WEBVTT 1 00:14:33.451 --> 00:14:35.299 Councilor Avalos, are you available online? 2 00:14:41.264 --> 00:14:41.966 Great, thank you. 3 00:14:47.080 --> 00:14:47.889 Good afternoon. 4 00:14:49.280 --> 00:14:52.291 Calling back to order this recessed meeting of the Portland City Council. 5 00:14:52.388 --> 00:14:56.264 It's 2:02 on Thursday, July 23rd. 6 00:14:58.133 --> 00:14:59.043 Rebecca, can you please call the roll? 7 00:15:00.580 --> 00:15:01.149 Good afternoon. 8 00:15:01.409 --> 00:15:02.126 Koyama Lane? 9 00:15:02.419 --> 00:15:02.745 Present. 10 00:15:02.909 --> 00:15:03.490 Council Vice President Olivia Clark? 11 00:15:03.490 --> 00:15:03.750 Present. 12 00:15:03.750 --> 00:15:04.009 Mayor Kevin Lewis? 13 00:15:04.009 --> 00:15:04.009 Present. 14 00:15:04.009 --> 00:15:04.009 Council Member Marianne Sawant. 15 00:15:04.009 --> 00:15:04.210 Present. 16 00:15:04.210 --> 00:15:04.250 Councilor Angelita Morillo? 17 00:15:04.250 --> 00:15:04.450 Here. 18 00:15:04.450 --> 00:15:05.289 City Manager Raymond C. Lee? 19 00:15:05.289 --> 00:15:05.289 Present. 20 00:15:05.289 --> 00:15:05.289 Councilor Mitch Green? 21 00:15:05.289 --> 00:15:09.049 Here. 22 00:15:09.049 --> 00:15:10.190 Councilor Eric Zimmerman? 23 00:15:10.190 --> 00:15:10.730 Here. 24 00:15:10.730 --> 00:15:11.789 Councilor Samir Khan? 25 00:15:11.789 --> 00:15:13.190 Present. 26 00:15:14.049 --> 00:15:14.049 Present. 27 00:15:14.649 --> 00:15:15.730 Present. 28 00:15:15.730 --> 00:15:16.929 Councilor Mimi Swartz? 29 00:15:16.929 --> 00:15:18.230 Present. 30 00:15:18.230 --> 00:15:18.230 Councilor Jamie Dunphy? 31 00:15:18.230 --> 00:15:22.250 Here. 32 00:15:22.909 --> 00:15:27.090 And can we please read the rules of decorum for the chamber? 33 00:15:27.870 --> 00:15:29.450 Good afternoon. 34 00:15:29.450 --> 00:15:31.179 Welcome to the Portland City Council. 35 00:15:31.677 --> 00:15:40.899 To testify before council in person or virtually, you must sign up in advance on the council agenda, www.portland.gov/council/agenda. 36 00:15:41.461 --> 00:15:44.333 Information on engaging with council can be found on the council clerk's webpage. 37 00:15:45.010 --> 00:15:48.690 Individuals may testify for 3 minutes unless the presiding officer states otherwise. 38 00:15:48.785 --> 00:15:50.980 Your microphone will be muted when your time is over. 39 00:15:51.389 --> 00:15:52.761 The presiding officer preserves order. 40 00:15:52.875 --> 00:16:00.028 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. 41 00:16:00.626 --> 00:16:02.375 If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given. 42 00:16:02.567 --> 00:16:05.023 Further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting. 43 00:16:05.697 --> 00:16:08.664 Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass. 44 00:16:08.745 --> 00:16:11.440 Additionally, council may take a short recess and reconvene virtually. 45 00:16:12.177 --> 00:16:14.360 Your testimony should address the matter being considered. 46 00:16:14.424 --> 00:16:16.076 When testifying, state your name for the record. 47 00:16:16.285 --> 00:16:17.537 Your address is not necessary. 48 00:16:17.745 --> 00:16:20.264 If you are a lobbyist, identify the organization you represent. 49 00:16:20.778 --> 00:16:23.955 Virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when the council clerk calls your name. 50 00:16:24.227 --> 00:16:24.629 Thank you. 51 00:16:24.950 --> 00:16:25.751 Thank you very much. 52 00:16:25.831 --> 00:16:33.683 Colleagues, we have 5 items today, including a land use item, A sec— a single second reading and 3 first readings of non-emergency ordinances. 53 00:16:33.812 --> 00:16:35.908 Let's see if we can get through all of it today. 54 00:16:36.198 --> 00:16:37.663 Uh, can we please call item number 8? 55 00:16:38.188 --> 00:16:38.828 Our time's certain. 56 00:16:42.051 --> 00:16:57.168 Item 8, amend the comprehensive plan map and zoning map for a vacant lot on Northwest 31st Ave described as Willamette Heights Addition Block 18, Lot 14, at the request of Portland Parks and Recreation, LU 26-007967. 57 00:17:06.096 --> 00:17:09.865 Colleagues, first our city attorney is going to make some announcements about today's hearing. 58 00:17:10.847 --> 00:17:11.073 Lauren. 59 00:17:13.182 --> 00:17:15.664 Hello, uh, this is an evidentiary hearing. 60 00:17:16.020 --> 00:17:28.932 This means you may submit new evidence in to the council in support of your arguments, um, for council consideration of a hearings officer recommendation on a comprehensive plan map amendment Testimony will be heard as follows. 61 00:17:29.125 --> 00:17:31.854 We will begin with a staff report by PP&D staff. 62 00:17:31.998 --> 00:17:35.834 Following the staff report, the City Council will hear from interested persons in the following order. 63 00:17:36.171 --> 00:17:43.616 The applicant will go first and will have 15 minutes, um, or is it 10? 64 00:17:43.808 --> 00:17:43.921 10. 65 00:17:44.049 --> 00:17:48.142 10 Minutes, sorry, following this, uh, uh, to address Council. 66 00:17:48.286 --> 00:17:52.666 After the applicant, Council will hear from individuals or organizations who support the applicant's proposal. 67 00:17:53.019 --> 00:17:54.336 Each person will have 3 minutes to speak. 68 00:17:55.269 --> 00:17:59.157 Next, council will hear from persons or organizations who oppose the applicant's proposal. 69 00:17:59.221 --> 00:18:01.165 Again, each person will have 3 minutes. 70 00:18:01.551 --> 00:18:09.249 If there was testimony in opposition to the applicant's proposal, the applicant will have 5 additional minutes to rebut the testimony given in opposition to the proposal. 71 00:18:09.666 --> 00:18:11.963 Council may then close the hearing and deliberate. 72 00:18:12.623 --> 00:18:19.276 As this is a non-emergency ordinance, it will pass the second reading, and council may make amendments to the ordinance and findings or direct staff to return with amendments. 73 00:18:20.432 --> 00:18:21.282 Scope of testimony. 74 00:18:22.278 --> 00:18:25.907 I would like to announce several guidelines for those who will be addressing City Council today. 75 00:18:26.277 --> 00:18:27.786 Submitting evidence into the record. 76 00:18:28.380 --> 00:18:33.308 Any letters or documents you wish to become part of the record should be given to the council clerk after you testify. 77 00:18:33.855 --> 00:18:45.848 Similarly, the original or a copy of any slides, photographs, drawings, maps, videos, or other items you show the council during your testimony, including PowerPoint presentations, should be given to the council clerk to make sure they become part of the record. 78 00:18:47.002 --> 00:18:49.711 Testimony must be directed to the approval criteria. 79 00:18:50.192 --> 00:19:01.316 Any testimony, arguments, and 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 that you believe will apply to the decision. 80 00:19:01.909 --> 00:19:06.813 PP&D staff will identify the applicable approval criteria as a part of their staff report to council. 81 00:19:07.838 --> 00:19:10.018 Issues must be raised with specificity. 82 00:19:10.386 --> 00:19:15.307 You must raise an issue clearly enough to give the council and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue. 83 00:19:15.916 --> 00:19:20.490 If you do not, you'll be precluded from appealing to the Land Use Board of Appeals based on that issue. 84 00:19:21.453 --> 00:19:25.080 Applicants must identify constitutional challenges to conditions of approval. 85 00:19:25.305 --> 00:19:37.196 If the applicant fails to raise constitutional or other issues related to the 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. 86 00:19:38.625 --> 00:19:40.214 Thank you very much, Lauren. 87 00:19:40.873 --> 00:19:47.518 Uh, colleagues, first The next item on my little script here is to ask if any councilors wish to declare a conflict of interest. 88 00:19:51.240 --> 00:19:58.401 And additionally, since I'm not seeing anybody jump up with a conflict of interest, which is great, no councilors have declared a conflict of interest. 89 00:19:58.465 --> 00:20:04.241 Do any councilors have any ex parte contacts to declare or information gathered outside of this hearing to disclose? 90 00:20:06.130 --> 00:20:14.833 Similarly, seeing no councilors with ex parte communications Have any members of the council made any visits to the site involved in this matter? 91 00:20:17.112 --> 00:20:17.917 Again, nobody. 92 00:20:18.013 --> 00:20:19.642 So no councilors have visited the site. 93 00:20:20.980 --> 00:20:21.221 Great. 94 00:20:21.383 --> 00:20:24.380 So we're now moving into the testimony portion. 95 00:20:24.685 --> 00:20:31.691 First, the staff report, followed by the presentation of the applicant, then supporters of the applicant, then opponents of the applicant. 96 00:20:31.997 --> 00:20:35.409 And if there has been opposing testimony, the applicant will be able to give rebuttal. 97 00:20:35.464 --> 00:20:35.704 Thank you, Mayor. 98 00:20:36.445 --> 00:20:38.160 Let's move into staff presentation. 99 00:20:38.224 --> 00:20:38.516 Welcome. 100 00:20:40.310 --> 00:20:40.634 Thank you. 101 00:20:41.394 --> 00:20:44.741 I have a PowerPoint, should be coming up. 102 00:20:49.970 --> 00:20:50.227 Thank you. 103 00:20:50.645 --> 00:20:52.048 Yeah, so good afternoon. 104 00:20:52.257 --> 00:20:53.305 I am Andy Galizia. 105 00:20:53.368 --> 00:20:55.656 I'm a planner with Portland Permitting and Development. 106 00:20:56.365 --> 00:21:04.333 This is a land use hearing for a comprehensive plan map amendment and a zoning map amendment requested by Portland Parks and Recreation for a property that they own. 107 00:21:05.517 --> 00:21:15.121 For this type of application, a land use hearings officer employed by the City Auditor's Office holds an initial public hearing, and then the hearings officer issues a recommendation for City Council. 108 00:21:15.713 --> 00:21:19.705 The City Council then decides the application in another public hearing, which we're doing today. 109 00:21:20.989 --> 00:21:25.286 The initial public hearing with the hearings officer took place on April 20th of this year. 110 00:21:26.200 --> 00:21:33.719 No neighbors or other members of the public attended that hearing, and the hearings officer issued a written recommendation to Council on May the 20th. 111 00:21:33.767 --> 00:21:33.894 Thank you. 112 00:21:34.136 --> 00:21:37.480 And I'm going to summarize the findings and the recommendation from the hearings officer. 113 00:21:38.270 --> 00:21:38.804 Next slide, please. 114 00:21:42.115 --> 00:21:44.998 So this is an aerial view with the subject site outlined in blue. 115 00:21:45.770 --> 00:21:49.700 Subject site is a 5,000-square-foot vacant lot in Northwest Portland. 116 00:21:49.861 --> 00:21:53.597 It's on Northwest 31st Avenue between Northwest Thurman and Vaughn Streets. 117 00:21:54.474 --> 00:21:57.527 It is surrounded on 3 sides by lots developed with houses. 118 00:21:58.257 --> 00:22:02.525 The lot is owned by Portland Parks and Recreation, but it is not developed as a park. 119 00:22:03.068 --> 00:22:07.588 Portland Parks and Recreation would like to be able to sell this lot, and that's the reason for this application. 120 00:22:08.026 --> 00:22:08.642 Next slide, please. 121 00:22:11.750 --> 00:22:15.307 This is a view of the subject site looking east from Northwest 31st Avenue. 122 00:22:15.951 --> 00:22:19.478 It is a vacant lot, and you can see there are lots developed with houses on both sides. 123 00:22:19.832 --> 00:22:22.699 There's also another lot behind this one with a house on it. 124 00:22:23.359 --> 00:22:25.326 That house is out of view behind the trees in this photo. 125 00:22:25.954 --> 00:22:26.487 Next slide, please. 126 00:22:28.355 --> 00:22:30.345 Thank you. 127 00:22:31.323 --> 00:22:35.750 This map shows the zoning pattern in this area, which also reflects the comprehensive plan map. 128 00:22:36.455 --> 00:22:38.156 The subject site is outlined in red. 129 00:22:38.478 --> 00:22:40.114 It is zoned OS, or open space. 130 00:22:40.900 --> 00:22:45.824 The southeast part of this lot is also in the environmental conservation, or C overlay zone. 131 00:22:46.642 --> 00:23:01.796 The lot is surrounded by the R-5 residential zone on all sides, and this lot was also zoned R-5 until 2018, when it was rezoned to OS in a legislative action that applied the OS zone to Portland Parks and Recreation's properties that were not zoned OS already. 132 00:23:02.731 --> 00:23:04.634 This lot, though, again, is not part of any park. 133 00:23:05.019 --> 00:23:09.357 Lower McLay Park is on the same block, but this property is not contiguous with the park. 134 00:23:09.682 --> 00:23:10.300 Next slide, please. 135 00:23:13.036 --> 00:23:30.788 So in order for Portland Parks and Recreation to be able to sell this lot for housing development, they are requesting 2 things in this application: a comprehensive plan map amendment to remove the open space comprehensive plan designation from this property, And apply the Residential 5000 Comprehensive Plan map designation instead. 136 00:23:31.541 --> 00:23:38.884 And 2, a concurrent zoning map amendment to rezone the property from the Open Space or OS zone to the R-5 residential zone. 137 00:23:39.156 --> 00:23:44.013 And there would also be the same Environmental Conservation Overlay and a new Constrained Sites Overlay zone. 138 00:23:44.109 --> 00:23:45.457 Those are the C and Z overlays. 139 00:23:46.611 --> 00:23:51.099 In the lower left here, you can see the existing zoning map with the subject site in red hash marks. 140 00:23:51.726 --> 00:23:56.598 The purple dots show other properties in this area that are also owned by Portland Parks and Recreation. 141 00:23:57.229 --> 00:24:02.672 Again, Lower McLay Park covers part of this block, but the subject property for this review is not contiguous with the park. 142 00:24:04.106 --> 00:24:06.287 And in the lower right, you can see the proposed zoning map. 143 00:24:06.612 --> 00:24:09.523 The subject site would have the R-5 residential base zone. 144 00:24:10.192 --> 00:24:20.479 The environmental conservation or C overlay zone would remain unchanged in the southeast part of the site, and there would be a new overlay, the constrained sites or Z overlay, applied to the entire site. 145 00:24:21.042 --> 00:24:26.674 So by code, the Z overlay is always applied to lots in the R-5 zone when any part of the lot has the environmental conservation overlay. 146 00:24:29.159 --> 00:24:33.109 And what the Z overlay does is restrict development to a house or a duplex. 147 00:24:33.773 --> 00:24:41.522 The Z overlay does not allow triplexes, fourplexes, or cottage clusters, which are allowed on other R-5 zone lots without the Z overlay. 148 00:24:42.324 --> 00:24:42.961 Next slide, please. 149 00:24:45.912 --> 00:24:56.375 The comprehensive plan map amendment would remove the open space comprehensive plan map designation from this property and apply the residential R-5— I'm sorry, residential 5,000 designation instead. 150 00:24:57.071 --> 00:25:05.195 And this comprehensive plan map amendment is necessary for the property to be rezoned to the R-5 residential zone and then for a house or a duplex to be constructed on it. 151 00:25:06.348 --> 00:25:12.566 The approval criteria for the comprehensive plan map amendment are in zoning code section 33-810-050A. 152 00:25:13.655 --> 00:25:24.900 The criteria require that compared with the existing open space comprehensive plan map designation, the proposed residential 5,000 designation must be equally or more supportive of the comprehensive Thank you. 153 00:25:24.900 --> 00:25:24.900 Thank you, Mayor. 154 00:25:24.900 --> 00:25:24.900 Councilmember Herbold. 155 00:25:24.900 --> 00:25:24.900 Thank you, Mayor. 156 00:25:24.900 --> 00:25:26.619 The hearing officer found that the proposed ordinance would not be in conflict with the comprehensive plan as a whole. 157 00:25:26.619 --> 00:25:32.619 This criterion required an analysis of a number of different factors which are addressed in the hearings officer's recommendation. 158 00:25:32.619 --> 00:25:46.839 This includes Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan for the metropolitan region, the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals, the Northwest District Plan for this neighborhood, and comprehensive plan policies related to housing, natural resources, and public services. 159 00:25:47.799 --> 00:25:59.442 The hearings officer found that by creating an opportunity for new housing on a vacant lot in a central area with good access to services, the proposed amendment is equally or more supportive of the comprehensive plan as a whole. 160 00:26:00.452 --> 00:26:06.564 An opportunity for new housing directly supports a number of policy goals related to housing supply and efficient use of land. 161 00:26:07.590 --> 00:26:15.596 Various review groups at the city evaluated this request, and they all indicated that adequate public services are available for future residential development on this lot. 162 00:26:16.413 --> 00:26:30.750 Natural resources protections will remain through the existing environmental conservation overlay that will remain over the southeast part of this lot And also from Title 11 Tree Code regulations that regulate tree removal and require a minimum tree canopy on a residential development site. 163 00:26:31.381 --> 00:26:31.993 Next slide, please. 164 00:26:36.471 --> 00:26:48.836 The second part of this is the zoning map amendment to rezone the property to the R-5 residential zone, and the approval criteria for the zoning map amendment are in Zoning Code Section 33-855-050 and 33-855-060. 165 00:26:50.744 --> 00:26:55.424 And the first criterion is that the zoning map must be consistent with the comprehensive plan map. 166 00:26:56.151 --> 00:27:04.758 With concurrent approval of the comprehensive plan map amendment to the Residential 5000 designation, this zoning map amendment request meets this requirement. 167 00:27:04.871 --> 00:27:11.758 The R-5 residential zone that's proposed here is the only corresponding zone for the Residential 5000 comprehensive plan map designation. 168 00:27:12.986 --> 00:27:18.644 The second criterion is that adequate public services must be available to serve development that could occur in the R-5 zone. 169 00:27:19.201 --> 00:27:21.611 Which on this lot would be a house or a duplex. 170 00:27:22.654 --> 00:27:25.769 Again, different review groups at the city evaluated this request. 171 00:27:25.849 --> 00:27:30.907 They all indicated that adequate public services are available for possible residential development on this site. 172 00:27:31.325 --> 00:27:36.784 This includes water, sewer, stormwater, police, and the capacity of the transportation system in the area. 173 00:27:38.053 --> 00:27:48.724 And lastly, the application of the Z overlay or the constrained sites overlay must be necessary to address a situation And must be consistent with the adoption criteria for the overlay and with the comprehensive plan. 174 00:27:49.864 --> 00:28:03.541 Again, the Z overlay limits development to a house or a duplex, and the Z overlay adoption criteria in the zoning code require the Z overlay on the entirety of all R-5 zone lots when any part of that lot has the environmental conservation zone. 175 00:28:04.311 --> 00:28:10.934 So the fact that the southeast corner of this lot is in the environmental conservation zone is a situation that requires the Z overlay to be applied. 176 00:28:10.982 --> 00:28:11.095 Thank you. 177 00:28:12.538 --> 00:28:25.317 The Z overlay code was adopted by the City Council with a residential infill project in 2020, and at that time, all components of the residential infill project, including the new Z overlay at that time, were found to be consistent with the comprehensive plan. 178 00:28:26.157 --> 00:28:26.772 Next slide, please. 179 00:28:28.740 --> 00:28:32.119 So the hearings officer found that all of the applicable approval criteria were met. 180 00:28:32.555 --> 00:28:39.170 So the hearings officer recommended approval of the comprehensive plan map amendment to apply the Residential 5000 comprehensive plan map designation. 181 00:28:39.240 --> 00:28:39.450 Thank you. 182 00:28:40.117 --> 00:28:49.054 And approval of the zoning map amendment to apply the R-5 residential zone alongside the existing environmental conservation zone and the new constrained sites or Z overlay zone. 183 00:28:49.641 --> 00:28:50.277 Uh, next slide, please. 184 00:28:53.326 --> 00:28:54.686 And that concludes my presentation. 185 00:28:54.736 --> 00:28:55.768 Be happy to answer any questions. 186 00:28:56.912 --> 00:28:57.609 Thank you very much. 187 00:28:59.086 --> 00:29:02.364 Colleagues, are there any technical or clarifying questions from the presentation? 188 00:29:07.145 --> 00:29:07.772 Councilor Zimmerman. 189 00:29:08.368 --> 00:29:08.546 Thanks. 190 00:29:08.609 --> 00:29:14.932 I just want to make sure I understand that this was R-5, then in 2018 we made it open space, now we're going to make it R-5 again? 191 00:29:15.349 --> 00:29:15.769 That's correct. 192 00:29:16.508 --> 00:29:20.269 Okay, thanks. 193 00:29:21.071 --> 00:29:21.810 Vice President Clark. 194 00:29:22.694 --> 00:29:27.130 I'm not sure this is really relevant, but can I ask, it looks like there's a driveway. 195 00:29:27.194 --> 00:29:28.655 Did there used to be a house there? 196 00:29:30.053 --> 00:29:30.621 I don't believe so. 197 00:29:30.767 --> 00:29:37.748 I believe this was This has been a vacant lot for— I don't know if there was ever a house there, but I don't believe there was any house there anytime in the recent past. 198 00:29:38.217 --> 00:29:40.191 I was just curious because of the driveway. 199 00:29:40.240 --> 00:29:44.169 How— can I ask how the city became the owner of this lot? 200 00:29:45.510 --> 00:29:46.303 I don't know that either. 201 00:29:46.545 --> 00:29:48.114 Portland Parks and Recreation staff are here. 202 00:29:48.162 --> 00:29:49.819 They may know the answer to that question. 203 00:29:51.715 --> 00:29:54.574 If I may, I'm Zelaine Nunn from Portland Parks and Recreation. 204 00:29:55.672 --> 00:29:58.078 I believe it was a tax foreclosure about 100 years ago. 205 00:29:58.652 --> 00:29:59.838 And it's just been a vacant lot. 206 00:29:59.935 --> 00:30:01.749 I think there was a shed on there at one point. 207 00:30:01.957 --> 00:30:06.127 It's gotten some use from the neighborhood, but it's not ever been used formally by parks. 208 00:30:06.577 --> 00:30:07.332 Thank you. 209 00:30:08.663 --> 00:30:09.817 Thank you, Vice President Clark. 210 00:30:09.882 --> 00:30:10.412 Councilor Kanal. 211 00:30:10.667 --> 00:30:10.861 Thanks. 212 00:30:11.005 --> 00:30:16.268 Um, and I'm not 100% sure if you're the right folks to ask this to, but I appreciate the presentation. 213 00:30:16.316 --> 00:30:17.903 I'll just ask and let me know if not. 214 00:30:18.705 --> 00:30:19.364 Why now? 215 00:30:19.828 --> 00:30:21.368 What's motivating the change? 216 00:30:21.432 --> 00:30:24.192 Is there— I mean, does this link inextricably to a sale? 217 00:30:26.580 --> 00:30:27.653 So that, that is the plan. 218 00:30:27.926 --> 00:30:35.906 We went out a few— we went through the disposition process several years ago and got council approval to dispose of the property. 219 00:30:36.900 --> 00:30:43.390 We were finding that difficult to do with the OS zoning, so we're now looking to rezone it so that we can then sell it. 220 00:30:44.414 --> 00:30:46.226 Okay, council already voted on the sale? 221 00:30:46.498 --> 00:30:46.722 Yes. 222 00:30:47.075 --> 00:30:47.236 Okay. 223 00:30:48.517 --> 00:30:51.128 Prior to that, had there ever been a goal of acquiring the adjacent property? 224 00:30:56.950 --> 00:31:00.666 Uh, well, there's houses on either side. 225 00:31:00.861 --> 00:31:06.000 I'm not real sure what the parcel between that and Lower McLay is. 226 00:31:06.743 --> 00:31:08.990 Not that I'm aware of, I guess, is the answer to your question. 227 00:31:09.749 --> 00:31:09.911 Okay. 228 00:31:10.233 --> 00:31:18.108 I mean, what I'm trying to understand, and this might be outside the scope, is whether this is the best use of the property. 229 00:31:18.386 --> 00:31:23.957 Use of property, you know, in terms of losing the, the natural space, the green space. 230 00:31:24.038 --> 00:31:31.144 But, um, I'm trying to understand why— what motivated the, um, the sale, or the— I should say the, uh, the intent to sell. 231 00:31:31.709 --> 00:31:40.655 Um, at some later point, could you follow up and let, uh, maybe just via email and send over the information as to when council approved that? 232 00:31:41.721 --> 00:31:42.336 Uh, sure. 233 00:31:42.546 --> 00:31:44.224 I do have the ordinance number with me if that would be helpful. 234 00:31:46.807 --> 00:31:47.066 Great. 235 00:31:47.549 --> 00:31:49.019 Yeah. 236 00:31:50.133 --> 00:31:51.863 Uh, it was in 2021. 237 00:31:51.928 --> 00:31:54.583 It's Ordinance 190259. 238 00:31:56.282 --> 00:31:56.461 Great. 239 00:31:56.541 --> 00:31:57.756 And that declared it surplus. 240 00:32:00.526 --> 00:32:01.829 190—. 241 00:32:01.829 --> 00:32:02.104 Okay, cool. 242 00:32:02.152 --> 00:32:03.246 259. 243 00:32:03.423 --> 00:32:04.243 Yeah. 244 00:32:05.773 --> 00:32:05.951 Thanks. 245 00:32:06.401 --> 00:32:07.190 Thank you, Councilor Knoll. 246 00:32:07.463 --> 00:32:08.155 Councilor Pirtle-Guiney. 247 00:32:08.816 --> 00:32:09.926 Thank you, Council President. 248 00:32:10.038 --> 00:32:16.582 Also, Possibly outside the scope of what we're doing here, but I will ask because it continues on where my colleague was going. 249 00:32:17.017 --> 00:32:28.699 Because this was approved as surplus previously, after any rezoning that this council may approve, does Parks then have the ability to sell this without coming back to council? 250 00:32:28.796 --> 00:32:34.739 Or because that zoning change occurred, would there need to be any further action by council before a sale occurred? 251 00:32:36.286 --> 00:32:39.195 To my understanding, we do not need to go back to council. 252 00:32:40.939 --> 00:32:42.914 Okay, thank you, Council President. 253 00:32:43.317 --> 00:32:44.217 Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney. 254 00:32:44.377 --> 00:32:45.037 Councilor Novick. 255 00:32:46.210 --> 00:32:52.936 Mr. President, I just wanted to suggest that maybe we should establish a policy that when we foreclose on a property, we should check in every 100 years to see if it's zoned properly. 256 00:32:54.787 --> 00:32:55.336 Good suggestion. 257 00:32:55.528 --> 00:32:56.255 Excellent. 258 00:32:56.480 --> 00:32:59.933 That concludes the technical or clarifying questions from councilors. 259 00:33:00.047 --> 00:33:00.627 Thank you very much. 260 00:33:00.709 --> 00:33:04.020 I think we're going to move now to We'll now move to the presentation of the applicant. 261 00:33:14.029 --> 00:33:14.401 Good afternoon. 262 00:33:14.771 --> 00:33:15.709 My name is Chris Hagerman. 263 00:33:15.806 --> 00:33:17.178 I'm with the Bookin Group. 264 00:33:17.728 --> 00:33:20.714 We were the land use planners that worked with Parks on this process. 265 00:33:23.298 --> 00:33:34.373 We are delighted with the staff report, delighted with the work that the city has done And we have no further presentation at this time except to make ourselves available for your questions. 266 00:33:36.582 --> 00:33:36.729 Excellent. 267 00:33:36.826 --> 00:33:37.152 Thank you. 268 00:33:37.395 --> 00:33:41.220 Colleagues, do you have any questions for our applicant? 269 00:33:43.689 --> 00:33:45.323 Councilor Pirtle-Guiney, still in the—. 270 00:33:45.646 --> 00:33:46.844 Sorry, that's old. 271 00:33:47.830 --> 00:33:48.348 Thank you. 272 00:33:48.396 --> 00:33:48.655 There we go. 273 00:33:51.722 --> 00:33:54.675 Seeing no further questions for our applicant, Questions from any councilors? 274 00:33:54.904 --> 00:33:56.018 Thank you very much for your presentation. 275 00:33:58.039 --> 00:34:01.156 We're now moving to testimony from supporters of the applicant. 276 00:34:01.221 --> 00:34:03.288 Do we have any signed up for that? 277 00:34:03.417 --> 00:34:04.289 No one is signed up. 278 00:34:04.779 --> 00:34:04.924 Okay. 279 00:34:06.255 --> 00:34:08.670 And do we have any opponents of the applicant? 280 00:34:08.784 --> 00:34:10.063 One person is signed up. 281 00:34:10.632 --> 00:34:12.726 Ghalib bin Imhotep El. 282 00:34:15.385 --> 00:34:15.876 Welcome. 283 00:34:16.106 --> 00:34:16.681 Come on down. 284 00:34:22.467 --> 00:34:22.710 Okay. 285 00:34:23.583 --> 00:34:28.030 I prepared this Monday, maybe Tuesday, before Wednesday happened. 286 00:34:28.985 --> 00:34:42.626 And though this applies specifically to this, I think what happened Wednesday night or Wednesday afternoon when, um, that last agenda item, I think this is a perfect example of what needs to happen as far as change is concerned. 287 00:34:43.786 --> 00:34:48.188 Now, I chose to speak on this exact— let me start off by saying good afternoon, councilors. 288 00:34:48.653 --> 00:34:53.041 I am Ghalib Benimut M. Hotep L., and I reside— I am domiciled in District 4. 289 00:34:54.623 --> 00:35:00.233 I chose to speak on this exact ordinance for a reason that may not sit well with you, and it does not sit well with me either. 290 00:35:02.331 --> 00:35:16.496 When City Administrator Lee spoke of change management, it is my sincerest hope that the idea was for the management to change the culture and the processes, or refine the processes, in the name of transparency, Accountability and diligence. 291 00:35:17.929 --> 00:35:20.280 This process does not feel like change. 292 00:35:20.972 --> 00:35:22.197 That's why I'm opposed to it. 293 00:35:23.436 --> 00:35:25.039 I don't oppose this ordinance on its merits. 294 00:35:25.217 --> 00:35:26.380 It's, it's a simple change. 295 00:35:26.445 --> 00:35:32.954 5,000 Square feet of open space to 5,000 square feet of residence, probably for a duplex, 2 single-family dwellings. 296 00:35:35.500 --> 00:35:37.900 My opposition is in the process and the language. 297 00:35:39.478 --> 00:35:45.965 I have too many questions that lack answers, and it is my hope that these answers have been asked and answered already. 298 00:35:46.929 --> 00:35:52.862 First question, why were there only 2 people in that initial public hearing that was a Zoom call? 299 00:35:54.992 --> 00:36:03.353 The 2 people that were adjacent in the property, the 2 property owners of the adjacent properties, I think they would have some interest in what's going on with that property there in the middle. 300 00:36:04.655 --> 00:36:09.505 But there's been this public outcry about these hearings and the notice that's given of them. 301 00:36:09.568 --> 00:36:09.746 Thank you. 302 00:36:10.327 --> 00:36:18.572 And yet here we are having another meeting where there is just the assigned group and the Portland Parks and Recreation Bureau. 303 00:36:18.635 --> 00:36:20.585 So there's no other additional input. 304 00:36:21.197 --> 00:36:22.099 That's questionable. 305 00:36:24.273 --> 00:36:29.929 There's also this question: when and where will this actual lot be made available for purchase? 306 00:36:30.463 --> 00:36:31.706 That question's already been answered. 307 00:36:32.190 --> 00:36:34.077 It was purchased back in 2021. 308 00:36:34.820 --> 00:36:34.965 Thank you. 309 00:36:35.804 --> 00:36:55.141 Considering that the change to open space occurred in 2018 with a comprehensive update, a process that is required by ORS Revised Statute 197 to actually provide to the state, why pass an ordinance that's contrary to those goals that are set to be realized by 2035? 310 00:36:55.981 --> 00:36:57.164 Is that progressive? 311 00:36:58.454 --> 00:37:02.668 Why does the language keep referring to the PP&R not using the space as a park? 312 00:37:03.686 --> 00:37:04.639 That was never the intention. 313 00:37:05.030 --> 00:37:09.576 It was meant to be an open space for clean air, clean water, and vegetation. 314 00:37:10.012 --> 00:37:14.860 Basically greenery, because trees are our carbon dioxide scrubs. 315 00:37:14.958 --> 00:37:15.873 That's what they are for us. 316 00:37:16.202 --> 00:37:18.657 We breathe in good oxygen because we have those trees there. 317 00:37:20.802 --> 00:37:23.445 So why would they consider it a legislative process? 318 00:37:23.721 --> 00:37:24.936 Why make vague language? 319 00:37:26.007 --> 00:37:28.148 Again, I don't intend to bombard you with issues. 320 00:37:28.503 --> 00:37:30.987 There's a simple solution: transparency. 321 00:37:32.302 --> 00:37:37.072 I oppose this ordinance Because it's not transparent and that lot has already been sold in lieu of this process. 322 00:37:37.731 --> 00:37:43.512 Your choice in this matter is your choice, but the scent of theocracy is ripe in the public documents. 323 00:37:44.250 --> 00:37:47.990 Just remember this, no matter what you choose, I love you all unconditionally. 324 00:37:48.248 --> 00:37:48.809 Thank you. 325 00:37:48.987 --> 00:37:49.757 Thank you very much. 326 00:38:01.411 --> 00:38:02.494 And Rebecca, does that conclude? 327 00:38:02.947 --> 00:38:03.902 That concludes testimony. 328 00:38:04.096 --> 00:38:11.967 Okay, as there was opposing testimony, the, the applicant is entitled up to 5 minutes for rebuttal if they so choose. 329 00:38:16.581 --> 00:38:19.978 Okay, the applicant has denied that. 330 00:38:20.155 --> 00:38:22.436 Okay, colleagues, discussion? 331 00:38:23.617 --> 00:38:24.215 Councilor Knoll. 332 00:38:25.849 --> 00:38:26.043 Thanks. 333 00:38:26.269 --> 00:38:28.518 Um, couple questions. 334 00:38:28.938 --> 00:38:34.503 Uh, first, just wanted to understand if I can get clarification on the current legal ownership of this property. 335 00:38:34.778 --> 00:38:42.190 Just want to respond, be responsive to the, the item, the, uh, point raised in testimony here. 336 00:38:44.775 --> 00:38:47.293 If either the applicant or the staff could come back on up. 337 00:38:47.715 --> 00:38:48.121 There you are. 338 00:38:48.447 --> 00:38:48.610 Cool. 339 00:38:48.690 --> 00:38:49.177 Thanks. 340 00:38:51.168 --> 00:38:53.985 So the property is currently owned by Portland Parks and Recreation. 341 00:38:56.112 --> 00:38:56.599 Okay. 342 00:38:57.099 --> 00:39:08.503 There are properties to the east and south that if hypothetically were acquired by the city would make it contiguous with the larger green space. 343 00:39:08.987 --> 00:39:15.045 Were those properties ever targeted by any part of the city for acquisition should they have become available? 344 00:39:22.742 --> 00:39:23.423 Good afternoon. 345 00:39:23.487 --> 00:39:27.507 Dylan Paul, Public Works Business Services, Real Estate Services. 346 00:39:28.333 --> 00:39:29.760 We represent Parks on this matter. 347 00:39:30.940 --> 00:39:38.699 Um, I can say from my experience working with Parks and Recreation that oftentimes we do look at adjacent parcels. 348 00:39:39.280 --> 00:39:48.134 Oftentimes we will buy an easement In order to create new access corridors, in this case, it wasn't something that was warranted or needed. 349 00:39:49.048 --> 00:39:55.679 This lot, in order to connect it to the park, would have taken a considerable considerable amount of resources. 350 00:39:55.793 --> 00:40:03.018 However, in most cases in the past, we would also record an easement and then end up selling the property. 351 00:40:03.579 --> 00:40:06.630 It just seemed unlikely and infeasible that we would ever. 352 00:40:06.840 --> 00:40:10.260 Get the corresponding easements required to connect an access point. 353 00:40:10.679 --> 00:40:15.777 And there were already 2 different— 3 different access points available for Maclay at this time. 354 00:40:16.018 --> 00:40:23.445 So it was seen as a low priority and potentially a bit of a liability since it was being used in an unpermitted fashion. 355 00:40:26.159 --> 00:40:26.690 Unpermitted. 356 00:40:26.820 --> 00:40:27.061 Okay. 357 00:40:28.847 --> 00:40:32.695 Was there ever a consideration of creating a community garden there? 358 00:40:33.425 --> 00:40:34.762 Or any other sort of usage? 359 00:40:35.860 --> 00:40:40.824 I feel like, you know, obviously we— there was a whole conversation on this prior to us getting here, so I'm just trying to understand. 360 00:40:41.449 --> 00:40:47.909 Yeah, great, great, you know, I think comment where we look at community gardens. 361 00:40:47.956 --> 00:40:52.121 Typically we're looking for much larger areas to provide those services. 362 00:40:52.233 --> 00:40:53.375 They can be very expensive. 363 00:40:53.826 --> 00:40:57.509 They can also have an impact on adjacent homes with a lot of different visitors. 364 00:40:58.510 --> 00:41:02.045 So this wasn't seen as an ideal situation for a community garden. 365 00:41:02.965 --> 00:41:07.951 But, you know, I'd be happy to follow up with, you know, where all of ours are and what criteria they look for. 366 00:41:08.032 --> 00:41:13.820 But most often we're looking for a much larger, you know, hopefully, you know, close to an acre. 367 00:41:14.371 --> 00:41:14.615 Okay. 368 00:41:16.050 --> 00:41:16.228 I—. 369 00:41:19.398 --> 00:41:29.172 So I haven't been to the site, but I have looked at it on Google Maps, and the satellite view looks Like a portion of it is kind of in that being used in that way. 370 00:41:29.447 --> 00:41:30.302 It's a little hard to tell. 371 00:41:31.449 --> 00:41:33.905 And obviously the street view, you can't see the back of the lot as easily. 372 00:41:34.710 --> 00:41:37.481 So that's the basis for the question. 373 00:41:37.759 --> 00:41:39.438 I'm also not 100% sure. 374 00:41:40.239 --> 00:41:53.818 I would love to get some follow-up that's outside of the scope of this document on what the criteria that Parks looks at for community gardens, because Just interested, would love to support him. 375 00:41:54.943 --> 00:42:13.737 I guess the only other thing I wanted to ask, we had a presentation in Committee of the Whole earlier today for Prosper Portland board appointees, and one of the things that got talked about in that was just how assertive, and I say this as a positive thing, and how proactive Prosper is with land acquisition. 376 00:42:15.846 --> 00:42:20.304 And I'm seeing a lot of sale but not a lot of purchase, Broadly through the administration. 377 00:42:20.496 --> 00:42:22.664 I don't know that I can say that that's specifically to parks. 378 00:42:23.708 --> 00:42:43.954 And so I think just 2 things to put a pin in for later, maybe for the city administrator, is I'd love to understand the sort of net on that as we start repivoting and reaffirming our interest in land banking as a council, but also how we can move away from Portland Parks owning land and get back to, or get to a place of Portland, the city of Portland owning land. 379 00:42:44.003 --> 00:42:44.469 Councilor Smith. 380 00:42:45.465 --> 00:42:51.614 Because one of the things that I think complicates this is that bureaus are, you know, we're not a city yet. 381 00:42:51.710 --> 00:42:59.177 We're 27 bureaus and a trash co. And I would love to get to a place where, yeah, and I know that's a priority for you as well, Mr. City Administrator. 382 00:42:59.577 --> 00:42:59.755 Thank you. 383 00:43:00.702 --> 00:43:01.489 Thank you, Councilor Kanal. 384 00:43:01.681 --> 00:43:02.291 Councilor Pirtle-Guiney. 385 00:43:02.644 --> 00:43:04.411 Thank you, Council President. 386 00:43:05.615 --> 00:43:07.188 What outreach was done to the neighbors? 387 00:43:07.445 --> 00:43:15.500 It is striking to me that Folks who have had an empty lot next to them have no opinion about this, whether positive or negative. 388 00:43:15.628 --> 00:43:21.353 I, I've seen situations with neighbors who feel strongly one way or another, but we're not hearing anything today. 389 00:43:22.458 --> 00:43:40.755 Yeah, so before the initial public hearing in April, there was a notice sent by mail to all property owners within 400 feet of the site, as well as to the neighborhood association district coalition, and there was a sign posted in front of the property Advertising to the public hearing with where to get more information on how to attend. 390 00:43:41.253 --> 00:43:47.585 So I would've thought too that people would've been more curious or concerned, but I did get some questions. 391 00:43:47.634 --> 00:43:56.927 So I know that there were some people who were aware of this, but I did not— no one— it's correct that it was just Mr. Hageman and myself at the last hearing, that none of the neighbors came or provided testimony. 392 00:43:57.362 --> 00:44:01.112 But you received questions from neighbors who wanted more information, clarification? 393 00:44:01.853 --> 00:44:02.045 Yeah. 394 00:44:02.663 --> 00:44:09.326 There was one neighbor who asked about whether, you know, how the property would be marketed and what the price might be. 395 00:44:09.485 --> 00:44:12.938 And Mr. Hageman responded at the first hearing that wasn't decided yet. 396 00:44:14.126 --> 00:44:20.275 I think I got a phone call from another person just asking some general questions about the process, I think, but nothing more than that. 397 00:44:20.789 --> 00:44:25.172 The notifications, though, it sounds like made it clear to neighbors that this change would likely lead to a sale. 398 00:44:26.585 --> 00:44:27.211 Yes, I think so. 399 00:44:27.307 --> 00:44:32.376 I mean, because it was, Talks about how it's for potential house or duplex or housing development in the future. 400 00:44:33.065 --> 00:44:33.306 Okay. 401 00:44:33.418 --> 00:44:36.898