The record · Transcript
Council Session — 2025-02-20
Transcript from the session's official auto-captions (6,976 words), shown in readable case and split into speaker turns. Speakers are not yet identified (colors just separate consecutive turns). Auto-captions can contain errors — check the recording for anything that matters.
Session summaryEditor-reviewed
The Portland City Council reconvened its February 19th meeting on February 20, 2025, at 2 p.m. for a land use session, with roll call confirming attendance and rules of decorum and evidentiary hearing procedures read into the record. The item under review, item 8, concerned a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map for properties at 3508 Northeast 11th Avenue and 1123 Northeast Fremont Street, requested by Greenbox Architecture. No conflicts of interest or ex parte contacts were disclosed. A staff report from Portland Permitting and Development described the proposal to change zoning from R5 to CM1 and the corresponding comprehensive plan designation, noting increased height, floor area, and use flexibility, and outlined the Hearings Officer's recommendation for approval without conditions. Discussion covered topics including spot zoning concerns, site size, setback requirements, height limits, and community notification procedures. The applicant's representative addressed the council, describing the proposal as a small-scale housing and commercial project. No opponents testified, and one supporter was listed but not confirmed present. The evidentiary record was closed, and a motion for tentative approval of the Hearings Officer's recommendation was made and seconded. A vote occurred, with outcomes recorded in the vote ledger. The matter was scheduled to return on March 19th at 6:15 p.m. for further action.
AI-drafted from the session's auto-captions, reviewed by an editor — describes the discussion only; recorded votes live in the vote ledger. Captions contain errors.
Procedural markers in this session
Literal phrase counts from the official captions — a measurement of procedure, not a judgment of anyone's conduct. Click a marker to highlight its occurrences below. Captions contain errors.
0 Able to get it down. Yeah. And. Yeah. Like what's your hand. Feel free to again there's. Yeah. But he's. Ten lines of the same. Yeah. Yeah. The first line was mary. Yeah, yeah.
1 Hi.
2 I'm sorry.
3 About stealing your stuff.
4 And just.
5 Throw it in.
6 Yeah. It's not working.
7 Oh, good.
8 So they're out there okay. Yeah, we're not sure that's temporary, but this is. Yeah, yeah. Pretty. Please be sure me to send you. You can just have. Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah I need one for our plans to go out. So you like. You really like those? You know, I called, I called the school, and I was like, if there's a snow day, teachers shift their curriculum. Or would they just make those payment? How are you doing? Good. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. You got me. I don't know if you saw. This is.
9 I can certainly sit.
10 Up there with you. Yeah. I prefer it's up.
11 To you.
12 I think last time it was just like the first time it was. Yeah. For sure. 1900s. Bhr. Could you add a little gravitas? Yeah. Okay, well, I.
13 Can certainly.
14 Yeah. And it can be really interesting. Yeah. Oh, yeah. I just have to buy, like, it's just going to be really wondering where we're going to. You know, if you live in as you can tell. So. Perfect. Yeah. Perfect I had to. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I'm curious if we're going to ask about that. I think that would assume that they've actually been served. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Thank you. This is you know. Yeah. Exactly. Thank you. It's odd. It's just strange to me that they're just happy for them, you know, like you're saying. Yeah. Like that's. Yeah. It'll be interesting to see how it all and how the committee is, you know. Yeah. Yeah.
15 I.
16 Oh okay. Yes. Thank you.
17 I worked yesterday.
18 Yeah.
19 Good afternoon. We are reconvening our council meeting from February 19th. It is February 20th at 2 p.m. Councilors, this is a land use meeting. Keelan, could you please call the roll?
20 Avalos.
Procedural episode · turns 21–30
Parliamentary activity detected in this stretch (see the markers above). An editor-reviewed analysis has not been published for this episode yet.
21 Present.
22 Dunphy here.
23 Smith here.
24 No. Here. Ryan. Koyama Lane here. Morillo here. Novick here. Clark here. Breen here. Zimmerman.
25 Pirtle-guiney here. Thank you. And could you could we have our attorney read our rules and rules of decorum, please?
26 Yes. I'm going to read the rules of decorum and then I will I'm going to read the rules of decorum. And then I'll also run through the specifics for the land use.
27 Thank you.
28 Okay, so welcome to the Portland city council to testify before council in person or virtually. You must sign up in advance on the council agenda at. Do you want to call the item?
29 Oh no I'm sorry.
30 Okay. Sorry wwe Portland council agenda information on engaging with the council can be found on the council clerk's webpage. Individuals may testify for three minutes unless the presiding officer states otherwise, your microphone will be muted when your time is over. The presiding officer preserves order disruptive conduct, such as shouting, refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, or interrupting others testimony or council deliberations will not be allowed. If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given. Further disruption will result in the ejection from the meeting. Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass. Additionally, council may take a short recess and reconvene virtually. Your testimony should address the matter being considered. When testifying, state your name for the record. Your address is not necessary. If you are a lobbyist, identify your organization you represent and virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when the council clerk calls your name. Okay. Council clerk, do you want to read the item? And then I can go into the rest of the.
31 Thank you keelan.
32 Yeah. Thank you. Item eight amend the comprehensive plan map and zoning map for properties at 3508 northeast 11th avenue and 1123 northeast fremont street, at the request of derek metzen greenbox. Architecture lu 20 4073674 cp zc.
33 Okay.
34 Thank you.
35 Me again. This is an evidentiary hearing. This means that you may submit new evidence to counsel in support of your arguments for council consideration on a comprehensive plan zone map change testimony will be heard as follows. We will begin with a staff report by staff for approximately ten minutes and following the staff report, the city council will hear from interested persons in the following order. The applicant will go first and will have ten minutes to address the council. After the applicant, the council will hear from individuals or organizations that support the applicant's proposal. Each person will have three minutes to testify. Next, the council will hear from persons or organizations who oppose the applicant's proposal. Again, each person will have three minutes to testify. If there was any testimony in opposition to the applicant's proposal, the applicant will have an additional five minutes to rebut the testimony given in opposition to the proposal. The council may then close the hearing and deliberate. As this is a non emergency ordinance, it will pass. The second reading council may make amendments to the ordinance and findings and direct staff to return with revised findings and amendments. The scope of testimony for evidentiary hearings. I'd like to announce several guidelines for those who will be addressing the city council today. Any letters or documents you wish to become a part of the record should be given to the council clerk after you testify. Similarly, the original or a copy of any slides, photographs, drawings, maps, videos or other items you showed to the council during your testimony, including powerpoint presentations should be given to the council clerk to make sure they become part of the record. Testimony must be addressed to the approval criteria. Any testimony or arguments or evidence you present must be directed toward the applicable approval criteria for this land use review or other criteria in the city's comprehensive plan or zoning code you believe will apply to the decision, and staff will identify the applicable approval criteria as a part of their staff report to the council. Issues must be raised with specificity. You must raise an issue clearly enough to give the council and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue. If you do not, you will be precluded from appealing to the land use board of appeals. Based on that issue, applicants must identify constitutional challenges to conditions of approval if the applicant fails to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval, with enough specificity to allow the council to respond, the applicant will be precluded from bringing an action for damages in circuit court. Thank you. I'll now turn back to the council president to address conflicts of interest and ex parte contacts.
36 Thank you. And councilors, before we ask about conflict of interest, I do just want to give a little bit of information on what we're doing today. This is a hearing about an amendment to the comprehensive plan map. And what that means is that this is an item that has been reviewed by our planners and then reviewed by the folks above them within the bureau. Before it comes to us. We receive these items, whether or not the recommendation from staff is to approve or to not approve. It's not an appeal to us. It is just the next step in the process and then comes with a staff recommendation. So it's a little bit different from what we did the last time we did a land use hearing. But as with other land use hearings, the first thing we need to do is see if any councilors have any conflicts of interest. Okay. Seeing no conflicts of interest, do any members of council have have any council members of council had ex parte contact to declare or information that you have gathered outside of this hearing to disclose? Fantastic. There are no conflicts and no ex parte contacts have been had. I will call for testimony now. We will begin with the staff report and it looks like we have our staff up here. Could you please introduce yourselves and go ahead and go over the information for us?
37 Yes. Good afternoon council. Thank you all for having us today. My name is david kuhnhausen. I'm the interim director of Portland permitting and development. I am here purely to support staff. Amanda rhodes, the planner assigned to this case as a subject matter expert and is going to be leading the presentation today. I will then kick it off to her to walk through this case with you all.
38 Great. Good afternoon, madam president and members of the council. My name is amanda rhodes and I'm the staff planner for this case from Portland permitting and development. And again, this hearing is for a comprehensive plan map amendment with a concurrent zoning map amendment for a property at northeast fremont street and northeast 11th. The proposal, if approved, would be changing two maps, the comprehensive plan map and the zoning map. The comprehensive plan map represents what we expect to happen in the 20 year time horizon, and the zoning map reflects what can be developed today. There's a relationship between the two maps. Sometimes some comprehensive plan map designations have more than one corresponding zone, and sometimes the zoning on a site is not in compliance with its comp plan designation. In this case, the zoning map is compliant with the current comprehensive plan map designation. The current zoning is r5 or residential 5000, with the residential 5000. Comprehensive plan map designation and if approved, the proposal would apply the cm one or commercial mixed use one based zone and the mixed use dispersed comprehensive plan map designation on this corner property. And a few things to point out about this land use review type, which is different from other type three reviews. Again, this hearing is not for an appeal of a land use decision. Land use reviews that include a comprehensive plan map amendment. First, have a hearing with the hearings officer who makes a recommendation to council, and then the final local decision is made by city council. I'm here today representing the hearings officer's recommendation. This case type is not subject to the same statutory time limits as other land use cases. We don't need to issue our final local decision within 120 days. And finally, this review is only about the map changes. No development is proposed at this time. If these changes are approved, any future development would be subject to the development standards of the new base zone. Now I'll share a few images of the site and its vicinity. It's. The site is 5850ft■!s. It's a residential se shown on the left for with a red dot. It's within a single dwelling residential area of northeast Portland. It's located on northeast fremont street, several blocks east of northeast martin luther king jr boulevard. Irving park is to the southwest of the site. Directly south across fremont is the irvington historic district, which is also primarily zoned single dwelling residential, and a small commercial area is located to the east of the site on fremont at 15th avenue. The existing building, shown in the photo on the right, was originally a commercial structure. It was expanded and converted in 1986 to a residential unit, and the western portion of the site is currently vacant. There had been a house there which was demolished in 1991. Some more photos. I'll be going clockwise starting in the upper left, and you'll see the arrow pointing to the site. Here we see the neighboring house to the east in the foreground on the upper right. Again, that arrow is pointing at the site, and then you'll see the existing house to the north. The picture on the lower right shows the houses across fremont. Those houses are within the irvington historic district. A few more, again, starting in the upper left, there's a view of a few houses along northeast 11th avenue. You're looking in the second one at irving park to the southwest from kind of the corner of the site, and then you see some storefronts from the cm one area several blocks to the east. If this request is approved, the map changes will result in an increase in development potential. The numbers here don't reflect opportunities for bonuses for the two base zones, but in short, the cm one zone will allow a small increase in height from 30 to 35ft and larger increases in floor area and building coverage. And the cm one zone will allow more of a wider range of uses, including commercial uses, to take place on the site. Now, I'll summarize the two relevant sets of approval criteria for the review. The approval criteria for the comprehensive plan map amendment. Focus on looking at the proposal against the relevant goals and policies of the comp plan, and determining whether, on balance, the proposed designation is equally or more supportive of the comprehensive plan than the existing designation. So when we're doing this, we don't weigh every single goal or policy. We don't weigh them all equally. In this case, for example, we ignored policies on industrial development or employment districts. We were paying closer attention to housing policies, public facilities, urban form design and development, things like that. The comp plan also refers us to a number of other plans that have to be shown to be consistent with the proposal as well. So we're looking at the statewide land use planning goals. The metro urban growth management functional plan and the adopted area plans, in this case the albina community plan and the sabin neighborhood plan. Through these plans, we're looking at a similar set of issues, but we're getting more and more focused on the geographic area. To address these criteria, the applicant provided a detailed narrative responding to each of the relevant goals and policies of these plans, and these were reviewed by city staff and the hearings officer. The zoning map amendment criteria ensure that the proposed zoning designation is the most appropriate of those corresponding zones, and that public services are adequate to serve the proposal for criterion a, the applicant submitted a detailed narrative and additional exhibits addressing why cm one is the most appropriate of the two zones, and to respond to criterion b, the applicant provided a transportation impact study, a stormwater report, and a geotechnical report. These documents, similarly were reviewed by city staff and the hearings officer. The sabin community association land use and transportation committee did submit a letter of support stating that the changes will enable, quote, low impact, small scale development that provides services for nearby residences and is compatible with the surrounding area. One neighbor did attend the hearings officer hearing and asked questions about height limits, but no other public comment was received. The hearings officers findings conclude that all applicable criteria have been met based on several key points. The proposal was found, on balance, to equally meet the relevant comprehensive plan goals and policies. The proposal maintains or increases development potential of a site which is within the urban growth boundary. It's within the inner ring area of central Portland, and it's located close to several bus lines. The proposal enables development of small scale commercial uses, which is seen as positive at this location. The proposed zone cm one was found to be the most appropriate due to its location on fremont. Its close proximity to another cm one zoned area, and its proximity to civic resources like irving park and nearby churches, and the proposal would adequately be be served by current city infrastructure. With those findings, the hearings officer recommended approval of both map amendments with no conditions. Council has four alternatives in this case. Today, you can tentatively approve the application and direct the applicant and staff to return to amend the ordinance to include the final decision and findings. You can tentatively approve the application with conditions of approval and direct the applicant and staff to return. To amend the ordinance, you can delay the decision to a future date and request alternatives be explored. Excuse me, or you can tentatively deny the application and then direct staff to return to amend the ordinance. And that concludes my staff presentation. I'm happy to handle any questions if you have any.
39 Are there any technical questions council, before we hear from the applicant.
40 I'm curious.
41 About something. Yeah.
42 Counselor.
43 Ryan. Yes. Thanks. Madam president, just real quick. I'm curious because that neighbor asked about the height limits and I didn't hear what they were.
44 Oh, right. Now it's 30ft for the r5 zone, and cm one gets you up to 35. And there are bonus opportunities if they provide affordable housing for floor area. But even with those there is no height increase in the cm one. So 35 would be where it tops out.
45 Great. Thank you.
46 Councilor Dunphy.
47 Thank you, madam president.
48 I'm a little surprised that the first or third slide, or whatever it was says that there's not a planned development for this. This is simply changing the underlying zoning without it. And I'm also looking at the map and recognizing that it's almost a block and a half from the other cm one zone. First, do we often do a lot of spot zoning, like this post comp plan 2035? And second, does something like this anticipate that? I mean, does this set a precedent that we can expect the rest of the fremont facing blocks between 11th and 12th to eventually also come before us and ask for this up zoning?
49 That's a really good question. You know, I whether or not this is spot zoning is was really central to this review. And the hearings officer recommendation really felt like it was not. That term isn't really in the code, but that the criteria and the kinds of factors we were weighing were central to kind of that question of whether this is appropriate for that location. It is, you know, we don't get very many comprehensive plan map amendments. We get maybe one a year. And so it is possible that other properties along this corridor could come in, but it's not something that we've really seen before in any I mean, these this is a fairly involved review and not something that people undertake lightly. We don't want to necessarily approve a specific development proposal, because if that were to change due to any factors going forward, they'd have to come back through the process and get approval for the new proposal. And, you know, 50 years down the line, we really don't want to be referring back to very dated land use approvals when we're just talking about what the zoning regulations are that will apply to the site.
50 And just so I'm looking between the f.a.r increase and the height increase and the massing abilities, we're functionally quadrupling the amount of developable land on these two lots. Is that more or less correct?
51 So I wouldn't I mentioned that there are bonus potentials for the current based zoning. The current site can have up to four units. It can even if they're going to do deeply affordable units, they can have up to six units on the property. And with that they will get the extra five feet of height and they will be allowed more floor area. So they, you know, it's it is an increase. It's not I wouldn't say it's quadrupling.
52 Well, didn't it say that it was not only increasing f.a.r but also going from 40% developable on the lot to 80% developable.
53 Right. Residential building coverage is determined through a calculation. So it will look different for smaller sites versus larger. But yeah, for this calculation, the current building coverage allowance is I calculated 41%. And that would be going up to 85.
54 Thank you.
55 Councilor Smith.
56 Thank you, madam president. Have we seen in the past before where people will get the zoning changed? It's easier to get the zoning change without having a project on it, and then come back six months to a year later to now ask for permitting for a new project. Have you seen that pattern in, in terms of how others have done different zoning requests?
57 Right. Since we're not approving a specific development with this particular case type, they will be limited to what we're granting them in terms of the maximum kind of box they can build to. And so that would be, you know, something that these applicants do have a proposal kind of in their back pocket. It's I don't know what, you know, development stage that is.
58 But right. Because I can just imagine someone is just trying to get zoning just because just just for their health, I mean.
59 Right, right.
60 Yeah.
61 Exactly. Yeah. What I understand is that they would like neighborhood scale commercial use on the site, which is not allowed on the under the RFP. So they're what they were, what they have looked at, which is not what we're reviewing in this case. But what they've looked at is like ground floor retail use with a couple of residential units above two story.
62 Because when I looked at this and they said there's no plans, I was like, this is crazy. Nobody's going to do that.
63 It's the only development type where we're a land use review where we're not.
64 So the other thing is they said that they had community input. Did they go to a neighborhood association? When was there community conversation that they had?
65 So we through land use reviews we have a notice requirement. So we're noticing to all properties within 400ft of the site. And we have our public hearing that we're sending out that notice regarding. So anyone can come to that public hearing or submit testimony directly to the hearings office. And that would be recorded and incorporated into the analysis.
66 So if we're talking about 400ft, that's probably only. Maybe 6 or 8 residents.
67 In each direction.
68 Direction. Yes. Okay. Well, thank you for explaining this and bringing this forward today. Thank you, thank you.
69 No one else in the queue. Thank you for bringing this forward and for the work that our planners have done. And we'd like to invite up the applicant at this time.
70 Thank you.
71 Thanks.
72 Should I sit. Over here?
73 Sure.
74 Okay.
75 Hi. Good afternoon. I'm christie white. I'm a land use attorney for the applicant, and I don't have to state my address. It looks like I want to start by thanking staff and the hearings officer for their work on this project, and for the recommendation of approval to the city council. And as council president said, this isn't an appeal. It's a review by the city council of the lower hearings, officers decision to recommend approval. And thanks to the saban neighborhood association for their support of this amendment. And there was reach out to the neighborhood association. And as a result of that, reach out, we received this nice letter of support. So there was no opposition to this. This is a housing project with a small commercial node that is the impetus for this zone change and comp plan amendment. The idea is to provide a historic and small commercial node gathering area across from irving park, which was historically how this neighborhood gathered. And so bringing that capability back to this vacant corner lot on the ground floor, with modest residential development above and beside it, is the idea behind this amendment. And to respond to a couple of questions from councilor Smith and councilor Dunphy, you don't move forward with a proposal unless you know you have the comprehensive plan map amended and the zone amended, because, of course, that would be incredibly risky without knowing whether the city was behind this. So the comprehensive plan map designation of mixed use disperse only has two implementing zones there cr and cm1. So those are the two zones that were compared throughout the process. And to answer another question about density, the forgotten fact here is the site is really small. So and the height limit is very modest. So you can't get the kind of far within that height limit based on a really small site being the relationship between the square footage you're allowed to develop and the square footage of the site area. So because we have such a tiny site, doubling that square footage keeps you under basically a two story building, which is entirely consistent with the surrounding parcels. And like another comparison for you is the existing. There's two legal lots of record. The one that staff showed you, which was a converted commercial storefront, and it has a little residential above that building is already above the fa that would be allowed in the cr zone, for example. So that's how small scale we're talking. And when you look at the math and run out the fa numbers, what you find is this building at two stories will likely come in below 30ft. And 30ft is the height limitation in the existing ar five zone. So it's once you input the site size into all of those equations, you end up with a pretty small and modest proposal. As we also discussed the area fremont carries other cm one zoning episodically, and it's not really spot zoning. It's there's an active corner. And there's a reason for having cm one at this corner. Our corner is vacant. Nearby is two large neighborhood churches. Right across the street as you saw was irving park. So it's a nice little corner node to bring in some low density commercial operation of some sort with adjacent residential. The site isn't isolated, as we said, and because it's integrated into the fabric of the community, I think the hearings officer found that this would be consistent with the character of the area. The change allows this vacant corner. As you can see, it's been undevelopable. It's a vacant corner across from irving park and transform it with these needed housing units and the commercial node. So I don't feel like I need to say anything more, because staff did a very comprehensive job of explaining the fabric and the area and the consistency with the surrounding zoning. So I would thank you for listening to us request that you also approve the hearing officer's recommendation. And of course, here to answer any questions.
76 Councilors, any questions for miss white? Okay. Thank you so much for being here today. We will move on to testimony from supporters of the applicant. Keelan. Could you call any testifiers up?
77 Yeah, we have one person signed up in support, johnny cortez galindo. So.
78 Sorry.
79 Johnny cortez galindo. Okay. Does it look like they're here? And that completes testimony?
80 Are there any opponents who have signed up to testify?
81 No one signed up.
82 We will move past the rebuttal to the applicant then, or for the applicant then and move into council discussion. Councilors, does anybody have questions, comments? Discussion? Councilor Green?
83 Thank you, madam president. I guess my only concern or question would be, would this one off zoning change preclude any future up zoning in that district? And I guess maybe that's a question for any expert in the room, but or anyone on council.
84 Lauren do you want to take that.
85 So let me make sure I understand. Would this this zone change prevent future zone changes from coming in? No. Absolutely not. So the way it works is there's a legislative process for zone and comp plan map changes, which is what staff was referring to. Kind of happens on the 20 year plan. And then there's a process in the zoning code for individual property owners to come over in a quasi judicial and change their zoning. So this would not prevent future property owners from coming in, nor would it require future property owners to come in. It's specific to this site.
86 Thank you. That does answer my question. I would then say, I think this is a great use of the flexibilities we have in our in our zoning code, and I think we should be accommodative to, to allow someone to fill a little gap that I think the neighborhood needs.
87 Councilor clerk.
88 Thank you, madam president. That's exactly what I was going to say. Just it's good to see infill. That's exactly what we want. We have vacant lots everywhere that we need to see more housing and small scale commercial development. So thank you.
89 I have a quick question and I'm not sure if it's for staff. Perhaps there is a comment that there had at one point been a question about height, but no follow up through the process of review. Did staff here at all from any of the neighbors who had been notified about their thoughts on this? Since we don't have anybody testifying today.
90 Right. So the individual who came to the hearings, officer hearing was the next door neighbor to the east and was basically asking, does this mean that they could build higher next to my property? And, you know, short answer, potentially, because they're going from 30ft to 35ft, that would be the extent of it.
91 And we heard from the applicant that with the f.a.r as well, that is technically allowed by the height zoning, it wouldn't be functionally allowed because of the size of the property. Is that accurate?
92 Right? I mean, I think the applicant intends to keep the existing kind of historic building in place and develop the vacant portion. Of course, this process wouldn't require that they do that. So, you know, I'm not a developer, so I don't know, you know, could they do three stories and still meet all of the other, you know, things? Would that look wild? Would it function the way we would want them to? I don't know the answer to that. So three stories is the max that you could get. And that would be the same right now. If they were to develop up to six units, they get an extra five feet of height as well. So potentially even with the current zoning, they would.
93 So in terms of impact on neighbors, it allows for commercial as opposed to just residential. It allows for more of the lot to be used. But in terms of height, building type, things like that, there's not a functional change for neighbors in what's allowed.
94 It depends on if you mean, you know, think five feet is functional. I will say that commercial zones require additional setbacks from adjacent properties to try to buffer against those, and require buffer landscape buffers. So instead of five feet, which is what's currently allowed the minimum setback from adjacent residential lots goes up to ten feet with landscaping.
95 More setback would be required after the change.
96 Correct?
97 Perfect. Thank you so much councilor Kanal.
98 Just wanted to clarify for you. Sorry. I'm going to keep you up here. So you mentioned just a second ago that it wouldn't require and this is I want to be clear, I'm not suggesting it for this particular project. I'm just trying to understand. You mentioned that it wouldn't require any particular type of development on it. Is that the sort of thing and maybe this is more of a question for the attorneys. That could be you mentioned the four types of council actions to take on this. And the second one involved conditions. Is that the sort of thing that that would fit into a potential condition on? Again, not necessarily this project just in general.
99 Yeah. So council does have the ability when doing a comp plan, zone map change to condition and specify. I think, as amanda alluded to earlier though, that that tends to create problems down the road. So for example, there in recent years there was a comp plan zone map change for a site in southwest. And the condition that council imposed at the time was to require it to be a grocery store. And that limited the. And there were some other limitations around that site and that limited council's ability or the applicant, the property owners ability to do anything with the site. Because it was such a specific limitation, it didn't really necessarily stand up the test of time. So, I mean, that's a choice, a policy decision council could make with a comprehensive plan zone map change. But there are reasons to kind of keep it consistent with more the zoning. There are other types of conditions council opposes imposes as well related to improvements for things. And we can talk about those as they come up with specific applications. But it's within the scope of your authority. Yes.
Procedural episode · turns 100–108
Parliamentary activity detected in this stretch (see the markers above). An editor-reviewed analysis has not been published for this episode yet.
100 Okay. And then sort of to clarify the previous question, do we does this change require any of the use to be residential or does that remain entirely within the permitting process and the property owner's authority.
101 Correct. We would we would just be going by what the cm one zone allows. Certainly residential isn't allowed use for all commercial zones.
102 Allowed but not required under. Yeah okay. Thank you.
103 Councilor do you have follow up there where we should have time for you to put forward a condition. Okay. Is there any other discussion? Okay. Given that we haven't had any testimony today and we haven't received any requests to leave the record open, I am going to close the evidentiary record. And counselors, you'll remember that land use items are a two meeting hearing. So at this point we are looking for a motion we can move to tentatively approve the application. We can move to tentatively approve it with conditions, or we could move to tentatively deny the application. There's a longer motion when we decide which we want to use, but I can help us read into the record, and then we'll vote on that and then come back at a time certain for a final vote.
104 Point of order. Can I use that? But are you saying if we. Because there's two meetings, right. If we do something like a tentative approval or a tentative denial, what does that mean for the second meeting.
105 That gives time for staff to prepare the official documents. And then at the second meeting, we vote on those official documents, which, unless we are asking for approval with conditions, we'll look just like what we have today, but in formal form, and then we will vote on those.
106 Yeah. And sorry, just to further, because this particular item is an ordinance. So typically for land use it would be a council order. And the council president's correct. It would come back for a second reading and it would be a final because it's an ordinance, because it's a map change which has to be done by ordinance. The code actually requires, unless there's an emergency, that amendment would happen and then there would be one more reading. So there's actually two more readings. Both of those would be short five minute roll call items. But the purpose of that is today, council would take a tentative vote, give direction to staff and the applicant to come back with findings reflecting how this application meets the applicable approval criteria. We return for this next reading, which we've been coordinating dates over here. That would be a quick item. And then one more reading for a final vote. Unless council decides to add an emergency clause and then it can be done at the second meeting.
107 So if we give a tentative approval or denial, then that needs to come. Like it requires a motion to say tentative approval, right? But does that require that the motion or also say why or say I need these things, or is there there's some certain set of things we're already going to get, but is this a place for us to request other materials in between the hearings?
108 Request other materials to review for the purposes of making your decision, or for what you would hope to see in the findings?
109 I guess both. I'm just asking larger process.
110 So typically the tentative vote gives direction for staff to make sure that the findings reflect council's decision and the things that we heard today. I recognize that there was not a lot heard today, but because the hearings officer's recommendation, we just want to make sure it fully reflects and complies with all of the applicable approval criteria. So that's what staff and the applicant and our office will return with. If there are things that were salient that council wants to make sure are included in the findings, we would want to definitely hear that, that feedback, but it is not necessary for council to supplement it. And then if you if what you're asking for is more information, because your vote could potentially change between the tentative and the subsequent, my recommendation would be to not make a vote today, if that's if that was your inclination. Only because once you make a tentative vote, it's sort of sending staff and the applicant off to do a whole lot of work. And should they come back? And then council says, actually, I want to change my vote. We need to then go do a whole lot of work again and come back so that I hope that answers your question. Yeah.
111 Councilor Green.
112 I move that we provide a tentative approval for the staff recommendation.
113 Second.
114 And just to clarify, the hearings officer's recommendation.
115 That is right.
116 Okay.
117 Does that suffice for what you need for a motion?
118 Yes. So I'll restate it for the purposes of the record. So the evidentiary record is closed for and no more oral and written testimony and council motion is to approve the hearing, uphold the hearing officer's recommendation, and tentatively approve and request that staff return. And I think the date that we settled on was March 19th at 6 p.m, with revised findings for council to amend the ordinance to reflect those revised findings.
119 Thank you.
120 I believe we have a second to that.
121 Yeah, I still second that. Yeah.
122 Councilor Green, are you in the queue for discussion? Councilor canal.
123 So my question is about the date you just mentioned. Is it possible to not have this be a evening meeting?
124 I was discussing this with the council clerk. The alternative would be to have it on a Thursday. It's because it's a roll call item. It would be reconvening you on that Thursday meeting to just make a five minute vote, as opposed to having it during the evening meeting and have it be. So it's either lengthening the evening meeting or having a meeting for the sole purpose of just calling a vote and then leaving again.
125 I think you may want to speak on this council minutes.
126 Well, I a quick question. We have closed the evidentiary record, but this is an ordinance which we usually accept public testimony on. Will we be accepting public testimony at that meeting or not?
127 No. The record would be closed. There'd be no testimony.
128 Yeah, okay.
129 And the amendment would not significantly lengthen that five minutes. What's that? My understanding is we would need to amend in the things that we've been discussing, that would not significantly increase the length of the.
130 No. It would just be so the, the, the vote on the 19th would be I moved to amend the ordinance to include staff's findings, and it would all be written up, and then it would just should just be a quick call your names, roll call, vote.
131 On the amendment. And then at the.
132 And then one more final vote and again could be whatever. Yeah. Just speeches should you choose to make them. Otherwise a quick roll call vote.
133 Thank you.
134 Councilors. Any other discussion keelan could you please call the roll?
135 Avalos I.
136 Dunphy I.
137 Smith I.
138 Canal I. Ryan hi.
139 Koyama Lane I Morillo. I Novick. I Clark. I Green.
140 I.
141 Pirtle-guiney I the finding or it's tentatively approved with a vote of 11 ayes.
142 Thank you.
143 So we'll return March 19th at 6 p.m. And I'll coordinate with staff and the applicant to get the findings prepared.
144 We may want to say 6:05 p.m. I believe our meeting formally starts at 6 p.m.
145 Right. Is the time certain? Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
146 605605 okay.
147 Thank you. Lauren, do you have anything else you need from us on this agenda item?
148 I do not, okay.
149 We will reconsider this on our March 19th agenda.
150 Council president, I'm so sorry. That was completely my mistake. We would actually want to set the time certain for 615, because we'll hear public communications first for the first 15 minutes. So perfect. I'm sorry. 615 we will.
151 We will hear this agenda item again on March 19th at 6:15 p.m. And with that we will close the council meeting. Thank you all so much for being here.