, uh frankly, you know, the sites do provide a revenue opportunity through a real estate transaction. So I just wonder about you know if there's opportunity for you know sell one property to to fund another project or or either capital or site specific. Um we have heard clearly uh through a work session from uh from city council that they would like to own and operate site D for the for the foreseeable future. So we have clarity on that. We have not gone through a work session on site A and that's why I say not not sure. Um I you know it's going to depend on um a lot of factors some that I mentioned already and then you know um just kind of city feasibility of actually being a developer and property owner as well. um because that is um that is a specific kind of role that the city needs to intentionally take on. We've done it a little bit already um you know city halls and public works buildings, police state of course like you own and maintain those generally uh center for the arts as well but we do lease some spaces as well. We lease the Sesame site. Uh we lease the um Cooper Mountain A house and so we've gotten into that a little bit and I think for each one of these needs to be an intentional decision by the city council because

it's going to cost money and there's going to be maintenance and ownership responsibilities that they need to kind of say that say yes every time but the plan does not make any final decisions. I guess we kind of need to get into a work session for each one.

The the reason primarily that that I was asking is you know this map is a fine map amongst all the others you know is clearly right at the heart of Oldtown Sherwood. And so to me, it makes great sense for the city to maintain ownership of that if for no other reason over time as things evolve, the city can decide to do different things. Once a once a site becomes privately owned, then it's gone for all intents and purposes. Y

So I was wondering if it would be a good idea to with site. I mean, I think it is pretty clear. You can but I wonder if it should be more explicitly stated that this idea at least the longterm intention is for it to be maintained as a city. Any other suggestions, recommendations? I'll be a list of whatever modifications.

Yeah, not really sure how to put all that motion.

I got here. I can see if I can recap. I think and just to back out a second like what I envision happening here. You know, we've had a public hearing. You guys have asked questions, some questions, some explicit recommendations or requests for changes. We've heard uh one piece of public testimony. And so the way I envision this happening is to package this up in likely in a staff memo to planning commission or I'm sorry to city council. So before we actually get in the plan and make any changes, um uh we will package this up in a memo and then at city council Sean or I will present and say here here was the discussion. planning commission asked these questions um and made these explicit requests and then you know if you choose to adopt them we're happy to make those changes and then staff with the consultant if they if they take them up would make the changes prior to the second uh city council reading the final adoption is how it work so um if that sounds like a good plan I can summarize for you

I think it's city council has been very vested in this process they've had significantly more work sessions retracted it from our last so that they could revisit it one more time. So they they've got ownership on this document. So I think our recommendations is certainly appropriate. So then would I could I just make a motion with the following modification being like your summarized summarized by your memorandum? Absolutely. So let's see before you do that one more. Yeah.

And uh tell me this is I think this is appropriate um to discuss now. So on page um 82 where the section heading is performance indicators and monitoring framework. Um that whole section is is great. It talks about just as the title suggests how monitor that the actions as time goes on are producing the results that are desired. So then specifically on page 87 um it talks about annual monitoring and reporting and um when I read that so yeah right there annual monitoring report when I read that I was struck by with all of the actions that are in this very broad plan that has a lot of great ideas and a lot of great actions. It seems like annual isn't often enough because in the once a year some things could really go off the rails in terms of producing the desired results. And so I thought twice a year is more just twice as good. Now there's good and bad to everything. It's more work to do twice a year, but in some ways it's less work because it's not such a big monitoring and reporting report. It's twice recommendation.

I agree. And I was super pleased to see the tracking that

can you know we'll capture the public testimony of course around Columbia and Pine and just considering you know potential traffic issues there. Um question from uh Commissioner Vance about sort of what what happens first uh the development or the road connection. So may clarify that the study happens first and um yeah clarify that the study happens first and then maybe comment on sort of the development agreements that we could that we could make. These might be out of order because I won't by commissioner just disclaimer from chair Simpson. Um just I think acknowledging the fire department and the rail being a challenge as we look at that colia 18 18hour district not being completely uh the vision accurately the vision for old town. So consider some different language there. Um, Commissioner Barnes, uh, question about the parking for site G. And, uh, we might just kind of explain the parking the parking study that happens first, but not including um, parking on site G that was needed for the development uh, symposium and the site C transition with development on that site. Commissioner Kai, the um comment on the architecture, old old town and I guess the more generic on on this side, newer on that side. Um and we might describe a little bit of of the branding there in terms of that response. I'll circle back to you, Commissioner C, get that exactly right.

Um I think this one's back with chair Simpson the tab four clarifying the 75% transparency um that that is intended just to be the ground floor is the short answer there clarify mean I'm sorry meaning that it doesn't preclude requirements on the upper floors it's just that the ground floor when you look at the ground floor by itself it needs to be 75 and we can still say Um the concern about the HDR to retail commercial reszone in the the low density residential nearby buffering of the neighborhoods. Uh question about the vertical housing incentive and whether that's going to incentive incentivize more stories. Commissioner Bance, um, and correct me if I'm not getting this right, or you want to restate, um, some potential concern about the lopsidedness of, you know, um, more intense growth along Colombia versus, uh, the the older parts of town. Parking is going to be key as we have more intense land uses. Um, consider room to expand the Canary Plaza as we grow and have for events relatively full now. Um and Commissioner Tatson making sure uh clarifying um and making it more clear that site D is uh to be cityowned and maintained and then the performance indicator twice per year. I miss anything. This is not a heavy lift for us to be a nice

and if I misdated or misrepresented let me know

vote on all that nothing needs to be struck stricken maybe we had language they sure would close by 9 Yes, Commissioner Kai. Yeah, I don't even know if he'll be asleep. Part of what my thought or concern was. The other part of it was, you know, an emphasis on um you know, preserving, you know, what unique aspects Oldtown currently has and also trying to um maintain that so that emphasis on Oldtown Main Street. as opposed to aesthetics.

And these are just going to be straight up bullet points in the memo. Um I I think just to make sure that we include get everything in, there will probably be like a bullet a bullet point list either as an attachment or in the memo. We might kind of summarize in a more paragraph form kind of a discussion and you know what happened and then maybe do attachment. Does that sound like your plan?

Yeah. And when you send it out to council for their meeting packet, can you also send it to the planning commission? I don't want it sent out ahead of time because then it' be like a public meeting, but when it when it goes out to public notice to council, post it on the website. Copy commissioners in case there's a needs to be everybody feel okay. So

I'm gonna phrase this at the end by saying planning commission public testimony we received with the recommended considerations listed in the affformentioned memo staff will outline council that's right I'm going to go ahead and close the public record and we'll go ahead and go into final deliberations yes I I needed to close the public I needed close the public hearing because we are now officially not taking any more public testimony.

All right. Um so probably gone completely off script but nope I was right there. No further question is now closed. It says deliberation. Are there any further questions or discussion? So we can enterain a motion. All right. Okay.

I move the Sherwood Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the city council for the Oldtown strategic action plan based on the draft presented to the planning commission and public testimony received with the recommend with the recommended considerations listed in the affirmation memo. Staff will outline council. I'll second. All right. It's been moved and seconded that we forward a re a recommendation of approval for the Oldtown Strategic Action Plan. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion say I. I.

I. Opposed. Motion carries. Thank you very much. That was a lot of interaction. I appreciate that. All right. New business. I have none. Does anybody have any new business? I have a quick question. I'm just curious. I I have been reading the TRAT may be closing down our bus line here if they do and then I realize there's all kinds of discussion around that. How does that affect our development requirements around CFAC? Because right now there's a lot of things we can't stop around especially our parking things like that as long as there's a transit line that goes away. Do we get parking requirements back or have you guys thought about this? Just curious.

That's a that's a great question, Commissioner Vance. And um we have not uh staff has not engaged uh the state on that question, but I think it's I think it's a good a good time to do that. So why don't we staff can add that to our list. Um if I'm recalling correctly where the state landed last was that any bus line um would prompt the CFAC quarter mile, if I'm recalling correctly, no parking I believe the latest is that Trime was considering a reconfiguration of one of the lines and so we'll try and get that information uh for first just so we under understand where try is likely to go but then see um if um if the state has any comments on if that modifies the the CFAC designated area um

wasn't the original langage Sorry.

And that's was my comment about essentially any bus line is is sort of triggers the the quarter mile if if I'm recalling correctly. So it could be that you know we'll have to take a look at the route and if the route changes that could change the c designated area. Um I think there I don't know exactly where tryment landed in the end and the where the decision- making is but I know there was a proposal to cut a line entirely and I think based on some feedback from the city and from some of the neighboring cities there was a modified proposal to bring back a modified line which is which is good news for um transit and active transportation but I don't know exactly when you know there's a vote from the board to finalize all this stuff. So why don't we do a little bit of research on that? We can follow up

and I would do the push back on the CEC because the language was frequency had to be met and even though they made an exception because it was moderately covered if it becomes severely limited then the purpose. Yeah. Okay. Any other commissioner comments? Moving on to item eight. All right. If there is no objection on the planning commission, we'll go ahead and adjourn. Hearing none, we are adjourned. Thank you.