►
From YouTube: House Bill (HB) 2001 Community Info Session
Description
On Thursday, July 22, 2021 the City of Bend hosted a presentation and question and answer session on House Bill (HB) 2001 and the proposed code amendments to implement the bill in Bend.
A
A
A
So
let
me
just
introduce
who's
on
the
call
from
the
city
we're
honored
to
have
counselor
keebler
here
with
us
to
help
provide
an
overview
michaela
oliver.
She
is
with
our
communications
department.
She
will
help
she's
kind
of
helping
run
things
behind
the
scenes
and
I'll
I'll
turn
it
over
to
here
in
a
couple
minutes
to
give
a
give
information.
Everybody,
if
you
want
to
ask
questions,
she'll,
tell
you
how
to
facilitate
that
lynn.
A
Mcconnell
who's,
our
affordable
housing
manager
pauline
hardy,
who
is
a
senior
planner
with
our
planning
division
in
the
community
development
department,
and
then
we
also
have
elizabeth
oscar,
who
is
with
our
city
attorney's
office.
So
the
agenda
for
this
evening
is
we
have
about
an
hour
of
information
and
presentations
that
will
be
provided.
That
includes
a
kind
of
an
overview
and
introduction
from
counselor
keebler
lynn.
A
A
Then
pauline
is
going
to
come
on
and
provide
a
review
of
the
kind
of
the
the
technical
aspects
of
the
proposed
code
amendments
and
the
process
that
we
that
was
developed
to
get
them
into
a
draft
form
and
then
we'll
have
around
an
hour
of
q
a
that.
Hopefully
we
can
provide
to
help
answer
some
questions.
A
A
I
want
everyone
to
know
that
you
know
I
know,
there's
been
a
lot
of
questions
about
the
outreach
that
has
occurred
to
this
point.
Staff
has
been
following
the
process
that
has
been
that
was
developed
in
coordination
with
the
city
council
and
the
planning
commission
that
includes
that
use
of
the
stakeholder
group.
That's
been
going
on
which
pauline
and
lynn
will
talk
about
just
to
help
develop
the
draft
code
that
is
being
presented
and
discussed
right
now.
A
The
the
the
code
and
information
that
is
being
shown
today
is
part
of
the
package
that
has
been
posted
and
sent
to
the
planning
commission
for
consideration
at
their
monday
meeting.
So
really,
the
intent
of
this
information
session
is
to
provide
clarifying
information
on
what
is
in
that
proposed
code
package.
A
This
is
not
the
place
to
deliberate
the
code.
This
is
really
the
place
to
make
sure
that
if
people
have
questions
about
what
is
in
the
code
and
what
discretion
the
city
has
and
how
it
was
developed,
we'd
be
more
than
happy
to
answer
that.
But
if
you
have
comments,
questions
concerns
and
want
to
provide
testimony
that
should
be
directed
to
the
planning,
commission
and
then
planning
commission
will
for
consider.
A
The
information
presented,
the
testimony
that
is
provided
they
will
provide
a
recommendation
to
city
council
that
city
council
date
has
yet
to
be
scheduled,
but
we're
thinking
it's
going
to
be
sometime
in
september
and
then
then
you'll
also
have
another
opportunity
to
provide
additional
testimony
to
city
council.
City
council
is
the
ultimate
approval
body
for
this
code
package,
and
if
you
have
information
about
this,
obviously
we
have
a
host
of
people
on
the
call
that
can
provide
detailed
information
about
how
that
process
is.
A
A
So
when
we
get
to
the
question
and
answer
section,
we
are
we're
going
to
kindly
ask
that.
Please
you
direct
your
questions
to
clarifying
information
regarding
the
code,
how
the
code
was
developed
and
the
process
either
that
we
did
to
get
here
or
the
process
moving
forward
again.
This
is
not
the
place
to
deliberate.
A
We
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
getting
the
right
information
out
there,
so
that
people
once
we
get
to
the
the
public
bodies
that
you
can
provide
appropriate
testimony
and
address
your
concerns,
any
questions
or
concerns
that
you
might
have
about
that.
So
that's
really
just
my
open
remarks.
I'm
going
to
turn
this
over
to
michaela
she's,
going
to
give
you
a
brief
kind
of
just
kind
of
clarify
instructions
on.
A
If
you
want
to
provide
questions,
how
to
go
about
that
and
then
makayla
will
hand
that
over
to
our
presenters
and
we
will
move
through
the
presentations
and
then
I
will
jump
back
on
once
we're
ready
to
start
the
question
and
answer
session
so
with
that
michaela.
I
will
turn
it
over
to
you.
Thanks
stress.
B
Hi
everyone
thank
you
so
much
for
being
here
tonight
and
as
russ
mentioned,
we
are
going
to
do
about
an
hour-long
presentation
and
then
there
will
be
an
hour-long
opportunity
for
questions
and
answers.
So
all
of
you
that
are
attending
you're
attending
as
attendees
as
zoom
webinars
call
it.
So
what
we're
going
to
need
you
to
do?
If
you
would
like
to
ask
a
question
or
provide
a
comment,
is
to
raise
your
hand.
You
can
do
that
now.
B
D
C
We
need
to
start
making
more
types
of
homes
for
more
folks,
so
this
really
is
a
is
a
big
deal
for
oregon.
It
was
a
big
deal
when
that
bill
was
passed,
and
now
here
we
are
a
couple
years
later
at
the
end
stages
of
actually
implementing
what
the
legislature
wanted
us
to
do.
So
I'm
I'm
eager
to
sit
through
this
presentation.
C
I
know
there's
been
a
great
presentation
already
to
our
planning
commission
we're
going
to
get
a
great
presentation
when
this
topic
comes
to
council.
So
it's
exciting
for
everybody
here
to
get
a
presentation
as
well
and
have
an
opportunity
to
have
that
q
a
and
have
questions
answered
about
this
particular
topic
as
you're
going
to
see
from
pauline.
When
she
talks
about
how
this
code
came
to
us
and
what
we
need
to
do
per
state
law.
We
don't
have
unlimited
discretion
in
how
we
implement
the
idea.
C
Made
rules
that
said
this
is
these:
are
the
paths
you
need
to
go
down
here
are
sort
of
the
sideboards
of
where
you
can't
go,
and
this
is
how
we
want
you
to
implement
this
code
and
put
it
into
your
own
city
code
as
we,
you
know,
on
a
certain
timeline
they've
given
us.
So
we'll
hear
from
pauline
about
that.
C
What
the
previous
city
council
decided
to
do
was
to
create
a
stakeholder
committee
to
help
advise
our
planning,
commission
and
our
staff
on
how
to
really
form
the
code
and
bring
it
up
through
our
normal
land
use
process.
So
the
question
for
that
group:
wasn't
you
know
if
we
should
do
this,
but
really
how?
What
should
it
look
like?
C
And
what
are
the
discretionary
areas
that
we
wanted
to
work
on
when
putting
this
code
together
for
bend?
So
the
stakeholder
group
consisted
of
people
who
know
how
to
build
homes
and
build
these
types
of
homes
and
could
lend
their
expertise,
and
that
was
supplemented
by
people
who
are
parts
of
the
neighborhood
leadership
alliance,
who
are
developers
or
architects.
People
who
are
experts
in
land
use
and
all
people
that
had
an
interest
and
a
stake
here
and
what
goes
on
in
our
community.
C
I'm
just
was
reading
stories
today
from
people.
I
know
who
are
young
professionals
or
a
home
with
two
accountants
or
people
who
want
to
start
a
family
here,
and
they
cannot
afford
a
home
even
though
they've
saved
for
years,
even
though
they
make
pretty
decent
money
and
now,
if
someone
is
living
in
a
rental
and
that
landlord
decides
to
sell
that
home,
the
options
are
so
limited.
People
are
thinking
about
maybe
having
to
live
in
their
car
for
the
foreseeable
future.
C
If
they
want
to
stay
here
and
bend,
I
don't
think
that's
acceptable
for
our
community.
We
want
to
have
a
community
that
welcomes
all
types
of
people
from
all
walks
of
life
and
people
that
make
all
different
types
of
incomes,
and
we
want
to
have
housing
options
for
them
so
that
they
know
that
there's
somewhere,
that
they
can
afford
to
rent
or
buy
in
our
city
and
they're
not
going
to
be
priced
out
and
have
to
move
out
of
our
great
community.
C
So
that's
also
what
plays
into
why.
We
have
some
urgency
right
now.
If
you've
been
paying
attention
to
actual
the
median
home
prices,
the
escalation
over
the
past
year
has
been
frightening.
I
would
say
almost
shocking
how
quickly
home
prices
have
gone
up
and
how
little
homes
are
available
for
people
who
want
them.
C
So
that's
why
we've
directed
staff
to
ensure
that
this
code
package
proceeds
quickly
through
the
public
process
and
that's
part
of
our
effort
to
respond
to
all
that
compelling
ongoing
testimony
and
like
the
stories
that
I've
heard
from
our
neighbors
about
their
struggles
to
be
able
to
secure,
safe
and
affordable
housing
and
bend.
So
again,
thanks
for
everybody
attending
today,
thanks
for
your
attention
to
this
topic,
this
will
be
recorded.
E
C
Everyone
I'm
lynne
mcconnell.
Hopefully
everyone
can
hear
me
okay
and
see
me
up
there
in
the
corner.
Maybe
it's
always
a
little
funky
in
these
presentations
when
the
photos
get
minimized,
but
hopefully
you
can
make
do
with
the
slides.
So
really
wanted
to
kick
us
off
by
saying
you,
as
you
know,
we're
here
for
presentation
on
the
house
bill
2001
code.
This
is
really
most
likely.
The
first
time
most
of
you
have
encountered
a
code
like
this,
where
the
state
has
really
deliberately
removed
much
of
the
public
process.
C
So
I
thought
it
would
be
helpful
to
provide
a
little
bit
of
context
on
how
we
ended
up
here,
but
before
we
go
into
that,
I
really
wanted
to
call
out
and
thanks
to
the
orchard
district
in
particular,
for
requesting
this
presentation
and
then
allowing
us
to
take
it
over
and
invite
the
whole
community.
We
really
appreciate
that
y'all
were
willing
to
be
flexible
and
and
allow
us
to
turn
this
into
a
bigger
situation.
C
C
So
many
of
you
know
that,
in
order
to
qualify
for
affordable
housing
in
bend,
if
you
want
a
rental
property,
you
have
to
be
making
60
percent
of
area
median
income
or
ami
or
lower.
So
that's
that
kind
of
reddish
bar
where's,
the
horizontal
bar
at
the
bottom,
there
60
ami
for
a
household
of
four
individuals.
That's
two
hundred
48
forty
dollars
annually
gross,
so
that's
sort
of
our
bar
for
rentals
for
ownership.
It's
eighty
percent
ami,
and
just
so
that
you
know
ami
is
a
term
of
art.
C
That
is
something
that
the
federal
housing
and
urban
development
department
so
hud
develops
each
year
and
tells
us
what
it
is.
We
don't
get
to
choose
this,
so
our
median
income,
as
you
can
see,
is
100
emi,
so
80
ami
being
the
top
out
for
true
publicly
supported,
affordable
housing
in
bend
means
that
there
are
a
whole
bunch
of
people
here
who
do
not
qualify
for
affordable
housing,
not
to
mention
the
many
who
do
qualify
and
cannot
get
in
because
we
don't
have
enough
of
that
either,
and
so
at
the
very
tip.
C
C
Vital
members
of
our
community
are
relying
on
us
to
allow
for
additional
housing
choice
so
that
they
can
remain
here,
and
I
do
want
to
be
clear
that
the
housing
types
that
we'll
be
talking
about
today
are
not
just
for
market
rate
housing.
This
is
also
tools
that
are
being
used
by
our
affordable
developers,
particularly
those
focused
on
an
ownership
product,
so
they're
actively
using
this
code
and
elements
of
it
as
well.
C
I'm
going
to
tell
you
also
that
we
do
not
have
the
subsidy
or
revenue
available
to
subsidize
our
way
out
of
this
crisis.
We
absolutely
need
to
rely
on
the
market
to
also
help
bring
the
solution,
and
that
involves
incentivizing
and
creating
options
for
that
type
of
housing
to
be
built.
So
michaela,
can
you
advance
please.
C
So
why
are
we
here?
Why
are
we
here
in
this
place
now
and
a
lot
of
it
comes
down
to
the
way
that
housing
production
is
structured.
So
there
are
a
lot
of
discretionary
approvals,
there's
exclusionary
zoning,
which
is
what
house
bill.
2001
is
trying
to
overcome
and
a
lot
of
nimbyism.
Among
other
things,
this
has
led
to
a
massive
shortage
which
is
really
more
acute
in
communities
with
very
robust
economic
development
and
job
creation.
So
we've
done
a
really
good
job
of
job
creation
in
bend.
C
We
continue
to
exceed
tops
of
lists
nationally
for
job
creation
and
economic
development,
but
our
housing
is
not
keeping
up.
So
what
this
image
is
showing
is
that
during
2010
to
2016
in
oregon,
we
produced
we
under
produced
housing,
significantly
statewide,
that
was
about
150
units
of
housing
that
were
underproduced
for
the
number
of
households
that
were
started
in
in
the
state
in
deschutes
county
for
every
new
household
that
formed
we
built
0.85
housing
starts.
C
So
definitely
not
enough
and
of
reasons
of
course,
leading
to
this,
and
I
can
tell
you
that
the
one
that
the
state
intended
to
address
is
that
big
changes
nearly
always
lead
to
pushback
from
folks
who
are
already
established
in
a
community
and
who
aren't
interested
in
change
and
I'm
gonna
say
I
think
all
of
us
at
different
points
feel
that
way
about
bend
right
myself
included.
I
I
love
ben.
I
love
how
it
is
now.
I
love
how
it
was
when
I
moved
here.
C
I
love
how
it
was
when
you
know
I
was
still
a
kid
and
we
came
up
and
and
would
visit
here,
25
000
people,
it's
hard
to
accept
change
sometimes,
but
that
is
the
the
charge
that
the
state
has
given
cities
to
do
is
to
ensure
that
we
have
housing
for
our
population
and
for
the
projected
population
growth.
So
you
all
will
hear
this
in
the
in
the
feedback
that
you
see
presented,
there's
a
lot
of
folks
who
are
asking
for
us
to
slow
down
the
process
and
find
ways
through.
C
C
So
nationally,
the
exact
same
trend
is
happening,
as
is
in
oregon.
We
are
under
building
significantly,
and
so
I'm
going
to
ask
you
to
use
a
grain
of
salt
as
you
look
at
this.
This
graph
is
from
the
economist
at
the
naval
federal
federal
credit
union,
so
pretty
credible
source,
but
I
have
not
been
able
to
completely
replicate
his
data,
so
that's
the
grain
of
salt
that
red
bar
on
the
right.
What
that's
representing
is
how
many
homes
each
of
these
bars
are
built
by
decade
nationally.
C
So
you
can
see,
I
don't
know
how
well
you
all
can
see
the
number
so
I'll
tell
you
the
the
far
left
5.4
million
homes,
though
that's
how
much
we
were
building
between
1930
and
1939
over
on
the
far
right
is
2010
to
2019
5.8
million
homes.
So
I'll
tell
you
the
data
that
I
have
been
able
to
piece
together
to
replicate.
This
has
put
us
right
in
the
eight
million
eight
and
a
half
million
homes
nationally
over
the
last
decade.
C
So
so
that's
the
grain
of
salt
that
I'd
asked
even
at
eight
and
a
half
million
homes,
we
are
still
building
at
the
levels
that
we
were
building
in
in
1940
and,
of
course
our
population
is
substantially
greater
now
than
it
was
so
when
supply
is
constrained
and
the
competition
really
escalates.
It's
our
lower
and
moderate
income
communities
and
those
who
have
been
historically
marginalized,
who
are
most
effective.
What
is
an
inconvenience
for
some
is
life-threatening
for
others,
and
we've
absolutely
seen
that
play
out
in
bend
even
just
this
year.
C
Ben
does
not
have
the
option
to
limit
growth.
We
can't
build
a
wall.
Every
angle
that
has
been
explored
by
council
by
staff
has
shown
that
we
just
can't.
So
our
other
option
then,
is
to
ensure
that
we're
creating
options,
housing
options
for
the
full
range
of
folks
and
not
just
the
elite,
and
we
need
these
options
in
every
neighborhood
in
bend
and
I'll
talk
about
that
in
a
minute.
C
Thank
you
mikayla.
So
the
impact
of
short
supply
is
rising
prices,
and
this
is
affecting
our
community
by
causing
something
called
rent
burden.
So
rent
burden
is
when
you
are
paying
more
than
30
of
your
gross
income
any
given
month
to
housing
costs.
Severe
rent
burden
is
when
you're
paying
more
than
50
of
your
gross
income
to
housing.
Pre-Coveted
bend,
which
is
what
this
slide
represents.
C
26.5
of
our
renter
households
were
paying
more
than
50
percent
of
their
income
to
housing.
So
let
me
just
make
that
clear.
Over
a
quarter
of
our
population
right
now
is
paying
more
than
50
percent
of
their
gross
income
to
housing
each
month.
This
means
that
they
are
making
the
choice
about
whether
to
pay
for
housing
or
food,
medical
or
child
care.
This
is
what
we
call
our
unstably
housed
population
and
they
are
living
on
the
brink
of
eviction
and
on
the
brink
of
houselessness.
C
Another
statistic
that
I
find
fascinating
is
that,
nationally
for
every
10
increase
in
rents,
there
is
a
corresponding
13.5
increase
in
houselessness
and
ben's
prices
have
risen
approximately
40
in
the
past
year,
so
if
you're
noticing
an
increase
in
healthlessness
community
members
living
on
the
street
or
in
vehicles
or
in
your
neighborhood,
where
you
never
anticipated
that
they
would
be.
This
is
exactly
why
so
the
date
is
going
to
take
some
time
to
catch
up.
C
We
know
we've
had
a
lot
of
in-migration
over
the
past
year,
but
each
of
us
have
heard
from
folks
who
are
struggling
to
make
it
work
here
and
that,
as
melanie
pointed
out,
counselor
keebler
really
does
not
is
not
limited
to
just
a
few
income
levels.
This
is
absolutely
across
the
spectrum,
so
switching
gears
a
little
bit
folks
in
ben
talk
a
lot
about
the
need
for
the
market
to
provide
housing
and
largely.
F
C
Absolutely
believe
that
they
are
right.
However,
I
do
believe
that
it's
vital
that
we
understand
one
of
the
reasons
that
we're
in
this
mess
and
the
fact
that
this
is
directly
linked
to
government
action
in
the
past.
So
most
of
you
may
have
heard
a
term
called
redlining
before
this
was
something
that
happened.
C
I'll,
walk
you
through
it
here
and
that's
what
we're
looking
at
right
now,
the
red
lighting
map
of
portland
from
back
in
the
day
so
redlining
was
invented
and
perpetuated
by
the
government,
which
was
the
fha,
the
federal
housing
administration
created
in
1936
as
sort
of
a
depression
recovery
tool.
The
green
areas
in
this
map
were
really
in
any
city
in
the
country.
At
the
time
were
rated
in
demand,
which
was
categorized
or
meaning
they
lacked
a
single
foreigner
or
negro
where
redlining
occurred.
C
C
Thus
it
became
kind
of
a
self-fulfilling
prophecy.
The
practice
continued
even
into
the
1960s
in
areas
and
because
a
majority
of
household
wealth
is
established
through
homeownership
and
equity.
The
shutout
of
certain
households
has
led
to
an
insane
wealth
and
asset
imbalance,
and
we
see
that
every
day
so
practices
along
the
lines
of
redlining
were
in
place
roughly
from
the
1930s
through
the
1960s.
C
C
So
when
people
talk
about
structural
racism,
this
is
what
they're
talking
about.
It's
exclusionary
zoning
and
fallout
from
redlining
go
ahead:
mit
miguel,
okay,
so
comprehensive
zoning
aka.
What
we
use
today
came
to
be
after
specific
racial
exclusion
zones
were
struck
down
by
the
courts.
That's
redlining
with
historical
documents
illustrating
that
the
intent
of
this
type
of
zoning
comprehensive
zoning
was
absolutely
the
same.
C
So
part
of
the
best
practice
that
was
touted
by
the
fha
was
creating
restrictive
zoning
ordinances.
That
would
continue
to
segregate
populations
from
one
another
and
during
this
time,
which
was
roughly
1945
to
1959,
aspiring
black
home
buyers
received
less
than
two
percent
of
all
mortgages
in
the
united
states.
C
So
there's
no
debate
that
the
encouragement
of
zoning
arose
from
the
same
segregation
principles
of
redlining
and
today,
people
of
color
by
poc
community
wealth
is
a
fraction
of
white
wealth
in
assets
in
homeownership
and
in
liquid
assets,
which
is
cash
for
every
dollar.
A
white
household
has,
on
average,
a
black
person
has
five
cents
and
black
home
ownership
is
typically
hovers
about
20
percent
less
than
white.
C
So
when
the
white
homeownership
rate
is
somewhere
in
the
70
range,
black
home
ownership
is
going
to
be
right
around
50
and,
of
course
our
black
community
was
dramatically
affected
by
the
last
large
recession
in
the
way
that
the
lending
laws
switched
and
the
way
that
that
different
mortgages
were
issued
I'll
say
so.
While
I
believe
the
vast
majority
of
the
testimony
that
folks
are
providing
is
not
coming
from
a
place
of
racism,
it's
very
impossible.
We
can't
erase
the
past.
C
It's
also
really
difficult,
sometimes
to
see
the
structural
inequities
that
sometimes
exist
without
stepping
backwards
a
bit
and
looking
at
these
issues
from
a
big
picture.
So
just
because
bend
has
looked
this
way,
since
any
one
of
us
moved
here
doesn't
mean
that
that's
how
it
should
be
again
when
folks
talk
about
structural
res
racism,
this
is
it
and
what
you're
looking
at
here
is
life
expectancy
in
baltimore
in
relation
to
redlined
areas,
so
that
redlined
map
is
on
the
left.
I'm
sorry
for
not
pointing
this
out.
C
First
red
line
map
is
on
the
left
and
on
the
right
is
life
expectancy
with
the
darker
areas
being
the
higher
life
expectancy?
So-
and
this
is,
I
believe,
from
2015
census
data,
so
the
effects
of
redlining
are
absolutely
still
with
us
and
not
going
away,
and
we
need
a
way
to
dramatically
overcome.
That
is
what
the
legislature
was
thinking.
C
So,
in
addition,
research
is
firm
that
lower
income,
children
who
grew
up
in
in
what's
termed
an
opportunity
area-
and
please
forget
any
reference
to
opportunity,
zones,
opportunity
areas,
etc.
That
you've
heard
before
this
is
also
a
term
of
art,
unfortunately
overlapping
with
a
number
of
other
terms
of
art.
They
use
the
word
opportunity,
so
children
who
grow
up
within
low
income
in
opportunity
areas,
which
is
higher
typically
higher
wealth
areas,
have
better
chance
of
success
than
those
raised
in
lower
income
areas.
C
So
it's
a
very
powerful
tool
to
be
able
to
cite
folks
of
low
income
throughout
our
community,
really
good
research
out
of
seattle
on
this.
If
folks
want
to
look
into
it
further,
there
was
a.
I
want
to
call
him
a
kid,
though
he
wasn't
a
kid.
He
was
probably
in
his
20s
tech
worker
youngster,
nothing
to
do
with
housing,
but
having
a
hard
time
finding
a
place
in
seattle.
C
So
this,
hopefully,
helps
explain
a
little
bit
about
why
house
bill.
2001
is
being
lauded
nationally
as
a
civil
rights
victory
tons
of
headlines
here
from
all
sorts
of
news
sources.
Talking
about
how
exclusionary
zoning
is
a
really
big
deal,
and
I
think
this
a
lot
of
it
started
really
showing
up
nationally
in
media
when
the
joint
center
for
housing
studies
at
harvard
university
published
the
headline
you
can
see
kind
of
midway
down
on
the
left,
eliminating
exclusionary
land
use
regulation
should
be
the
civil
rights
issue
of
our
time.
That's
a
bold,
bold
statement.
C
Obviously
this
happened.
This
publication
happened
before
covet
before
some
of
the
recent
race
relation
changes
that
we've
seen
out
there
nationally,
but
it
does
show
the
gravity
of
this
situation
and
how
at
least
preet
coven
and
pre-george
floyd.
This
was
absolutely
seen
by
thought
leaders
throughout
the
country
as
a
pretty
big
deal
for
us
to
overcome
some
of
our
systemic
inequities.
C
So,
all
right
back
one
more
sorry,
our
community
is
responding
in
just
the
way
the
legislature
said
that
they
would
by
saying
no
by
saying,
slow
down
or
essentially
fighting
the
changes
proposed
in
whatever
way
they
think
they
can
and
again.
I
have
no
doubt
that
they're,
legitimate
voices
and-
and
we
recognize
that
that
the
education
is
being
asked
for-
and
that's
part
of-
why
we're
here
today,
but
the
history
of
nimbyism
and
killing
development
is
something
again
that
the
legislature
absolutely
wanted
to
overcome.
C
So
let
me
be
clear
here:
the
purpose
of
this
law
is
to
remove
the
public's
ability
to
say
no
because
of
the
historic
underproduction
and
the
systemic
inequities
the
state
absolutely
intended
to
take
away
the
public's
ability
to
fight
this.
You
have
seen
a
lot
of
public
comment,
I'm
sure
or
heard
asking
to
ensure
that
the
public
has
a
say
in
the
implementation
and
for
better
or
worse
here
we
are,
the
state
removed
our
ability
to
weaken
the
impact
of
this
law.
C
So
the
way
I
like
to
think
about
it
as
a
working
mom
is
that
cities
got
grounded,
we
are
grounded.
We
did
not
do
the
homework
our
communities
needed
so
mom
or
the
state
stepped
in
to
take
our
privileges
away.
If
we
do
not
act,
we
will
end
up
with
a
model
code
which
is
in
many
cases
offers
less
than
what
we've
created
today.
Less
parking,
less
siting
and
design
options
and
less
choice.
Oregon
is
the
first
state
to
do
this
in
the
country,
but
we
are
in
good
company.
C
Minneapolis
is
next
to
us.
They
passed
a
very
comparable
law.
Discussions
have
arisen
pretty
much
everywhere
from
connecticut
to
california,
atlanta
detroit
boston
berkeley.
This
has
been
a
significant
academic
push
for
well,
as
you
can
see
by
these
headlines.
So,
okay,
next,
so
here's
a
rough
timeline
for
y'all
about
the
process
of
including
middle
housing
in
bend.
I
want
to
point
out
first
that
if
you
walk
around
our
historic
district
you'll
see
middle
housing
all
over.
C
This
was
very
common
before
folks
figured
out
redlining
before
from
an
faj
was
created
before
folks
figured
out
exclusionary
zoning.
This
this
was
absolutely
it
and
what
it
allowed
was
for
your
teacher
to
live
next
door
to
you
and
your
nurse
to
live
around
the
corner
in
a
wide
variety
of
different
incomes
and
interests
all
on
one
street.
C
I
don't
know
how
many
times
pauline
tried
to
take
everybody's
input
and
distill
it
into
one
final
big
code
package.
When
we
first
started
talking
about
duplexes
and
triplexes,
but
it
was
a
ton,
a
ton,
a
ton
of
meetings
and
what
that
led
us
to
realize
is
that
we're
never
going
to
get
everybody
to
be
exactly
in
the
right
place.
C
In
addition
to
the
process,
the
number
one
piece
of
feedback
received
on
every
survey
issued
by
the
city
over
the
past
number
of
years
is
the
need
for
more
housing
that
is
affordable
and
the
need
for
more
housing
choice.
So
our
affordable
housing,
advisory
committee
or
ahac
was
set
up
in
part
to
ensure
a
voice
for
the
underserved
residents
of
our
community
and
joint
surveys
in
redmond
with
in
2018
on
housing
choice.
C
We've
had
some
annual
meetings
under
house
bill,
4006
community
feedback
surveys,
each
biennium
again
and
again
what
they
say
is
they
need
more
housing
and
more
housing
options.
So,
throughout
this
timeline,
the
topic
has
gained
steam
in
various
other
markets
and
in
seattle
we
talked
about
that
sorry,
I'm
moving
forward.
Okay,
go
ahead,
so
in
2015-ish
I
can't
remember
if
it's
2014
or
15
that
this
began,
but
then
2030
can
be
the
stakeholder
group
to
figure
out
how
to
help
middle
income.
C
Folks
in
bend
with
a
plan
to
report
out
to
council
what
they
found.
So
this
citizen
group
came
up
with.
It
was
filled
with
a
variety
of
developers
and
housing
professionals
and
they
came
up
with
a
list
of
recommendations
for
bend
city
council,
there's
lots
of
technicality
and
also
lots
of
reach,
and
that
provided
the
basis
for
each
of
the
tools
that
we're
talking
about
tonight.
C
That
group
was
largely
focused
on
three
goals.
It
was
number
one
to
increase
the
supply
of
rental
and
ownership
for
middle
income
population,
that's
at
80
to
125
ami
mark
and
in
2017.
This
was
roughly
47
000
dollars
in
gross
income
up
to
about
75
000
in
gross
income
as
well,
and
they
could
afford
a
home
price
of
about
320
000.
C
They
also
wanted
to
add
new
housing
types
to
the
mend
market
to
provide
an
entry
point
for
ownership,
and
this
kicked
off
a
renewed
council
effort
to
make
this
happen
and
the
eventual
inclusion
of
the
four-plex
goal
in
council
goals.
The
following
biennium
so
council's
had
a
goal
to
set
to
get
four
plexes
into
our
standard
residential
zones.
It's
2017
and
we've
been
working
on
it
since
then,
so
the
four
places
goal
is
actually
is
the
the
reason
this
work
session
is
structure.
C
G
F
C
C
That's
a
middle
housing
development
there
on
the
right
a
little
bit
of
an
outline
of
kind
of
how
we
ended
up
in
this
place,
whether
or
not
that's
where
we
all
would
have
chosen
to
be
with
or
without
state
regulation.
On
this.
This
is
where
we
are
and
moving
forward
with
the
options
that
we
have
in
front
of
us
from
the
legislature.
H
Great,
thank
you,
lynn,
there's
a
lot
of
information
and
very
important
information
to
lead
up
to
how
we
got
to
where
we're
at
today.
So
I'm
going
to
dive
in
specifically
on
the
house,
bill,
2001
requirements
and
the
process
that
our
stakeholder
took
to
get
to
where
we're
at
today
and
then
give
background
and
what
the
actual
code
amendments
are
for
the
proposed
draft,
so
the
house
bills
was
adopted
in
2019,
so
it's
been
around
now
already
a
couple
years.
H
The
bill
is
very
specific
on
what
cities
our
size
are
required
to
do.
The
two
things
are:
we
have
to
allow
a
duplex
on
every
single
lot
that
we
allow
a
single
family
detached
dwelling
and
we
also
have
to
treat
them
the
same.
In
addition,
we
have
to
allow
what
the
state
calls
other
mental
housing
types.
So
that's
the
triplexes
quadplexes
cottage
clusters
and
townhomes
and
areas
zoned
for
residential
uses
that
allow
for
the
development
of
detached
single
family
dwellings,
and
we
already
allow
a
lot
of
these
uses
today.
H
We
also
may
regulate
citing
and
design
standards
for
this
type
of
middle
housing.
Inciting
and
design
standards
is
everything
but
density
and
lot
sizes.
So
it's
setbacks.
It's
height,
it's
slot
coverage,
parking
floor
ratio
and
oh
design
standards
such
as
a
percentage
of
windows
on
a
building
or
where
the
front
door
has
to
be,
and
how
wide
can
the
garage
door
be,
so
those
are
design
standards.
H
We
at
least
have
to
do
that.
They
also
created
two
model
codes,
one
for
smaller
cities
and
then
one
for
large
cities,
which
is
city
of
bend,
that
we
can
comply
with
or
a
third
alternative
to
get
to
where
you
are
in
compliance
is
if
you
want
to
propose
something
that
isn't
allowed
or
wasn't
thought
of
up
during
the
rule
making
process,
you
can
propose
an
alternative,
sighting
and
design
standard.
H
So
I
think
a
good
example
of
what
this
process
its
intention
was
for
is
prior
to
all
this
getting
adopted,
portland
adopted
a
residential
infill
project
and
they
adopted
visibility
standards
so
and
I
don't
know
the
exact
details,
but
the
visibility
standards.
Basically,
if
a
developer
improves
the
first
floor
to
be
somewhat
accessible
above
and
beyond
that
what
is
required,
then
they
get
incentives.
H
H
So,
through
this
alternative,
siting
and
design
standards,
if
you
want
to
propose
something
like
this
visibility
standard,
you
have
to
go
through
a
process
and
present
analysis
and
findings
to
the
department
of
land,
conservation
and
development,
and
the
findings
are
very
specific
and
you
cannot
propose
something
that
would
cause
unreasonable
cost
or
delay.
And,
more
specifically,
you
have
to
make
the
findings
a
through
f,
with
f
being
in
bold,
because
this
is
one
of
the
more
important
ones.
When
you
propose
something
to
the
state
that
isn't
necessarily
allowed.
H
You
have
to
show
that
the
time
and
cost
proposed
by
this
unique
standard
is
proportionate
to
the
public,
need
or
interest
that
the
standard
fulfills.
So
this
visibility
standard.
Yes,
it
might
cost
a
little
bit
more
or
take
a
little
bit
more
time
to
construct.
However,
there
is
definitely
a
public
need,
so
there's
a
proportionality
there
on
that
could
be
justified
next,
please
so.
H
However,
they
were
far
enough
along
where
we,
as
a
stakeholder
advisor
group,
could
at
least
start
meeting
to
review
the
draft
administrative
rules
and
become
more
familiarized
with
them.
So
we
started
a
meeting.
In
september
of
last
year,
we
held
11
meetings
to
discuss
the
oregon
administrative
rules,
the
model
code
and
the
alternative,
citing
and
design
standards
for
missing
middle
and
again
we
held
11
meetings
and
we
met
up
until
april
of
this
year.
H
The
next
side,
please,
the
stakeholder
advisory
group
as
council
club
mentioned,
is
comprised
of
several
different
members
of
our
community.
It
definitely
included
representation
from
our
city
advisory
committee,
so
we
had
one
member
from
our
city
council.
We
had
one
member
from
the
planning
commission
and
one
member
from
the
affordable
housing
advisory
committee.
We
had
two
members
from
the
neighborhood
leadership
alliance
and
then
we
also
had
members
who
had
different
backgrounds
so
like
audrey,
allen,
she's
a
designer
and
has
helped
design
some
habitat
developments.
H
So
next,
please
so
the
bend
development
code,
I'm
going
to
focus
on
the
amendments
here.
There
are
amendments
to
the
ben
comprehensive
plan.
However,
the
time
that
we
have
allowed
tonight,
I
just
want
to
really
dive
into
the
bend
development
code
amendments.
So
this
is
high
level.
This
is
what
the
stakeholder
advisory
group
looked
at.
He
looked
at
density,
which
is
being
proposed
with
no
maximums
and
I'll
go
into
more
detail
with
each
of
these.
We
looked
at
lot
sizes
which
are
being
reduced
parking,
which
is
proposed
to
be
reduced.
H
H
So
for
density,
as
we've
all
heard,
this
is
one
of
those
standards
that
we
can't
propose
a
alternative
for
and
we're
proposing,
no
density
for
duplexes,
triplexes,
quadplexes
and
cottage
clusters.
Townhomes.
There
is
a
way
to
have
a
maximum
density,
but
the
stakeholder
advisor
group
agreed
that
it
is.
It
would
make
it
very
complicated
for
a
development
that
has
a
number
of
mixed
metal
housing
in
it
to
require
density
for
townhomes,
but
not
for
the
others,
so
proposing
no
density
for
townhomes
as
well.
H
So
all
middle
housing
will
be
with
no
density
and
then
in
addition,
we
met
with
several
representative
representatives
from
affordable
housing
developments
and
talked
to
them
about
density,
and
they
were
interested
in
eliminating
the
maximum
density
for
multi-family
deed,
restricted,
affordable
housing.
This
does
not
have
to
do
with
house
bill
2001,
but
since
we
are
looking
at
density,
we
did
meet
with
them
and
we
proposed
this
to
the
stakeholder
advisor
group
and
there
was
support
to
eliminate
the
maximum
density
for
multi-family,
which
is
five
or
more
units
for
deed,
restricted,
affordable
housing.
H
H
The
fourth
column
is
the
model
code
and
what
is
being
proposed
and
again,
the
stakeholder
advisory
group
did
discuss
in
certain
cases
the
alternative,
siding
and
design,
but
really
focused
on
a
combination
for
code
amendments
that
was
either
in
compliance
with
the
organ
administrative
rules
and
or
the
model
code.
So
for
lot
sizes.
H
These
the
amendments
have
already
been
made
for
some
of
the
districts.
So
for
low
density
and
standard
density,
residential,
we're
already
in
compliance
and
compliance
with
the
oregon
administrative
rule
for
lot
sizes
for
a
duplex
states
that
you
cannot
have
a
lot
size
that
is
greater
than
what
you
require
for
a
single
family
dwelling
unit.
That
is
exactly
the
same
as
what
the
model
code
states.
H
So,
basically,
the
proposed
amendments
make
the
lot
sizes
the
same
as
what
we
require
for
a
single
family
dwelling
unit,
which
we
already
do
for
low
density
and
standard
density,
residential
and
we're
adding
new
requirements
for
medium
and
high,
and
then
a
triplex
is
a
little
bit
different.
There
is
some
different
options
that
you
can
choose
for
developing
lot
sizes
for
a
triplex.
H
So
today,
in
the
low
density
residential
district,
a
triplex
is
only
allowed
on
twenty
thousand
square
foot
lot
and
then
in
our
standard
density
residential.
It's
on
a
nine
thousand
square
foot
lot
and
the
other
two
districts.
There
is
no
minimum
lot
size
today,
the
minimum
compliance
would
go
back.
H
The
minimum
compliance
for
a
triplex,
I
believe,
is
if
your
lot
for
a
single
family
is
less
than
5
000
square
feet.
Then
you
can
propose
a
lot
size,
no
greater
than
5
000.
So
for
our
rs,
for
example,
it
is
a
4
000
square
foot
lot
size
for
a
single
family,
so
we
can
do
propose
lot
sizes
that
are
no
greater
than
5
000
square
feet.
If
they're
greater
than
5000
for
a
single
family,
then
you
can
do
a
lot
size,
no
greater
than
what
you
require
for
a
single
family.
H
The
model
code
suggests
or
requires
that
you
only
allow
triplexes
on
the
same
size
lot
as
a
single
family,
and
the
stakeholder
advisory
group
took
a
little
bit
of
both
of
these.
So
for
our
low
density,
residential
and
our
standard
density
residential.
We
are
in
compliance
with
the
model
code
and
we're
going
to
propose
that
a
triplex
can
be
on
the
same
size
lot
as
our
single
families
and
then
for
the
medium
and
high
density
residential,
because
single
family
is
allowed
on
less
than
5000.
H
We
are
proposing
lot
sizes
of
4000
for
the
medium
density,
residential
and
2500
for
the
high
density
residential,
which
is
in
compliance
with
the
oars
next
similar
exercise
for
a
quadplex
today,
they're
not
even
allowed
in
the
low
and
standard
density
residential
district
unless
they're
part
of
mass
plants,
so
first
off
we're
going
to
permit
quads
in
these
districts
and
then,
if
they're
in
the
medium
and
high
density
residential
today,
there's
no
minimum
lot
size.
What
is
being
proposed
again
is
a
combination.
H
Similar
warning
under
the
oars
is
dependent
on
the
lot
size.
If
the
single
family
home
is
on
a
lot
seven
thousand
square
feet
or
less,
then
the
lot
can't
be
any
larger
than
seven
thousand
model
codes
suggest
or
requires
that
you
would
allow
a
quad
on
the
same
size
law
as
a
single
family
dwelling
and,
as
you
can
see
on
the
right,
the
proposed
column.
H
We
would.
We
are
proposing
that
in
the
low
and
standard
density
residential
districts,
they
would
be
allowed
on
the
same
size
lot
as
a
single
family
dwelling
unit,
and
then
the
medium
would
be
four
thousand
and
the
high
would
be
twenty.
Five
hundred
townhomes,
there
is
two
different
options
and
you
can
see
what
is
allowed
today.
So
in
our
standard
density
residential,
we
allow
townhome
on
a
2000
square
foot
lot
medium
on
a
1600
square
foot
lot
and
the
high
density
residential
is
on
a
1200
square
foot
lot.
H
If
we
well,
we
are
proposing
what
is
in
the
oregon
administrative
rules,
which
is
an
average
of
1500
square
feet,
and
then
the
model
code
doesn't
require
any
lot
sizes.
You
just
use
the
development
standards
that
would
dictate
the
lot
size.
So
the
stakeholder
advisor
group
proposed
that
we
would
use
the
average
of
1500
square
feet
for
all
the
districts,
except
for
high
density
residential
we're
already
at
1200,
so
it
makes
sense
to
use
1200
square
feet
for
the
average
in
the
high
density
residential
district.
H
Next,
thank
you.
So
floor
area
ratio
is
an
interesting
one
for
the
city
of
bend
because
it's
kind
of
all
over
the
board.
It's
not
a
blanket
requirement
for
all
housing
in
bend
and
that
that's
one
thing
I
want
to
make
sure
everyone
understands
today.
We
do
not
have
a
floor
area
ratio.
That
applies
to
every
single
lot
in
bent.
We
have
certain
situations
where
it
applies,
so
if
you
were
to
do
a
quad,
plex
or
a
townhome
today
in
bed,
there
is
no
floor
area
ratio.
H
If
you
were
to
do
a
duplex
or
a
triplex
and
bend,
there
is
only
a
floor
area
ratio
of
0.0.6
in
this
standard
density,
residential
district.
So
if
you
were
to
do
a
duplex
in
the
low
medium
or
high
or
triplex,
there's
no
flooring
ratio,
anyone
that
proposes
to
do
an
accessory
dwelling
unit
would
have
also
a
flurry
ratio
of
0.6.
H
So
it's
based
on
this
date
of
december
of
1998,
so
basically
number
one
if
it's
a
new
single-family
residential
construction,
so
you're
building
a
house
or
you're,
adding
on
to
a
house
on
a
lot
that
is
less
than
six
thousand
square
feet
and
the
subdivision
was
planted
prior
to
1998.
You
will
be
subject
to
floor
area
ratio.
H
and
I'll
show
a
map
in
a
moment
to
kind
of
give
you
an
idea
of
where
these
lots
are
the
second
one
which
doesn't
get
used
very
often.
But
if
you
have
an
existing
house
and
you
want
to
create
two
lots-
let's
say
you
want
to
do
a
partition
or
a
lot
line.
Adjustment
and
those
lots
result
in
a
size
of
6,
000
square
feet
or
less.
H
The
third
one
is,
if
you're
doing
a
new
subdivision
with
lots
that
are
less
than
six
thousand
and
they
have
but
an
existing
subdivision
plated
prior
to
1998
and
those
lots
are
six
thousand
square
feet
or
less.
Then
you
are
subject
to
this
floor
area
ratio.
One
easy
way
around
number
three
is
you
would
make
those
lots,
six
thousand
and
one
square
feet,
and
then
they
are
not
subject
to
the
floor
area
ratio.
H
H
H
The
only
other
time
the
0.64
area
ratio
does
come
into
play,
regardless
of
when
you
were
planted,
was
if
you
are
developing
a
flag
lot
next,
please
so.
Here's
the
proposed
for
area
ratios
we
just
discussed
when
they
apply
in
certain
situations
in
the
city
of
bend.
What
the
oregon
administrative
rules
says
is:
if
you're
going
to
apply
a
flurry
ratio
to
middle
housing,
it
may
not
be
more
than
or
yeah
more
restricted
than
what
you
apply
to
a
single
family
dwelling
unit.
H
If
you
were
to
do
the
model
code
and
use
the
triplex
and
quads,
you
can
propose
a
floor
area
ratio
based
on
what
is
on
the
screen,
so
it's
based
on
the
lot
size
of
what
is
for
a
single
family
in
the
same
zone.
So
if
you
have
a
lot,
for
example,
and
most
of
a
lot
of
our
single
family
is
4
000,
you
would
have
a
floor
area
ratio
of
1.1
in
the
rs
or
standard
density
residential
district.
H
If
the
lot
is
for
a
single
family,
detached
is
less
than
3
000,
which
is
the
case
in
our
medium
and
high
density.
You
can
propose
a
floor
area
ratio
no
more
than
1.4,
so
these
are
significantly
higher
floor
area
ratios
than
what
we
use
today,
which
is
0.6,
and
it
does
say
up
to
so
there
is
room
on
what
floors
you're
gonna
use,
but
we,
the
stakeholder
advisor
group
after
reviewing
what
lot
coverages
today
allow
and
how
we
apply
not
uniformly
floor.
H
Air
ratio
throughout
the
city
of
bend
proposed
a
1.1,
fluoride
ratio
for
only
three-story
residential
uses
in
the
standard
density
residential
zone
and
none
no
fluorite
ratio
for
all
the
other
zones.
Floor
ratio
does
help
control
the
massing
of
a
building,
as
does
other
requirements
in
the
proposed
draft,
such
as
lot
coverage,
height
requirements,
setbacks
and
again,
floyd
ratio
has
not
been
used
all
over
the
city
event.
Today,
it's
only
been
used
in
those
cases
that
are
in
those
requirements
that
we've
talked
about,
and
the
proposal
is
to
pretty
much
eliminate.
H
H
So
this
is
the
percent
of
how
much
of
your
lot
can
be
covered,
so
35
for
low
density,
residential
districts
and
in
a
standard
density
residential,
it's
50
for
single
stories
and
then,
once
you
go
over
a
single
story,
it's
45
and
then
in
the
medium
density,
residential,
it's
the
same
except
for
middle
housing
is
actually-
and
this
is
already
in
the
code
60
for
lots
of
parcels
with
the
plexus
or
multi-units
and
then
in
the
high-density
residential
district.
Today
there
is
no
lock
coverage.
H
In
the
medium
density,
residential
district,
the
way
it
is
today
is,
if
here's
that
date
again
of
december
1998,
if
you
are
on
a
lot
or
parcel
created
after
that
date,
then
you
can
go
up
to
35
feet.
The
stakeholder
advisory
group
felt
that
this
is
our
medium
density,
residential
district.
You
should
be
able
to
get
21.7
units
to
the
acre
and
the
higher
the
the
building
can
be
the
more
units
you
can
get.
H
H
Well,
the
proposal
or
the
the
these
standards
protect
properties,
so
they're
considered
protective
properties
if
they're
20,
000
square
feet
or
greater
that
are
zoned,
either
standard
density,
residential
or
low
density,
residential,
and
so
again
they
have
to
be
20,
000
square
feet
or
greater.
When
you
propose
a
subdivision
next
to
these
protective
properties,
your
setbacks
increase
significantly
and
you
cannot
propose
lots
smaller
than
five
thousand
square
feet.
So
even
today
you
can
propose
all
over
the
city,
a
in
the
sander
density
residential
district,
a
house
on
a
four
thousand
square
foot
lot.
H
But
if
you
happen
to
be
next
to
a
protected
property
that
has
a
house,
you
can't
propose
a
house
on
a
lot
unless
it's
at
least
five
thousand
square
feet,
and
when
you
do
the
setback
that
abuts
this
protected
property
increases
30
feet.
So,
instead
of
it
being
a
five
foot,
let's
say:
side
yard
setback.
You
have
to
provide
a
35
foot,
side,
yard
setback
or
a
5
foot,
rear
yard
setback
would
go
to
35
feet.
H
And
then,
if
you
went
to
a
6,
000
square
feet,
6
000
square
foot,
laundry,
your
setback
is
still
significantly
increased
to
30
feet
and
then
michaela.
If
you
go,
the
next
slide
I'll
show
a
map
of
where
this
just
came
into
play.
So
these
properties
on
this
map
that
are
in
the
middle
there's
11
properties
being
proposed
and
they
retain
the
existing
house
that
fronts
the
existing
street.
H
As
you
can
see,
the
one
street
gary
drive
is
going
to
punch
through,
but
then
adjacent
to
these
new
lots
are
protected
properties.
The
they're,
the
two
properties
at
the
bottom
of
the
screen
are
considered
protective
properties
because
they
are
over
20
000
square
feet
and
the
bottom
one
that
one
where
the
arrows
at
that
has
an
existing
house.
So
because
it
has
an
existing
house
lot,
five
will
require
a
35-foot
setback
which
eliminates
that
lot
altogether
on
the
other
protected
property.
H
So
proposed
design
standards
are
an
attempt
to
reduce
the
prominence
of
the
garage
and
to
bring
the
front
door
forward,
so
we're
planning
for
people
not
so
much
for
the
the
planning
for
cars.
I
suppose,
is
what
you
would
say,
and
these
design
standards
would
apply
to
triplex's
quadplexes
townhomes.
They
don't
apply
to
duplexes
because
we
do
not
have
design
standards
for
single
family
detached
dwellings
and
we
have
to
treat
the
duplexes
the
same
as
we
treat
the
same
as
we
treat
the
single
family
detached
dwellings.
H
Next,
so
I'll
just
breeze
through
these,
because
I'm
looking
at
the
time
I'll
make
sure
we
have
plenty
of
time
for
public
comments
or
questions.
And
so
the
proposal
here
is
to
reduce
the
prominence
of
the
garage.
So
the
garage
door
width
will
have
a
certain
percentage
of
the
front
of
the
house
that
it
can
be
in
order
to
provide
an
incentive
and
bring
the
front
door
forward.
H
H
H
You
basically
measure
the
walls
of
the
house
and
15
of
those
have
to
be
windows
or
doors
that
face
the
street
next,
so
parking
I'll,
walk
through
this
one,
a
little
bit
slower.
The
chart
is
set
up
the
same
way
as
we
looked
at
when
we
looked
at
a
lot
covered
employer
ratio.
The
uses
are
on
the
left.
The
bend
development
code
is
the
second
column.
H
What
we
currently
require
today
for
duplexes
and
triplexes,
and
then
the
oars
and
model
code
are
the
middle
columns
and
then
what
is
being
proposed
so
today,
a
duplex
requires
one
space
for
a
one
bedroom
and
then,
if
it's
two
plus
bedrooms,
you
get
two
spaces
per
unit.
The
oregon
administrative
rules
say
you
can
require
a
maximum
of
two
spaces
total
for
a
duplex.
H
The
model
code
does
not
require
any
parking,
and
the
proposed
code
is
in
compliance
with
the
model
code
and
does
not
propose
any
parking.
These
are
minimums.
So
if
a
developer
wants
to
put
in
parking,
they
definitely
can
put
in
parking
we're
just
not
saying
that
they
have
to
put
in
a
certain
amount
for
a
triplex.
H
The
the
requirements
are
similar
to
maybe
identical
to
a
duplex,
and
then
the
minimum
compliance
or
oars
are
a
little
bit
different.
It's
basically
depends
on
the
lot
size
that
the
developer
builds
on,
so
the
smaller
the
lot,
the
less
parking
requirements,
so
it
almost
incentivizes
the
developer
to
find
smaller
lots
or
create
smaller
lots,
because
then
they
can
provide
less
parking.
H
The
model
code
is
very
similar
and
it
basically
just
breaks
it
up
if
you're
less
than
five
thousand,
it
is
one
space
for
development
and
in
zones
with
the
minimum
lot
size
of
five
thousand
square
feet
or
more,
it's
two.
So
the
model
code
is
based
on
zones
not
based
on
the
lot
size
and
the
zone,
for
example,
and
the
rs
for
triplex
were
proposing
a
4
000
square
foot
lot,
so
a
triplex
would
only
require
one.
H
A
quad
set
up
very
similar
to
how
they
regulated
triplexes.
The
oars
are
the
same.
So
if
it's
between
three
and
five
thousand,
it's
two
spaces
total
for
a
quad,
so
in
the
rs,
if
we
were
to
go
with
the
oars
and
they
I
guess
it
wouldn't
be
rs.
It's
just
depends
on
the
lot
size,
I'm
sorry
that
the
developer
builds
and
they
choose
to
do
a
4,
000
square
foot
lot
with
a
quad.
It
would
be
two
spaces
total
and
then
the
model
code
breaks
it
down.
H
Basically,
if
you
have
a
minimum
lot
size
of
less
than
five
thousand,
it's
one
space
total
for
the
development
and
if
it's
five
thousand
square
feet
or
bigger,
then
it's
two
spaces
total
and
the
stakeholder
advisory
group
supported
the
model
code
requirement.
So
in
our
standard,
medium
and
high
density,
residential
development
would
be
one
space
per
development
for
a
quad.
And
then,
if
it's
in
the
low
density
residential
district,
it
would
be
two
spaces
per
development
for
a
quad
and
again
these
are
just
minimums.
A
developer
can
propose
more
parking
requirements,
a
town
home.
H
Today
we
require
two
spaces
per
unit.
The
oars
and
model
code
only
allow
one
space
per
unit,
and
that
is
what
is
being
proposed
and
with
a
cottage
cluster,
we
are
proposing
one
space
per
unit,
which
is
in
compliance
with
the
oregon
administrative
rules.
Next,
please
real
quick,
some
standards.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
people
are
aware
of
that.
We
are
proposing
some
changes
to
our
accessory
dwelling
units
all
accessory
drilling
units,
regardless
of
how
big
your
lot
is,
can
be
a
maximum
of
800
square
feet.
H
We
used
to
have
some
floor
ratio
and
balcony
requirements
for
larger
accessory
drawing
units
over
600.
Those
are
going
away
and
accessory
drawing
units
would
be
if
they're
detached
from
the
primary
structure.
They
can
be
the
height
of
the
underlying
zoning
district,
whereas
today
they're
at
25
feet
townhomes,
we
regulate
in
the
standard
density
residential.
How
many
can
be
attached
that
requirements
going
away
and
we've
talked
about
duplex,
triplex
and
quadplexes
with
the
new
design
standards,
the
old
design
standards
for
duplexes
and
triplexes
are
going
away.
H
There
were
no
design
centers
for
quadplexes
and
then
the
requirements
for
duplexes
triplexes
for
landscaping
street
trees,
open
space
storage,
trash
enclosures
are
also
going
away,
and
I
did
talk
to
dlcd
about
the
landscaping
of
street
trees
and
that
is
considered
either
a
siding
or
a
design
standard,
and
we
don't
require
that
for
single
family
detached
dwellings,
so
we
can't
require
it
for
metal
housing.
I
do
want
to
remind
people,
though,
that
if
a
developer
creates
lots
through
residential
land
division,
we
can
reacquire
street
trees
during
the
land
division
process.
H
H
H
So
the
proposal
is
that
if
you
meet
again
all
the
requirements,
so
the
250
foot
spacing
and
the
parking
requirements
for
short-term
rentals
and
all
the
other
requirements,
you
can
propose
to
make
one
unit
of
the
triplex
a
short-term
rental,
but
you
can
no
longer
propose
to
make
all
three
of
those
units
a
short-term
rental
next
cottage
clusters.
This
is
very
similar
to
what
we
have
today.
H
This
is
a
development
here
in
discovery
west
for
cottage
housing
and
there's
just
slight
differences,
so
we're
keeping
what
is
in
the
code
today
for
cottage
developments
and
then
we're
creating
a
new
development
alternative
called
cottage
clusters
and
on
the
left
are
the
standards
of
what
would
be
proposed.
They
would
be
allowed
in
our
residential
districts,
except
for
high
density
residential.
H
H
That's
why
we're
keeping
both
types
of
cottage
developments
and
with
this
the
900
square
feet
maximum,
does
allow
an
additional
200
square
feet
for
a
garage,
but
anything
over
that
200
square
feet
for
a
garage
will
start
deducting
away
from
the
900
square
foot
building
footprint,
and
then
there
is
design
standards
for
the
courtyards
and
the
pedestrian
walkways.
This
is
shared
quartz,
it's
in
the
code
today.
H
I
just
want
to
let
everyone
know
that
we
are
changing
the
allowable
uses
to
just
be
town
homes,
and
they
can
be
on
any
size
lot
which
is
different
than
what
is
allowed
today
and
there's
some
new
fencing
requirements.
I
just
want
to
bring
it
to
people's
attention
because
they
weren't
aware
that
we
do
have
shared
courts.
It
just
won't
be
limited
to
a
parent's
parcel
of
1.1
acres.
It
can
be
on
a
larger
parcel
and
limited
to
townhomes
and
accessory
dwelling
units.
H
Next,
please
all
right
getting
to
the
end.
So
I
just
want
to
highlight
the
public
outreach
that
we've
been
doing.
As
I
mentioned,
we
had
11
stakeholder
meetings
to
discuss
the
draft.
Once
a
draft
was
available,
we
emailed
it
to
several
different
people
at
the
beginning
of
may.
We
created
well.
We
created
a
web
page
at
the
beginning
of
may
for
all
our
updates
and
meeting
minutes
and
powerpoint
presentations
and
background
on
house
bill.
H
2001,
we
met
with
several
different
organizations:
we've
posted
on
nextdoor
and
facebook,
we've
done
media
releases,
and
then
we
already
had
a
planning
commission
work
session,
which
was
a
similar
presentation.
As
this
in
the
middle
of
june,
we
met
with
the
accessible
advisory
committee
to
get
their
feedback.
We've
sent
that
notice
out
to
over
38
000
people
regarding
the
project,
and
then
we
are
holding
the
informational
session
tonight
and
if
you
want
to
participate,
provide
public
comment
verbally,
then
you
would
want
to
attend
the
planning
commission
public
hearing
on
monday.
H
These
are
the
next
steps.
If
you
want
to
submit
written
comments,
those
are
the
email
addresses
for
city,
council
and
planning
commission
and,
if
you
can
please
copy
me,
so
I
can
make
sure
it
gets
into
the
public
record
and
the
timeline
is
russ
mentioned.
We
have
not
scheduled
the
city
council
jeff,
but
we're
looking
at
probably
september.
A
Thank
you,
yeah.
Thank
you
pauline
and
a
lot
of
information.
A
couple
couple
things
before.
I
turn
this
over
to
michaela
to
help
facilitate
the
q
a
one
this
this
session
again
is
being
recorded
and
it
will
be
posted
michaela.
When
we
go
to
you,
if
you
wouldn't
mind,
let
everybody
know
where
it's
going
to
be
posted.
Pauline
has
demonstrated
where
you
can
find
you
know,
what's
going
on
with
the
hearings
and
how
to
submit
comments
around
that
we
understand
this
is
a
lot
of
information.
A
It's
very
technical
and
it
is
legal.
That's
one
of
the
reasons
we
wanted
to
record
this.
So
if
you
wanted
to
go
back
and
and
get
a
little
bit
take
a
little
bit
more
time
to
understand
what
was
going
on
again,
if
you
do
have
questions
you
can
you
can
get
them
submitted
to
us
and
staff
can
address
those
again.
All
this
information
that
is
being
shown
today
is
included
in
the
package
that
has
been
posted
and
sent
to
the
planning
commission
for
that
meeting
on
monday.
A
A
This
is
not
the
time
and
place
to
deliberate
this,
but
it's
really
to
make
sure
that
if
there
are
clarifying
questions
about
the
information
presented
that
we
can
try
to
address
those
and
then
we'll
ask
you,
you
know
the
the
appropriate
place
to
to
provide
your
testimony.
Concerns
requests
for
changes
is
at
the
planning
commission
hearing,
so
the
planning
commission
can
receive
that
testimony
and
then
you'll
there'll
be
another
opportunity,
once
this
gets
to
a
city
council
meeting
to
to
again
provide
that
testimony.
A
Planning
commission
will
provide
a
recommendation
to
council
whether,
as
in
the
information
presented
here
or
through
testimony
and
planning
commission
deliberation
if
they
make
any
requested
modifications
to
that,
that
information
will
be
then
forwarded
on
to
counsel
for
consideration,
and
then
council
will
make
the
final
decision
through
their
deliberations
and
input
and
testimony
provided
at
the
council
meeting
on
what
that.
What
that
final
code
language
is
going
to
be
so
with
that,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
michaela.
A
B
Thanks
so
on
the
screen
now
are
the
instructions
for
raising
your
hand,
if
you
do
have
a
question
for
us
this
evening,
if
you're
calling
in
from
the
phone
those
are
not
on
the
screen,
you're
gonna
want
to
push
star
nine
to
raise
and
lower
your
hand.
So
if
you
can
do
that
now,
I'm
gonna
count
up
how
many
people
we
have
that
want
to
speak
and
then
we'll
put
a
timer
on
it.
B
B
I
Great
thanks
for
putting
this
together.
I
know
this
is
a
really
challenging
problem
and
almost
certainly
it
involves
building
more
units,
but
I
guess
some
of
the
questions
I
would
have
is
within
the
stakeholder
group,
how
many
of
those
people
meet
the
housing
cost
burden
definition
or
the
severely
housing
cost
burden
definition
beyond
that?
How
many
of
those
people
own
multiple
homes
in
bend
at
current?
I
guess
I
don't
know
when
the
answers
come
on
this
so
I'll
just
continue.
I
C
C
I'm
going
to
try
to
give
you
kind
of
ugb
and
predicting
need
101
in
in
a
very
short
amount
of
time.
I
can
tell
you
that
there
are
books
and
books
and
books
written
on
this,
so
I
am
oversimplifying
for
sure
the
city
is
tasked
with
projecting
our
20-year
housing
need
at
any
given
point
and
that's
called
our
planning
period
for
an
urban
growth
boundary
expansion.
C
Why
I
bring
this
up
is
because
we
are
beginning
to
embark
on
some
of
the
work
that
goes
into
that
right
now,
so
we've
created
in
the
past
a
document
called
the
housing
needs
analysis,
that's
actually
available
on
the
affordable
housing
page
of
the
bend
website.
So
if
we
scroll
way
down
to
the
bottom,
you
can
find
the
housing
needs
analysis
through
documents
like
that
through
a
document
that
does
a
similar
analysis
of
what
the
need
is
for
employment
and
then
what
availability
we
have
within
the
ugb.
C
That's
how
we
kind
of
figure
out
what
the
needs
are.
The
state
in
this
case
has
programmed
in
exactly
what
we're
supposed
to
expect
for
redevelopment
of
this
type
of
units
and
they're.
What
they've
asked
us
to
do
and
pauline
please
remind
me,
I
believe
that
they're
estimating
what
I
can't
remember,
is
if
it's
two
or
three
percent
redevelopment
in
the
20-year
period.
I
think
it's
two,
but
it
might
be
three.
C
Do
you
remember?
I'd
have
to
look
it
up,
so
they've
told
us
use
this
number
unless
you
can
prove
otherwise.
Basically,
so
that's
sort
of
what
we're
using
to
predict.
We
do
know
a
little
bit
about
sort
of
what
historically
are
the
number
of
single
of
owner
occupied
homes
versus
second
homes.
This
is
actually
a
really
challenging
thing
to
figure
out
I'll.
C
C
C
We
portland
state
does
that
every
year
and
it's
a
forecast
and
then
we
plan
based
on
that
and
determine
if
we
need
more
land,
how
much
we
need
to
identify
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
so
I'm
kind
of
going
off
on
some
some
tangents
here,
but
more
or
less.
If
there's
a
second
home
market
of
18,
we
need
to
accommodate
that
second
home
market
in
our
planning
going
forward.
So
that's
what
we
attempted
to
do
in
our
last
gb
expansion
process
was
account
for
that
18,
as
required
by
the
state
plan
for
those
homes.
C
Again,
we
can't
say
no,
I
have
strong
feelings
I'll
say
about
the
makeup
of
our
market.
As
I'm
sure
you
know
the
other
100
people
on
this
call
do
as
well.
We
all
have
different
feelings
about
what
should
or
shouldn't
happen.
If
you
know
each
of
us
were
king
or
queen
for
a
day,
but
unfortunately
we
cannot
necessarily
make
changes
to
that.
We
just
have
to
plan
for
the
growth
around
it.
So
what
am
I
forgetting
there
russ
and
others,
or
do
you
want
to
take
over.
A
Yeah,
just
for
the
sake
of
time,
there's
a
question
around
the
makeup
of
the
stakeholder
group
and
some
some
things
around
that
that
you
know
when
that
stakeholder
group
was
created.
We
were
trying
to
find
a
diverse
range
of
interest
in
this.
The
questions
that
you
asked
that
was
not
in
the
criteria
of
of
how
those
members
were
selected
that
that
selection
process
did
go
through
calling
the
planning
commission
did
that
go
to
council
as
well.
I'm
trying
to
remember
city.
H
A
Was
again
as
as,
if
you
go
back
to
that
list,
that
pauline
showed
it
was
just
you're
trying
to
find
a
balance
of
interest
from
from
you
know
the
the
neighborhoods,
the
different
committees
within
the
city,
different
interest
groups
and
and
also
getting
you
know,
we
there.
We
did
have
developers
in
that
and
and
builders
in
that
group,
because
they
have
first-hand
knowledge
on
how
these
projects
come
together
and
they
were
able
to
address
their
concerns
as
well.
But
it
was
a
balanced
group
of
different
different
interests,
and
I
know
there
were.
A
J
H
Existing
subdivisions,
if
they're,
not
part
of
a
master
plan-
and
you
have
a
brand
new
single-family
home,
I
suppose,
if
they
want
they-
can
build
another
unit
called
a
duplex.
But
what
we
see
in
existing
new
subdivisions
is,
they
may
build
an
accessory
dwelling
unit
and
then
existing
cc
and
rs
are
still
effective.
So
if
your
ccnrs
have
a
certain
lot
size
or
don't
allow
mental
housing,
those
still
apply.
B
K
Next,
thank
you.
Thanks
for
the
presentation
lynn
mentioned
san
francisco,
I'm
glad
you
did.
I
lived
there
for
45
years
before
coming
here
and
saw
how
an
influx
of
people
there
dramatic
influx
of
people
resulted
in
the
creation
of
new
housing,
but
unfortunately,
rather
than
becoming
affordable
housing,
it
became
the
most
expensive
housing
in
the
country
and
resulted
in
a
lot
of
displacement
of
lower
income
people,
particularly
from
the
mission
district.
How
are
these
code
changes
that
are
being
proposed
here?
How
is
that
going
to
be
prevented?
C
So
ted
hard
to
believe,
I
grew
up
down
there
as
well,
but
although
there
was
quite
a
bit
of
growth
during
probably
both
of
our
times
down
in
the
bay
area,
the
number
of
jobs
that
were
produced
compared
to
the
number
of
housing
units
is
like
way
way
way
out
of
line.
I
mean
even
more
than
what
we're
seeing
in
bend
right
now
it
is
a
fraction,
it's
something
like
15
of
the
jobs
that
were
created
in
housing
units
were
also
created.
If
that
makes
sense.
C
C
California
has
a
very
discretionary
land
use
system
and
I'm
not
an
expert,
but
I
do
know
that
it
is
a
lot
easier
for
people
who
don't
like
development
down
there
to
kill
it
than
it
is
in
oregon
and
so
really
again.
It
is
absolutely
a
supply
and
demand.
Question
san
francisco
and
the
surrounding
area
prohibited
a
ton
of
development,
and
that
is
absolutely
why
their
housing
prices
started
skyrocketing
and
you
can.
You
can
look
at
the
data
over
the
years
to
actually
truth
that
out
so
supply
and
demand.
C
It
is
a
hard
pill
to
swallow
and
I
get
it
that
we
are
growing
as
quickly
as
we
can
and
the
city's
charges
to
help
allow
for
the
development
of
housing
to
meet
that
need,
fortunately,
or
unfortunately,
is
a
great
place
to
live,
and
a
lot
of
people
have
figured
that
out.
So
what
we
are
doing
in
increasing
supply
again,
there's
a
ton
of
natural
national
literature,
peer-reviewed
studies
on
this
even
building
market
rate
housing
within
a
quarter-mile
radius.
C
Okay,
the
only
way
we
can
absolutely
guarantee
affordable
housing
is,
if
we
have
some
skin
in
the
game.
We
have
to
invest
in
that
property
in
some
way
in
order
to
take
a
deed
restriction
or
put
record
a
covenant
on
that
property
that
allows
us
to
keep
it
affordable
over
over
term
today
in
bend.
We
do
not
have
a
law
that
allows
me
to
say
tomorrow
all
of
aubrey
viewed
is
going
to
be
affordable
and
from
now
on
anything
that
gets
built.
C
C
For
that
that
taking,
I
guess,
and
that's
a
very
huge
oversimplification,
but
that's
the
way
I
get
involved
is
when
there's
an
interest
from
folks
in
developing
and
we
in
some
way
invest
in
that
property
or
that
development,
so
that
I
can
then
record
covenants
to
keep
it
affordable
forever,
and
when
I
say
we
don't
have
enough
subsidy
to
fix
this
problem,
I
am
absolutely
not
telling
a
lie.
There
is
a
ton
of
interest
in
developing,
affordable
housing
in
this
town.
A
D
K
L
C
I
will
tell
you
that
our
former
mayor
was
also.
I
can't
remember
what
that
what
the
name
of
it
is,
but
he
was
head
of
the
local
club,
klex
clan.
So
there's
a
there's
some
racist
history.
Here
too,
we
do
still
see
some
discriminatory
deeds
every
once
in
a
while
and
some
pretty
funky
things
out
there.
So,
although
we
did
not
have
redlining,
we
were
a
tiny
town.
C
At
that
time
too,
there
were
a
lot
of
discriminatory
practices
and
the
reason
that
bend
is
a
relatively
white
community
was
again
very
intentional,
based
on
not
only
our
own
sort
of
processes
and
and
former
electeds
and
others
chasing
people
of
color
out
of
town,
but
also
that
nobody
could
get
here
because
they
were
getting
lashed
all
around
the
border
and
couldn't
travel.
You
know
the
the
extra
100
miles
or
whatever
it
was
to
get
into
bend.
M
Thank
you.
This
is
sherry
reynolds.
His
wife
he's
here
with
me,
really
appreciate
the
presentation
that
you
guys
made
just
wondering
if
you
could
speak
to
the
parking
requirements
for
multi-um
units
in
the
rm
district,
I
noticed
that
we
talked
about
fourplexes
clusters,
townhomes
tries
and
duplexes,
but
didn't
hear
anything
about
anything
beyond
that.
Thank
you.
A
H
Okay,
so
real
fast,
we
are
not
proposing
any
changes
to
the
multi-family
parking,
but
on
the
screen,
if
you
were
to
look
back
at
slide
28,
the
quad
today
would
almost
fall
under
multi-family
until
we
changed
definitions,
so
I
believe
it's
a
studio
in
multi-family,
which
is
five
or
more
units.
A
studio
is
one
space,
a
bedroom.
If
you
only
have
one
bedroom,
it's
only
one
space.
If
you
have
two
bedrooms,
it's
1.5
spaces.
A
C
Yeah,
I
think
the
parking,
the
parking
requirements
that
are
in
our
code,
you.
It
was
nice
to
actually
kind
of
see
them
lined
up
for
these
housing
types
and
see
where
we're
going
with
them,
which
I
think
is
the
right
direction.
Because
when
we're
talking
about
the
area
of
the
lot
and
the
area
of
land,
that
a
developer
has
to
work
with
when
they're
thinking
about
making
some
of.
C
C
That
currently
right
now,
the
requirement
to
build
x
amount
of
parking
spots
can
cause
projects
to
not
happen
at
all
and
that's
similar
to
the
slide
that
paul,
where
pauline
was
talking
about
the
setbacks,
just
straight
up
removing
the
opportunity
to
build
housing.
So
I
think
it's
a
really
important
conversation
and
we
saw
in
the
model
code
that
the
state
sent
down
to
cities
that
they
they
were
moving
in
the
direction
and
definitely
saying
do
not
over
burden
these
developments
with
minimum
parking
requirements.
C
Because
then
you
may
not
see
them
in
the
numbers
that
you
want
to.
So
I
think
that's
why
that
was
a
big
discussion
with
this
stakeholder
group,
and
I
think
it
will
be
continue
to
be
a
discussion
for
council
going
forward
looking
throughout
the
city,
where
we're
requiring
parking,
how
much
and
what's
appropriate.
A
And
again
I'll
just
reiterate
here
if
you
do
have
concerns
or
questions
or
recommendations,
or
you
support
the
parking
parking
being
proposed
in
the
code.
Please
provide
that
testimony
to
planning
commission
council,
I'm
pretty
sure
that's
going
to
be
a
topic
of
discussion
as
they
go
through
their
deliberations
based
off
the
input
we've
seen
now
so
again.
This
is
your
opportunity
to
provide
your
input
and
your
thoughts
on
on
what
the
what
the
proposed
parking
requirements
are
going
to
be
mikayla.
Go
to
you.
N
That's
one
question
the
other
question
is
I
don't
see
how
the
states
the
law
at
the
state
level
would
have
any
requirement
to
allow
a
short-term
rentals
to
be
included
in
this?
It
sounds
like
that's
something
that's
being
arbitrarily
decided
by
the
city.
I
don't
think
they
should
be
in
it
because
they're
not
they
take
away
from
affordable
housing
and
the
final
question
is:
can
these
be
built
middle
housing
be
built
in
if
you're
in
a
house,
that's
a
historic,
designation
or
in
a
historic
commune
neighborhood?
That's
it.
A
Great
question
I'll
take
that
middle
one
and
then
I'll
then
then
I'll
probably
turn
it
over
to
our
staff
for
the
other
ones.
Regarding
the
short-term
rental
just
over,
you
know,
and
the
code
in
the
policy.
That
is
where
discretion
does
come
in
from
council
that
again,
as
pauline
mentioned,
that
is
not
guided
by
house
bill
2001.
A
So
if
you
do
have
specific
input
around
that
topic,
that
is
one
area
that
both
planning,
commission
and
council
can
deliberate
and
they're
not
bound
by
any
rules
or
requirements
from
from
house
bill
2001.
I
just
saw
our
one
of
our
city
attorneys
pop
on
elizabeth.
Do
you
want
to
add
anything
to
that.
E
What
this
package
does
is
address
short-term
rentals
because
of
the
existing
codes
around
short-term
rentals
in
the
bend
development
code
that
were
developed
through
a
large
public
process
and
ended
up
with
a
package
of
regulations
that
were
adopted
in
2015
and
so
to
ensure
that
not
every
middle
housing
development
that
would
be
built
could
be
a
short-term
rental.
There's
a
small
addition
of
short-term
rental
code
in
this
package
to
sort
of
align
with
the
existing
code
developed
in
2015..
E
So
this
is
not
a
package
that
will
be
able
to
include
more
changes
to
the
short-term
rental
code,
russ
and
lin,
and
pauline
talked
about
the
notices
that
went
out.
Changes
to
our
short-term
rental
code
were
not
included
in
the
notice
that
went
out,
except
for
that
small
change
as
it
applies
to
middle
housing,
and
so
any
changes
to
short-term
rental
beyond
that
are
not
within
the
scope
of
changes
that
planning,
commission
or
city
council
could
make
without
further
notice
and
further
process.
So
it's
a
little
clarification
to
what
you
said.
Rest.
H
To
be
clear
on
the
short-term
rentals,
what
is
being
proposed
is
more
restrictive
than
what
is
allowed
today,
so
it
will
reduce
the
number
of
short-term
rentals
that
are
allowed
and
then
for
the
historic
district.
Yes,
middle
housing
is
there
today
and
it
will
still
be
allowed
to
be
built
there.
We
have
a
historic
code
that
they
would
also
have
to
comply
with
when
it
comes
to
the
architecture
and
other
design
details.
Thank
you
and
then.
C
C
D
A
B
O
Got
it?
Thank
you,
I'm
curious
with
the
passage
and
demand
of
hb
2001
and
the
directives
to
build
and
accommodate
our
affordable
housing
crisis,
how
something
like
ben
village
passed
through,
which
is
luxury,
condos
and
hotels,
and
six
story
buildings.
My
other
question
is:
does
hb
2001
address
at
all
an
environmental
study
when
new
projects
are
being
done
or
traffic
study
and
more
schools
or
response,
like
fire
police
libraries,
things
that
bigger
communities
need
with
an
influx
of
greater
population?
O
A
So
great
questions
I'll
try
to
take
the
first
through
and
then
let
all
go
to
you
for
the
definition
of
affordable
housing,
so
the
ben
village
project
that
is
on
on
the
west
side
over
by
the
river.
I
know
there's
a
lot
of
interest
from
the
public
on
that
that
went
through
a
land
use
process.
I'm
not
going
to
get
into
specifics
here
that
when
that
project
came
through,
it
did
meet
the
criteria
of
the
development
code
as
it's
defined
for
the
types
of
uses
that
were
that
were
allowed
to
go
there.
A
If
there's
additional
information
that
you'd
like
on
that
that
that
is
probably
an
inquiry
that
you
can
make
into
the
planning
department
to
get
more
information
on
that
in
terms
of
environmental
studies,
schools
and
fire,
that
process
is
typically
evaluated
through
our
urban
growth
boundary
process
at
a
macro
level,
and
they
look
at
wildfire
coming
in
from
different
areas
of
town
and
environmental
environmental
issues
that
may
pop
up
in
different
areas.
Transportation.
A
C
Yeah,
so
we
define
affordable
housing
in
two
ways.
The
first
is
federal
housing
and
urban
development
department.
Hud
tells
us
that
no
one
should
be
spending
more
than
30
percent
of
gross
income
each
month
on
housing
costs
right.
So
starting
with
that,
then
hud
tells
us
what
our
area
median
income
is.
C
So
the
numbers
change
constantly-
and
I
will
tell
you
that
even
the
numbers
that
you
saw
on
that
home
slide
right
up
front
are
subject
to
interpretation
I'll,
say
because
every
funding
source
that
is
out
there
to
finance
the
development
of
affordable
housing
has
slightly
different
rules
and,
unfortunately,
even
though
they
were
all
developed
for
the
most
part
in
the
same
place
by
the
same
federal
agency,
they
conflict
at
times.
So
it
gets
really
really
confusing.
A
I
mean
that
helps
yeah.
Thank
you,
lynn,
and
I
just
want
to
jump
back
to
like
another
kind
of
comment
around
that
ben
village.
Just
so,
you
know
elizabeth
help
me
here
if
I
missed
something
besides
what
we
call
the
capital
affordable
housing,
which,
just
that
lynn
just
addressed
all
other
types
of
housing
that
come
in
that
comes
in
the
city,
cannot
really
regulate
price,
whose
you
know
market
who's
being
sold
to.
We
can
really
just
regulate
the
information
that
pauline
went
over
in
terms
of
height
setbacks,
parking
requirements,
things
like
that
elizabeth.
E
E
Or
cost
of
housing
outside
of
what
lynn
described?
There
is
a
small
exception
now
for
certain
what
they
call
inclusionary
zoning,
where
you
can
require
a
certain
amount,
a
level
of
rent
or
ownership
cost,
but
only
for
larger
developments
of
a
certain
size
and
multi-family,
and
that
has
not
been
implemented
in
bend
but
other
than
that
small
exception.
E
F
F
I
kind
of
note
that
the
bend
median
price
is
about
640.
K
has
been
going
up
about
40
percent
a
year,
so
in
about
two
years
it
should
be
up
to
about
1.25
million
brookings
article,
like
I
read
today,
you
know
looked
at
this
situation
same
kind
of
situation.
They
found
a
three
townhouse
development
would
not
reduce
the
unit
price,
but
a
condo
would
reduce
by
40
percent
to
about
750
k,
which
is
still
about
200
percent
of
the
current
ami.
F
A
C
A
really
good
question-
and
I
really
appreciate
these
questions,
even
the
hard
ones.
This
is
exactly
what
we
need
to
be
doing
so
you're
correct,
I
mean
our
price
escalation
is,
is
potentially
out
of
hand
right.
It
is
there's
a
great
place
to
live,
and
people
have
figured
it
out,
so
we
do
anticipate
prices
to
continue
to
increase.
I
think
how
much
those
increase
depends
on
how
much
work
our
council
and
planning
commission
do
across
the
board
on
housing.
C
So
this
is
one
of
a
whole
bunch
of
different
strategies
that
council
and
the
state
are
taking
to
try
to
increase
affordability.
Is
this
our
silver
bullet
and
going
to
solve
every
problem?
We
have
with
affordability?
No,
of
course
not.
It
is
one
of
many
tools
that
might
help
chip
away
at
the
problem.
I
think
if,
if
we
have
drafted,
we
city
bend
community
stakeholder,
etc,
drafted
a
code
that
works
and
is
technically
appropriate.
We
have
a
shot
at
helping
to
stabilize
some
of
the
rents
and
home
prices
that
are
out
there.
C
We
are
absolutely
fighting
the
tide
on
this
one
and
with
our
in
migration,
with
our
growth
with
our
desirability.
It
is
not
an
easy
game
at
all,
but
lives
are
at
stake
and
that's
why
we're
encountering?
Why
we're
proceeding
in
this
direction
so
really
glad
that
you
did
in
fact
ask
that
question.
Yeah
brookings,
I'm
not
sure
if
I've
seen
the
exact
study
that
you
cited,
but
they've
done
a
little
bit
of
work
around
this
generally
and
you're
right
on
one
single
lot.
C
Building
a
town
or
building
a
triplex
is
not
going
to
do
a
lot.
You
can
reduce
the
land
cost
as
it
spread
across
three
units
now,
instead
of
one
but
increase
that
to
20
units
and
now
we're
playing
ball
right.
That
is
absolutely
it.
So,
as
we
continue
through
this
house
bill
2001
process,
we
hope
this
is
one
of
the
many
tools
to
bring
forward.
Staff
and
council
continue
to
work
on
other
code
revisions
to
increase
the
ability
to
to
build
even
more
densely
you're.
C
A
You
know
I'll
add
just
a
couple
things
here,
because
there
has.
You
know,
as
as
pauline
showed,
there's
been
a
lot
of
changes
to
our
code
over
the
past
several
years
and
we
are
starting
to
see
a
turn
in
the
the
housing
mix
between
single
family
and
kind
of
different
multi-family
attached
units,
also
just
with
the
with
the
the
policies
of
council.
What
we've
seen
in
the
market.
Another
council
goal
in
the
last
biennium
was
to
we
called
it
the
road
to
3000.
A
They
wanted
to
perm
permit
and
get
on
the
ground,
3
000
units
of
housing,
which
is
about
a
30
increase
over
what
we
saw
before
in
the
previous
years.
We
typically
do
about
a
thousand
units
a
year,
so
in
the
biennium.
That's
2000
council
wanted
to
wanted
to
try
to
achieve
a
goal
of
3
000,
with
with
the
actions
that
we
saw.
That
allowed
a
lot
of
different
developments
to
happen.
We
saw
a
big
increase
in
multi-family
we've
seen
the
housing
mix
change
and
we
really
exceeded
that
goal.
A
We
were
close
almost
hit
the
4
000
mark
in
the
number
of
units
that
are
either
put
on
the
ground
or
under
construction
right
now
and
and
we've
got
a
big
pipeline
of
additional
projects
coming
to
help
get
more
supply
on
the
ground.
But
a
lot
of
that
was
policy
changes
that
have
done
done
by
the
council.
A
One-
and
you
know
pauline
mentioned
on
adus,
we
removed
the
requirement
for
the
conditional
use
permit
and
did
some
other
changes,
and
we
saw
a
big
increase
in
adu
construction
over
the
past
several
years,
so
again,
credit
to
council
and
and
to
lynn
and
her
team
for
bringing
these
proposals
forward
and
then
pauline
working
with
with
all
all
these
different
stakeholder
groups
to
start
changing
the
code.
But
we
are
starting
to
see.
A
P
P
I
felt
like
a
portion
of
it
was
answered
as
far
as
not
wanting
to
burden
builders
with
adding
additional
parking
and
that
being
factored
into
how
they
are
building.
But
you
know
in
cities
like
portland
and
seattle,
where
they
have
done
away
with
parking
the
same
that
you're
talking
about
it,
does
impact
livability
and
it
also
impacts
retail
zones,
and
I'm
just
wondering
how
that
thought
process
is
going
to
play
out
and
how
it's
going
to
impact
neighborhoods
as
well
as
residential
zones.
A
It's
a
that's
a
great,
it's
a
great
question
to
me
and
I'll
try
to
answer
them
if
anybody
else
wants
to
jump
in
this
is
exactly
this
goes
to
the
heart
of
the
policy
decisions
that
and
the
value
statements
that
the
planning,
commission
and
city
council
are
going
to
evaluate
this
proposal
on,
because
there
are
questions
that
have
come
up
of
just
pure
value
statements
of
kind
of
what
takes
priority,
getting
more
housing
on
the
ground
off
street
parking.
You
know
livability
and
impact
to
neighborhoods
these.
A
That
just
goes
to
the
heart
of
the
value
questions.
The
policy
makers.
That's
why
they
they're
elected
officials
and
that's
why
they
sit
on
these
boards
and
commissions,
is
to
discuss
these
items
and
try
to
represent
those
opinions
and
those
values
to
the
community
and
make
those
decisions
that
that
then
get
embodied
in
the
code
and
how
development
occurs
within
the
city.
I
don't
know
if
anybody
thinks
it
has.
Anybody
else
has
anything
to
add
to
that.
A
H
I
can
well
one
we
are
in
compliance
with
the
oars
or
the
model
code
or
a
little
bit
of
both
the
only
one
where
the
stakeholder
committee
did
something
different
was
with
the
triplexes
by
proposing
no
minimum
parking
requirements
still
in
compliance,
because
it's
less
than
what
is
allowed.
I
believe
the
discussion
really
was
about
the
cost
of
parking,
the
need
for
more
housing
and
because
we
are
proposing
no
parking
for
duplexes.
H
I
believe
they
felt
that
that
was
appropriate
to
continue
with
the
triplexes
and
honestly,
the
fourplex
is
only
one
for
the
entire
development,
so
they're
all
within
zero
to
one
required
parking
spaces.
I
would
encourage
you
if
you
have
a
solution
or
a
comment.
I
would
email
the
planning,
commission
and
city
council
so
that
they
can
read
your
input
and
it
would
be
part
of
the
public
comments
and
there
is
some
wiggle
room
for
the
planning
commission
city
council
to
slightly
increase
the
parking
minimums.
As
we
went
through
that
chart.
H
You
know,
for
example,
a
duplex.
Yes,
they,
the
stakeholder
advisory
group,
recommended
no
parking,
that's
in
compliance
with
the
model
code,
but
there
is
room
to
increase
it
to
two
space
max
and
that
would
be
in
compliance
with
the
oregon
administrative
rules.
So
there
is
a
little
bit
of
room
and
I
I
know
the
council
will
definitely
take
the
in
into
consideration
the
feedback
that
they
receive
regarding
parking.
A
Q
Q
Q
A
I
just
wanted
everyone
to
know
staff
was
you
know.
Staff
has
been
working
on
this
for
a
long
time
and
we're
we're
trying
to
follow
the
direction
in
the
policy
direction.
We're
get
provided
by
city
council
on
the
planning
commission,
but
pauline.
Let
me
turn
it
over
to
you.
I
don't
know
if
you
have
anything
to
add
based
off
of
any
of
that
information.
H
The
dan
also
mentioned
a
couple
things
which
I,
that
detached
units
are
not
the
best
development
and
we
are
proposing
that
we
do
allow
detached
units,
particularly
for
you
know,
topography
and
unique
situations
which
reduce
cost
as
well,
and
I
believe
he
also
supported
reduced
parking
requirements.
So.
O
H
Some
things
that
he
mentioned
that
we
are
doing
well
and
some
things
that
he
may
that
when,
during
his
talk,
he
would
disagree
with,
but
we
are
following
what
is
allowed
by
the
oregon
administrative
roles
in
the
model
code.
As
for
the
parking
study,
I
verified
with
the
department
of
land
conservation
that
it
was
used
during
the
the
rule
making
advisory
committee
discussions,
and
so
that
is
why
it
was
included
in
our
findings.
A
R
R
The
few
years
ago,
there
was
a
poll
done
by
the
city
that
97
percent
of
the
citizens
own
at
least
one
car
per
household.
If
we
do
away
with
parking
restrictions,
where
are
those
cars
going
to
go?
Is
it
going
to
require
wider
streets
so
that
we
can
have
on-street
parking
and
everywhere
and
no
parking
areas
and
just
completely
go
away?
Because
people
do
have
cars
here
when
it's
100
degrees?
Everybody
wants
the
air
conditioning
when
it's
30
degrees.
A
Thank
you
brent,
great
questions.
Let
me
see
I'll
try
to
address
these
really
quick,
so
one
I
can
tell
you
that,
as
you
know,
brent
parking
has
been
a
hot
topic
of
conversation
with
council.
The
council
is
aware
of
these
surveys
and
and
is
taking
that
into
consideration
with
their
decision-making
as
they
go
through
this
I'm
going
to
leave
that
in
the
hands
of
the
policy
makers
of
of
you
know.
As
pauline
said,
there
is
some
discretion
in
this
and
again
this
is
just
you
know.
A
We
got
a
draft
code
based
off
of
the
work
of
the
stakeholder
group
and
that
has
been
presented
forward.
Council
can
take
that
draft
code
as
well
as
all
these
other
surveys
and
other
public
testimony
into
their
decision
making
process,
and
then
they
are
the
policy
makers
that
are
elected
to
make
these
decisions
and
we'll
leave
it
in
the
hands
of
them
to
to
come
up
with
a
conclusion
there.
A
In
terms
of
the
next
urban
growth
boundary
work,
we
are
working
right
now
on
doing
our
housing
needs
analysis
and
our
employment
needs
analysis,
which
is
basically
the
inputs
into
whether
or
not
we
need
an
expansion,
and
maybe
how
big
that
expansion
needs
to
be.
That
process
is
underway
in
this
biennium,
and
the
results
of
that
process
will
then
lead
to
our
next
step
of
what
do
we
do
with
that
information
in
terms
of
looking
at
the
next
expansion?
A
So
it
is,
and
and
the
priority
of
that
work
was
discussed
with
this
city
council
during
their
goal
setting
process,
and
that
was
that
was
the
direction
that
was
given
to
staff
from
council
was
to
begin
with.
Those
housing
needs
analysis
first
and
then
look
at
the
results
of
that
and
then
we'll
figure
out
where
what
the
next
appropriate
steps
are
with
the
urban
growth
boundary
process,
and
that
would
that
would
happen
after
we
get
those
those
studies
complete.
A
But
we
are,
we
are
looking
at.
You
know
what
is
our
housing
need
over
the
next
20
years
right
now
that
work
is
going
to
take.
I
would
imagine,
12
to
18
months,
to
complete
it's
pretty,
there's
a
lot
of
technical
work
that
is
involved
in
that
and
we'll
figure
out
the
appropriate
step
with
council
from
there
and
along
with
public
input.
A
I
don't
know
if
anybody
anybody
else
has
anything
to
add
at
this
point
on
that
before
we
close
this
out,
nope
all
right.
So
with
that
again,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
this
last
slides
coming
up.
So
the
next
step
in
this
process
is
the
is
the
planning
commission
next
monday
at
5
30.
again,
information
on
that
is
on
our
website.
B
Yeah,
so
we're
gonna
make
sure
that
we
have
the
link
for
this
presentation
on
our
youtube
channel.
So
that's
the
city
of
bend
youtube
channel.
In
addition,
in
addition,
we
will
include
it
on
the
hb
2001
web
page
and
so
you'll
have
easy
access
to
that
and
you
can
see
the
url
link
right
there
on
the
bottom.
I
anticipate
getting
this
out
and
by
tomorrow
morning,
so
you
should
see
it
there
soon
and.
A
H
They
should
go
to
the
the
house
bill
webpage.
That's
listed
at
the
bottom
of
the
powerpoint
slide.
We've
uploaded
everything
there,
staff
reports,
findings,
any
upcoming
hearings,
lots
of
questions
and
answers,
it's
full
of
information.
If
they
want
to
learn
more,
I
would
encourage
you
to
go
to
that
webpage
and
pay
a
visit
to
it
all.
A
Right
and
I
think
with
that,
we're
going
to
wrap
this
up.
First
of
all,
I
want
to
say
thank
you
for
everyone
that
joined
us
for
taking
two
hours
out
of
your
thursday
evening
to
to
get
some
more
information
on
this.
I
want
to
thank
our
wonderful
city
staff
for
the
presentations
and
addressing
all
the
the
questions
and
concerns
that
people
are
having
and
again,
I'm
sure
we're
going
to
be
having
additional
discussions
as
we
go
through.
A
This
process
continue
to
stay
informed
through
the
city's
communications
and
our
websites
about
how
the
process
goes
through
and
again.
Staff
is
here
to
help
answer
questions
if
needed,
as
we
go
through
the
process.
So
again,
thank
you,
everybody
and
have
a
great
evening
and
we'll
probably
see
many
of
you
monday
night
at
the
planning
commission
meeting.