Speakers labeled via automated voice-based diarization + AI name-matching against the city's official roster. Automated transcription can still mis-hear a name during fast speech (e.g. a rapid roll-call vote) -- clear near-misses are auto-corrected, but this is not manually verified line-by-line. Treat names as a strong best guess, not an official record.
[0:12] Speaker A (unidentified): He's on screen cover every year though. Yeah. Because of all that happens. I got it. The next thing up are the doing the NASCAR. I mean,. They managed to survive a drought, so that's in their field for the whole time. Yeah. That's a good first.
[1:04] Speaker B (unidentified): Yeah i think we do yeah we're still
[1:13] Speaker C (unidentified): Down a couple of people well
[1:17] Speaker D (unidentified): [1:20] Speaker B (unidentified): Elena
[1:24] Speaker E (unidentified): Elena yeah isn't she her seat expired and she didn't reply we only have one open seat technically speaking and that's district two from last i've checked with me is that elena's seat hi sorry i you know she's just not on there anymore so we are recording already, just so everybody knows, I got a little jumpstart. Just a reminder to speak towards that speaker. If you watch any of the past recordings, it is not very receptive to voices, especially from like the second chair back. It's hard when you guys get in conversations, but yeah.
[2:29] Speaker F (unidentified): We're ready to go. I think we've got a quorum.
[2:36] Speaker E (unidentified): The only person that let me know they were not going to be here was Simon and Arden. Arden is not coming. Okay.
[2:48] Speaker F (unidentified): Well, let's get started. So I'll call to order the Land Bank Commission meeting for September 9th. First item up is citizen comment period. I'm not seeing any citizens except commissioners and staff people. So we'll close the citizen comment period. Agenda items are acceptance of minutes, meeting minutes. August 12th is what's on the docket. Commissioners have these in their packet. And I would offer up any comments, amendments, or action on the minutes from August 12th. We do accept the Minutes. Okay. Josh has moved to accept the minutes as written. [Speaker B (unidentified): Anyone second? Second.] It's been seconded. Thank you, Michael. Sorry. Yeah. All right. And all those in favor? And I think that Dan wasn't here. Yeah, I wasn't here. so you're standing everyone else is affirmative got it next item up is university park you'll remember we discussed this about putting some play space that exists in university park
[4:19] Speaker D (unidentified): Turn it over to ethan yeah so i did invite corporation council to attend tonight those requests commissioners for additional insight from them they but due to our discussion we have with them and filling them in on why we wanted them to attend we discovered or didn't discover but determined that they determined that this project actually doesn't need land bank people after all so i told them there's no need to for them to attend we might want them to attend future meetings or other issues where We might need their expertise, but that they wouldn't need to attend this one, so they're they're not here, even though they're willing to come. The interpretation of chapter two, so like land bank ordinance is part of chapter two, which is it doesn't have its own standalone chapter, it's embedded in the chapter 2, which is really kind of outlines the administration of the city and talks about, like, the organizational structure. And she'll be a city manager, a police chief, and a public works director, and parks and rec director, et cetera. But within Chapter 2, it has a section pertaining to the land bank. And we looked closely at the language and the corporate council looked closely at the language and determined that there can be no structures built on unimproved or unforested, I'm sorry, unimproved or forested sections of land bank property. Because the area that this playground would go on is unforested, it's a meadow and has been for many years. They felt it didn't that prohibition on structures didn't apply in this case, you know, if we were cutting down trees and clearing the area to build a playground or something else, that would trigger land bank the need for land bank approval and council approval, but since this is going unforested area, they felt the language was fairly or was clear that approval wasn't required. It wasn't a permit for a prohibited use, so I know the land bank already weighed in on kind of an informal basis during the last meeting. I still think it's a good practice to let the land back know of these types of projects and we still intend to pursue it in the way that was presented in the last meeting, natural playground, you know, maybe a small pump track, pretty unobtrusive, no buildings, natural materials, that's kind of the desire of the neighborhood as well, so that's kind of the guidelines we would use for the project moving forward, but there's technically no land bank
[7:22] Speaker A (unidentified): approval required and or city council approval, so it's well, so just curious if an area has been maintained specifically as a low meadow, would that make it subject to potential development
[7:43] Speaker D (unidentified): not developments but for the city two-place structure, it's still city property. So it wouldn't be sold or disposed of. But if the city chose to do that, it wouldn't require land back approval
[8:00] Speaker G (unidentified): according to their greeting.
[8:02] Speaker A (unidentified): Even if it goes against the original Greek rationale for putting in the mail bank and maintaining it as a.
[8:08] Speaker D (unidentified): According to the ordinance as ad red. It's a slippery slope. Yeah. That's corporation council's interpretation. Yeah, so I don't think there's any plans to further, you know, I think another similar area would be like the paths open space where we have a unforested area and meadow that's maintained, you know, there's not too many other land bank properties that have unforested areas, but they felt because it was unforested the ordinance didn't require
[8:54] Speaker A (unidentified): Yeah, that was specifically preserved in mode to maintain it as a meadow, a wet meadow because it's the headwater of St. Paul Brook, you know, and there's lots of wetlands and streams running there. There and it would be maintained specifically as that kind of habitat, otherwise the city probably would let it grow up to forest, but yeah, just a very slightly slow, so
[9:28] Speaker D (unidentified): That's that's the update
[9:31] Speaker F (unidentified): Great, yeah, thank you. Any comments about professional use the women that ever be free. Great.
[9:41] Speaker B (unidentified): Awesome. Anybody else? Anything?
[9:47] Speaker F (unidentified): I do recall, we were just trying to figure out what is the threshold. I do now remember some of that language about forested and it's improved and unimproved. Brought back some memories. Ethan was mentioning that. It seems pretty straightforward. Forward. Parks will continue to do what they said they were going to do with the plan. And I don't think we have any other role.
[10:25] Speaker B (unidentified): Okay, great. Good.
New Business
[10:30] Speaker F (unidentified): Next item up is our new business and secretary's report. As far as the originators report go, I don't have a whole
[10:42] Speaker C (unidentified): lot did spend some time starting to, I think I mentioned several meetings ago that I was going to start to try to clean up some of the files on the G drive so I could do some network, but still have more to go on cleaning up some of the old project files. I've been just hard hiding old files, I'm not deleting anything to the record with history of the various projects and what's going on, so that's that's that'll continue as I have time over this point, that's the way out as far as psychotropic.
[11:11] Speaker B (unidentified): Okay, any
[11:16] Speaker F (unidentified): questions, comments? Motion to accept the report.
[11:30] Speaker G (unidentified): Move by Rob. Second,
[11:36] Speaker F (unidentified): second, smaller favor. Yes, you're my favorite. Yeah, no,
[11:44] Speaker B (unidentified): you should. Okay, unless you don't want to know.
[11:49] Speaker F (unidentified): Next up is the treasurer's report. All right.
[11:53] Speaker C (unidentified): So as of today, we have an account balance, projected account balance of $702,717. That factors in approved land-based expenditures, including soft loss for Davis Pines, an increase of our allocation for the spread, our full launch to $52,000 and 12,000 five letters for the dorms hearing market open, great [Speaker B (unidentified): Questions.] Others ready we support oven that number reflects x increase last city council budget for us one and a half percent. Yeah call the exact amount yeah in spring.
[12:53] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah which
[13:00] Speaker F (unidentified): was a considerable bump of a couple hundred thousand dollars a year okay.
[13:08] Speaker B (unidentified): We didn't go ahead and make that, did we?
[13:13] Speaker F (unidentified): Anyone want to make a motion to accept the trend urge report? It's been moved by Mike, seconded by Dan. All those in favor? Then it's unanimous. Good, everybody.
[13:26] Speaker G (unidentified): Cruising along. Communication and parcel updates.
[13:31] Speaker F (unidentified): I know we have the two reports on here. Somebody had indicated we had some administrative business with Dan in on appraisals and various other things, right? We should probably just include what you need for that in this section. Sure.
[13:55] Speaker C (unidentified): Yeah, go ahead. So I just wanted to follow up on the Murray Street plots. So just to dig back into that refresh. There's two lots, we looked at them during the site visit this summer. These two lots are on the, have been on the high priority in the land bank for several years and back in the early, earlier this year a landowner had reached out by a letter and a landowner is going to sell two of the Brussels in that area for forty thousand dollars each for a total of fifty thousand dollars. And so we, the land bank, then saw appraisals as the next step on those two parcels. We got the appraisals back earlier this summer. And I just wanted to follow up on the next steps here and the sequence of how this would proceed. I did want to get back to the landowner. I did contact her about a month ago, and she's still interested in selling parcels. So just to quickly summarize the appraisals, they are up on the G Drive, if you want to take a look. But one of them appraised for $36,000,
[15:08] Speaker F (unidentified): so a little under her asking price.
[15:10] Speaker C (unidentified): And the second parcel is appraised for $68,000, so over her asking price. But the mine is greater than the amount she's looking for, $1,400. So, in any event, I'm not sure how this works exactly as far as next steps. We need to make a formal, do you want to do more due diligence first, or do we make some sort of recommendation to the city to purchase and sales agreement? I just wanted to bring that up to the commission to find out.
[15:44] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah. Does she have the appraisals and knows that she's okay with what she offered?
[15:52] Speaker C (unidentified): No, I have not sent the appraisals to her. So it's been kept internal as far as I know.
[15:58] Speaker F (unidentified): And she would she be willing to do a purchase and sale without DFA? So what price do you think or?
[16:05] Speaker C (unidentified): I think this would all be part of sort of getting back to negotiating with her on the final price. We haven't, beyond her issuing her initial email saying she was willing to sell at that price. That's all the communication we've had on it.
[16:24] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah. I can give you some quick thoughts. This has been on our priority list for a long time. We have monies to buy land that are priorities. We've done the scorecard. We've done the appraisal. The next step would be getting a purchase and sale agreement and going to the council and going through that process if that's our recommendation is to buy the parcel. I do, I'd be a little concerned about the situation with the appraisal and money's offering, right, because you know we can't hide the appraisal from her, right, so that doesn't mean she wouldn't negotiate lower, her, you know, we could, we could ask her to, you know, still pay when she offered, right, to be a present some sort of recognition. Yeah, but I think before we report whether we should probably turn that with the owner, right, we know she's
[17:23] Speaker C (unidentified): a willing seller, right, it's just unusual, right, it could be sold as a, excuse me
[17:35] Speaker A (unidentified): the difference between asking and potential praise of that one could be a write-off
[17:44] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, and it could be sold to be a donation, yeah, we've done that, yeah, in other situations ran road property or preserved, yeah
[17:54] Speaker F (unidentified): I don't, I don't remember what the delta was, but it might be enough to be an incentive to do that. Yeah, I expressed my ignorance, but where would I find the other prehensiles?
[18:09] Speaker C (unidentified): So if you go into the Land Bank Commission Google Drive, you have the projects.
[18:18] Speaker F (unidentified): Projects, current and past by name? Yes, correct.
[18:21] Speaker C (unidentified): And then going to HP 15 Murray Street, and then these are if within that Murray Street folder, Riley parcels, those are the two appraisals the landowners is analyzing.
[18:40] Speaker A (unidentified): Let's say it's 20, 12,000 I believe, and plus the access, the annual taxes, that's a lot of
[18:55] Speaker C (unidentified): Yeah, I should add, if you read the appraisal, it makes it pretty clear that these lots are not, because developing housing is not very feasible, really no cost to construct all those paper streets out to some extent.
[19:11] Speaker F (unidentified): What was the difference in the parcel value with the size?
[19:15] Speaker C (unidentified): So part of it, yeah, that's a, it's, I kind of try to dig into that because, so part of the increase, you know, the increase value on one of them is,, is the size, but that doesn't really account for all of it because this is a pretty big jump. She, raised one at $3 per square foot versus another, the other parcel is $5 per square foot. She chose low end for one and low to medium on the other. And so I think it's, it's kind of hard to exactly tease out. There's a section in there that kind of explains that. I think it's due to using a comparable where a butters had offered more than what was expected because they were trying to protect, they didn't want to develop around property, so that was, that was used as
[20:01] Speaker F (unidentified): a comparable. It makes sense, yeah. So it's a real, it's a real sale, yeah, exactly, so that's
[20:06] Speaker C (unidentified): It's kind of how I think one of them is. Yeah.
[20:11] Speaker F (unidentified): Any comment from commissioners on continuing to move forward? I think we wouldn't take action tonight. Our next action would be to develop a purchase and sale and act on a purchase and sale that we would approve and then send to the council. Is there anyone, does anyone have comments or concerns or questions?
[20:31] Speaker G (unidentified): Can you move forward?
[20:33] Speaker F (unidentified): I do get a purchase and sales agreement and develop a land bank. Does corporate council put that together for us? Yeah, corporation council.
[20:41] Speaker D (unidentified): It's, it's evolved over the years. It used to be housing and economic development department helped with a transaction related to city land acquiring or disposing of it. Corporation council, I'm just thinking our most recent like North Durham Park, that was mostly through corporation council, that and we actually hired outside council for that to help with the transaction because they just didn't have capacity, so we filed, a hired a real estate attorney to assist with the transaction, they reported corporation counsel and myself on the whole thing, so we can get assistance with drafting up, but the discussion on, you know, letting them know about appraisal, they're not generally getting involved in the negotiations and arriving at the price, but they'll drop, draft it up, so the discussions with the property owner sharing the results through appraisal and arriving at a price, that's generally done by the land bank commission and court counsel formalize it all, so in that case I can
[21:48] Speaker C (unidentified): get back to her and let her know we've been forward here since. Yeah, and I'm glad to
[21:55] Speaker F (unidentified): chat about the excess in terms of a donation if she's willing to go that route or it's not really a donation is it because you're underpaying for one you're undercutting her on one it's two separate purchase and sale agreements or one agreement tied together i assume we would do one for the two parcels that but i don't know maybe corporation council would yeah if you have thoughts mike maybe there's a more novel way to deal with that but i was assuming it'd be one purchase and sale for the two parcels, and it's just based on what she offered and what the appraisal came out on. Well, the other, the other one was below.
[22:43] Speaker C (unidentified): Was it, was it for a parcel? She indicated it was, he said 40,000 per parcel. All right, so you're
[22:50] Speaker F (unidentified): right, one was actually high, one was low. Yeah, one's high, one knows the sky. Well, maybe
[23:28] Speaker C (unidentified): he's allocated to that eighty thousand dollar number. No, yeah, I think we would do that with
[23:37] Speaker F (unidentified): the purchase and sale if we got to the point of purchase sale. We'd allocate the money, purchase and sales. No sense in doing that if we don't get to the purchase and sale, is how I've been looking at that. We can certainly do. We've been there before, we have to buy that loose again,
[23:59] Speaker G (unidentified): right? Send it back into the government.
[24:03] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah, that aside, let's just make work for Rob. Security to be done. Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting circumstance, I think that you can't, I mean, we're, it's public record. So all of this is public record, but he wants that they can see it. And so there's no reason that, you know, with all the information from there, I think the messaging is, you know, there's a lot of other parcels on Murray Street, too. So you're setting precedent at some level also in this acquisition, which is what it is in a way, but other folks in the area will find this information somehow, if in one. And they decide they want to cut loose on everything. It's very critical. Other phrases, for sure.
[24:53] Speaker D (unidentified): You can just watch the minutes of this meeting, public meeting.
[24:57] Speaker F (unidentified): So I mean, I think transparency is your best policy.
[25:02] Speaker B (unidentified): And if Doug's pitch
[25:06] Speaker F (unidentified): on, we'll give you a tax letter,
[25:11] Speaker B (unidentified): along with 80,000 dollars, no problem. Sounds good.
[25:17] Speaker G (unidentified): We can language if you want.
[25:19] Speaker F (unidentified): I don't know that it's a fairly simple
[25:21] Speaker G (unidentified): purchase and sale agreement, so I'm not sure what
[25:23] Speaker D (unidentified): you know. I was just looking at the past one we did at Rand Road. We had to purchase a map and grid to the parent company of C&P. They had a parcel that the city purchased, and what it changed hands was I think $50,000, but the purchase agreed upon purchase price. I can't remember exactly how it was worded, but it was it was valued at 300 and some thousand dollars so that the delta was considered a donation city of Portland and so yeah so court council can help with that but we've done that in the past that was a great deal 50k for 25 acres yeah it's a very good deal for the city yeah
[26:08] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah it is the is a letter of intent an appropriate first step without corporate counsel or is that something that has to also go through counsel even if it has glaring holes I just you know you're at the point I just don't I don't want how long do you think it takes for a purchase and sale agreement to come back these days I guess in the grand scheme of
[26:36] Speaker H (unidentified): It can take a while.
[26:41] Speaker D (unidentified): There's a lot of priorities they're working on.
[26:43] Speaker F (unidentified): I do think, Dan, we should do a letter of intent. We do have a template for that, or you can find it on the drive. We should sign it and agree on what was just described in terms of the dollar amount and the value of the excess that could be charitable. And that would obviously be codified in the purchase and sale, but just a letter being very clear and agreeing on that.
[27:15] Speaker G (unidentified): Subject to mutually agreeable purchase and sale agreement
[27:17] Speaker F (unidentified): is kind of how they all end.
[27:20] Speaker G (unidentified): There's negotiating to be done,
[27:22] Speaker F (unidentified): but we're shaking hands in business.
[27:26] Speaker A (unidentified): We need to run the approach by cooperation and non-community. Probably share that letter.
[27:35] Speaker F (unidentified): Okay, so I'm not sure I agree with that statement. We're not blinding anybody to do anything.
[27:42] Speaker A (unidentified): No, but you're stating an intent that has city money to do it. So we're making a...
[28:01] Speaker F (unidentified): It's an agreement to agree, and so instead of letting things hang out there for months on end, potentially, and life circumstances changing on either end, it allows us to roll back into something that says, here's what we've agreed on. Can you please wrap it up in a, you know, just a term, just a term. Yeah. Fine. I mean, we can run it by, you
[28:33] Speaker H (unidentified): know, again, it's a time thing. Yeah.
[28:37] Speaker D (unidentified): I've, I've done that without. Yeah. I mean, if we need to, that's fine. I'm glad to do that. But yeah, I don't think it commits the city to anything. It's no more than what we've, what the discussions of, you know, you know if our commissioners are already having discussions property owners and all of it needs to get approved anyway in the end and can be changed in the end but yeah i mean i can
[29:04] Speaker F (unidentified): look at the links but they typically clearly states this is not a blinding yeah it's just making sure that i'm misunderstanding about the terms yeah i recall the letters of interest
[29:19] Speaker C (unidentified): Interest. The land bank doesn't have to formally vote to approve releasing that, but I think in the past, we've brought some of those letters to the Land Bank Commission just for awareness. So it sounds like there might be some time to check on it before council and draft it, sign it, and then pretty soon in the month folks can send it off.
[29:44] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah, it's up to the pleasure of the Commission. If we want to do that, we can certainly do that. I'm not opposed to having a look at it. I don't know how critical Dan, do you know
[29:57] Speaker C (unidentified): how pressed she is? I don't really, I don't think it's pressing now. Yeah, it's been quite a while. Yeah, so I think there's a time. Yeah, I wouldn't want to slow it down, right, but
[30:11] Speaker F (unidentified): yeah, I think if you get drafted and we'll take a look at it, and I don't know how corporation council, like whether we should aim to do that or how long it might take or
[30:23] Speaker D (unidentified): I can ask a quick question and see if there are meetings to review them. Yeah, that'll be great.
[30:29] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah, all chopped up. Yeah, okay, good. Yeah, that'll be a good one. Those have been kicking around. Yeah,
[30:38] Speaker A (unidentified): yeah, it's good progress. Yeah, I was actually, you know, there's some others. Yeah,
[30:44] Speaker H (unidentified): Yeah, this is a little sign-up. Yeah. Yeah, that's one of the best ways
[30:50] Speaker A (unidentified): Yeah, I've been around for too long, other
[31:05] Speaker F (unidentified): Can the other parcel updates, does anyone have quick updates on anything?
[31:11] Speaker C (unidentified): Thing. I had a question. Yeah. So back when we were discussing in about a year and a half ago, was going to the auction. There is some talk about trying to get a suitability for development assessment for the parcel, but I believe the planning department came back and said, well, the active development permit will be the deciding factor on whether it is suitable for development. I thought that was their response, but the planning board gave a somewhat ambiguous response to it. And in theory, they weren't allowed to vote on the development proposal because there was still the outstanding line and the developer was, at the time, so they weren't allowed to vote. The planning board chair, someone telegraphed their intent if they were able to vote by saying, you should be glad we can't vote because I don't think we could have voted.
[32:29] Speaker A (unidentified): But there was no formal denial.
[32:33] Speaker C (unidentified): So now that there is no active development proposal, no permits pulled before the parcel, would it make sense to try to go back and have the planning department do some type of suitability for development assessment and just have that record and say if you think it's good or bad, parts of this are not so good?
[33:02] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, they've they've done those letters on a couple occasions, typically for parcels where there's not like an active development that review in progress already. I think, you know, Redland Woods it was one, there's been a couple, I think Gearing North, Gearing Park, there was another instance where they basically did a short letter just saying this areas unlikely to be developed. I mean, nothing's impossible depending what you're willing to pay for it, but kind of outline what types of housing could be. Power development could be possible there, whether that was desirable city or whether it was likely or unlikely. So we can, I haven't kept up with the status of that project since the land bank just, you know, the auctions and all that, so I get it wired.
[33:58] Speaker C (unidentified): As far as I'm aware, last summer the planning department expired that development review was more interactive. As far as I'm aware, the land transferred to the patent, the lender that was on tap to issue the construction loan. That ended up not happening, obviously. And as far as I'm aware, there was no active good. So I wondered if this would be a good time to request it.
[34:37] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah, let's see. Let's see. Maybe we will get back to some guidance on that. It is, I remember there was lots of discussion about slope and the application as it was submitted, it proceeded though. I think that you mentioned it would have come, but it never came, and then that vision was withdrawing essentially by default. Okay, any other parcel updates?
[35:06] Speaker B (unidentified): Look.
[35:09] Speaker C (unidentified): At 340 Promenade or something. Oh yeah, get a sense of what the property looks like they have. We have a reasonably large forested area that goes from the Eastern Promenade down to the actual walkway on the right side of the building with parking lots, accessible with a walk-in, go down the trail, the existing city trail that's next to it, seemed like a good candidate it by the students go back and do the support card and maybe hear more about interest, maybe change, you know, it seems suitable as a. Number of the budding properties part of the parks department for city properties. I just don't know, I think the issue we were raising last time was that developers also interested in obviously applying to pay development money for adjacent their property improvement money and be with conservation, they're going to continue. Yeah, any.
[36:28] Speaker F (unidentified): guesses on the size of the forested area that never actually that is it is it the acre three acres did you have yes when you looked at it i would say an acre or less yeah it's pretty heavily forested but it's not a huge area
[36:46] Speaker B (unidentified): Right, yeah, and
[36:50] Speaker C (unidentified): Hey, I'm gonna go back, see if it is known separately or not, well, tried to find that information, jump out at the book.
[37:02] Speaker F (unidentified): If it's already split, I suspect it's, I believe it is, I think that's what the association president, they've told me, is it's all one place at the moment. Yeah, but there's, it, there's a, it looks
[37:18] Speaker C (unidentified): to me like there's a logical line you could draw from the end of one of their parking plots, create a path going down for us today, and there is, there is a path from a walking trail rail goes up without park already, so it's like a natural connection. Okay, thanks.
[37:41] Speaker F (unidentified): I did hear from the president of the association again, basically asking is the land bank if it's in its parcel. I told them we were doing due diligence. I'm, you know, there's a little bit of a appraisal game there because that's such a weird one. It's like a million dollar view, but is it really a million dollar acre? I, the only way to find it out is to ask an appraiser who's going to tell you I have no idea. We'll take some guesses at it because the land doesn't really sell down there, 's not, there's not comps like that. I don't know when the, I 'm tempted to put the appraisal burden on them, or we could do an appraisal if we felt we wanted to do an appraisal, but it seems really critical to understand the value, and then, you know, I, that would determine whether it would actually be an acquisition or something different in easements. I did tell them pretty quickly that they're going to be disappointed in the value in the easement, the money they get in their pocket from an easement, they may like the fact that the trees and forest is remaining in front of their property, but the money in their pocket is not going to be a lot. I 've already warned them of that, so maybe they want to rule that out and just look at the value of the property, but I don't know how else to determine the value without asking them for their amount. This is the link between them and the farm trail. Yeah, basically all the forests slow, it's steep, well, it's pretty steep, it's like a big gold building on eastern prom next to fort allen park.
[39:33] Speaker C (unidentified): I assume that they own from all the way to other side of troops, basically.
[39:44] Speaker B (unidentified): If it is a normally
[39:46] Speaker C (unidentified): Leave shape rectangle or square parcel. I would assume they would want just to cut on here. Yeah. But maybe they're probably still out.
[40:00] Speaker F (unidentified): I mean, that's a fairly, I mean, obviously fairly interesting development area at the moment, given what's happening. They've indicated and I have no idea if it's true. They've indicated that the developer next door is interested by which
[40:17] Speaker G (unidentified): Which would be apprentice group. I don't know. Yeah. Yeah.
[40:21] Speaker F (unidentified): It's fun. Yeah. I mean, there is that option. You know, they're going to get some development, but not with trees. They're not going to buy and keep trees. Right.
[40:32] Speaker D (unidentified): It's not like their motivation is their charge rate response for cattle improvements of their facility, right?
[40:39] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah. And that might be a good conversation to have with them. Like, what do you really need for funds? Because there may not be a match. The property may never be worth it, and certainly if it's not going to be an acquisition, it's not going to be worth it. I probably tell them you're not getting new windows with easement, you know, right, because it's that walking trail for down to the that's really most of the grades like
[41:04] Speaker D (unidentified): That yeah, you like it's like there's a little rock, it's a uniform hillside there. Yeah, the trail is on city land. Yeah, so just so everybody knows that, so this, you know, one of the facts, regardless who ends up at this property, the trails are going to be there, but yeah, it's pretty similar slope to the
[41:26] Speaker C (unidentified): Where the trail is, there's steps to get up that section. Yeah, it is from a developmentalist
[41:34] Speaker A (unidentified): In a development standpoint, having frontage on a public right when there's no form of road down through that property, you apply the code follow that frontage, so that would that question would have.
[41:58] Speaker F (unidentified): Especially if the neighboring development body. Yeah. But it would change the whole scenario. I mean, they have access to long-term use, like that would be there. Yeah. They have access through their existing parcel. I mean,
[42:13] Speaker C (unidentified): Through their existing parcel, but the property itself is not
[42:19] Speaker A (unidentified): Property. Right. So you have to get to and buy a certain kind of way. Otherwise, why did you want to build
[42:29] Speaker F (unidentified): It in the master plan? Yeah. And that's that would be asking you what you can build
[42:36] Speaker G (unidentified): And they will tell you how much money you have.
[42:38] Speaker A (unidentified): Oh, I'm just pointing that out. Yeah.
[42:45] Speaker F (unidentified): Josh, I don't know if you want to reach out to them and have some discussion about these things, or what's your preference for moving forward?
[42:53] Speaker C (unidentified): Yeah, I'm happy to have that conversation. Station, I can fill out the scorecard. I'm interested in hearing from them and again, what their intention is. In my mind, I was drawing a line. If they wanted to keep the forested area behind their building, and it will just be the subsection that actually will sell all of it. That changes the consideration pretty see we have a family yeah I think that's an interesting idea if they're going to sell it or give it or dispose of it on where there's others to ask do you see appraisal yeah because an appraisal is going to have to happen by the way to the
[43:41] Speaker F (unidentified): Developer for it yeah you could ask him that just say would you be interested in get his rental to find out the value of the property and don't even go that route of us doing it yet unless it was something he really wanted to do and you know we could but I that's a weird one that's that's cool it would be really a really great addition to the land bank it's like you know where it sits and what it is and what's happening down there and like you know It'd be nice to keep it as open space. I don't know how to go over that is I wonder You know a survey would have to be done at some point because they're carving it off of an existing Tax parcel or you know legal description, so that's a Layer of like what exactly what exactly are you selling? What are you trying to sell like we're Down from what we point to what point they haven't told us that they just they may not know Yeah. Yeah. You know, but yeah, the appraiser is not going to be able to praise without the survey. But at least he has some boundaries, some attempted boundary outline, right? Like, yeah,. Like, and I think that would behoove them to decide that because they're also don't want to shoot themselves in the foot with setbacks and other things, depending on what they might need to do in the future for garage work or a patio, or I don't know you know so like that really in some way they'd have to say like here's what we feel like we could give up that doesn't hurt our building yeah what would you gain from this it's kind of
[45:23] Speaker A (unidentified): Like gave us our own person actually so we asked our students
[45:35] Speaker F (unidentified): I'll pass along his information or maybe I'll connect you with him by email yeah Peter in Asia you know [Speaker B (unidentified): He's a lawyer] He's a topic lawyer. No, I don't think he really knows the conservation world. So I really think he's asking for some guidance and better understanding. He's just trying to figure out if it could work. I'm guessing he has bigger dollar signs in his eyes than is going to happen. Because he said they have major work. I don't entirely know what it is, but they're trying to not assess the association like through the roof. So yeah, it's worth talking, asking those questions and see if they would split the parcel, at least at least have a layer that shows what they would be willing to sell and would they get, find out the value. Do you think they'd be interested in selling to us
[46:51] Speaker C (unidentified): if the appraisal is involved?
[46:56] Speaker F (unidentified): I don't know. I don't know what their threshold is. That's why it might be, I don't know if they're willing to tell. There's a little gamesmanship going on, right? Like he said, the neighbor wants to buy it and they're doing a big development. It's got these views, the front of the headlight and the floors. All true, but I don't know if she's talked to the neighbor.
[47:13] Speaker D (unidentified): Why haven't they bought it if it's such a goldmine?
[47:16] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah. Do they really want high-rise apartments? I don't think they do. Yeah, I think that's the game they're playing. So if he, if he worked it to just see what their expectation might be like,, what do they need? Maybe they'll tell you I haven't asked him. And he might want to say it. Sure. Yeah. [Speaker B (unidentified): Okay, get] some details. Yeah, let them know that if they want, they
[47:45] Speaker C (unidentified): they want to dispose of it to us survey bracelet that sort of your state is what we're dealing with yeah heavy caution again we're not going to pay top dollars more regardless if it's developed
[48:02] Speaker F (unidentified): yeah i mean we would go by appraisal you know okay and i you know i could imagine if you really want to build housing there could be pretty amazing it wouldn't be horrible okay any other parcels I'm reaching out about Redlawn Woods again. I don't have any updates. I do have a little update on Redlawn. You remember there was discussion about better understanding how the current trails there relate to public and private property so that we're discouraging any trespassing. same. There is a trail map that Port of the Trails did by going out and mapping it up the trails. And they've actually put in a couple trailhead signs that BORA had requested if there could be you know, this is a trail, this is a public access, there's going to be three of them, one on June Street, and two on the north side, which I can't remember those common access yeah that's that one's there 's gonna be another one on the west of that sorry so another thing and a little bit of wayfinding arrows to direct people on kind of the main route through there's a main route that goes through there low wayfinding but just so you know that it's actually a trail available and more requested one basically where you access that and that hasn't gone there yet all of the trail as they're currently used and i know i think they use drama and other software and then actually looked on the ground where the footpath was our own city property somehow they don't cross the private parcel that's cool people do it 's kind of amazing. It doesn't really happen that way. But there is, you know, there is there's a there's a GIS trail map that shows where the trails are and how they relate to the different parcels. And it doesn't appear there's any trespassing. Obviously, someone can wander off. But the trail is not trespassing. So anyway, that's that's an update. Okay, just I'm texting with Laura now and see us palm Roy Street. Is that your one in Bancroft? The other side?
[50:53] Speaker E (unidentified): I talked about? There's Kenilworth, Rockland, Motley. Yeah, Motley was one. And then now Pomeroy. And yeah, Pomeroy didn't used to have a trail in there, but it's not significant, but they'll use it. Yeah.
[51:16] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah. Right. And Davis Pine. I can't remember last time we got the appraisal that we talked about this and the owner didn't like the amounts so we're and it just kind of proves that the letter intent is really not very powerful because he said I don't like that I want this amount so we're actually working to try to expand the parcel because there's a bunch more land there behind the building which I don't know why that never got included. It is probably my guess is it's another five acres so it's eight and five it might be. A 12 acre total parcel, I think it's more developable when an appraiser looks at it because it's flatter and drier. And so I'm, I conceptually have talked to the owner and he said I'm interested if you can get more value out of it from an appraiser perspective then I would consider it. The 230,000 for the eight acres which was mostly wet and steep, most of the value was removed because of the steep play slopes. I think only seven tenths of an acre was being developable and it's where all the big trees are of course. So continuing to work with them, he's still a willing seller. If we can meet the appraisal with the new property and he's agreeable to that, we continue on. My guess is it may be a $600,000 appraisal on 12 acres versus a $230,000 appraisal. I'm completely guessing just on a certain percentage of the other piece that we'd be adding being drier and flat. Also, there's a potential to connect with a couple other properties to get out to the road onto the sidewalk and connect to the golf course and the trails of the golf course. Which might help with the problem of the, remember, that's a private road that's currently closed to the public. So it actually might add some way to get to the property in terms of access that doesn't exist now. There'd be, again, there'd be other transactions, easements or something on the backside of the other properties. But there's potential for that. Yeah, that's not far. Yeah, no, it's right around the corner. The guy Doug, you'll appreciate this, he wanted to sell his stormwater ponds and I was like I think I'm good, you can keep your stormwater ponds. So he's, you know, he's not a conservation seller. Maybe someone buys stormwater ponds, I don't know. It was market porn. We don't want, somebody else can buy them, they actually have to go with their property, it's a regulatory thing. Yeah, you can't just sell your stormwater ponds. I think that was a, you know, basically a state site. Yeah, I assume. Yeah, I mean, I guess you could try but someone's going to catch it.
[54:39] Speaker D (unidentified): We've had other requests from development projects to put their stormwater ponds on land bank property, which we don't know if we didn't even get that question, so that's not happen. And yeah, interestingly enough, this area is, you know, think about our 10 minutes, 10 minutes to a park gold, there is a area that's underserved by green space or parks kind of to the east towards like the Auburn Street Washington extension area that guy that could help close the gap. I mean, we're at 98% citywide, and it's all these small little slivers of, you know, the areas that are further than 10 minutes away that there just so happens to be an area in the vicinity of this parcel that could help us with.
[55:32] Speaker C (unidentified): Where would the access point be?
[55:35] Speaker G (unidentified): A possibility of additional sliver? Out to
[55:41] Speaker F (unidentified): Riverside Street. We're behind those other properties, and that,, the butt Riverside, like in between the highway, the other properties that are on the right parallel to the highway. Yes. Just parallel to the highway. Don't go with MDOT for that. You know, you can crosswalk. Can we get a contact? Yeah, it's actually kind of crazy when I walked with the appraiser for the lower piece which abuts the turnpike and there's a culvert in that brook which is a trip of
[56:28] Speaker C (unidentified): What bigger system up above it Douglas no that trip doesn't have a specific
[56:37] Speaker A (unidentified): There's just something. Yeah. The next one over, the one that actually runs through the north, there's Dole. There's Dole, right.
[56:43] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah. So that goes under the highway, and it's a fairly big culvert, and at times it gets pretty big flows. A bunch of it is stormwater coming from those developments, but other flow. And when you walk out of it, you're in this grassy area, and all of a sudden you're on the turnpike. There's no fence. There's no nothing. It's like a picnic area, and all of a sudden you realize, but wait, that's a turnpike.
[57:07] Speaker A (unidentified): There were historic wetlands on the other side. Oh, I'm sure. I was able to look at old maps and find, you know, that there were wetlands draining across before the flood relief. Yeah,. That went right through that, you know, those sections of the jump stand. Yeah, it's very wet.
[57:27] Speaker F (unidentified): So more to come on that. [Speaker B (unidentified): Any other questions?] We've got the Parks Division report. I don't know if there's any questions on that from commissioners
[57:46] Speaker D (unidentified): A little play out this is a older report I think that came with your last agenda as well but there's a the Stroud water bridge ribbon cutting ceremonies this is the straw water bridge pedestrian bridge that goes over the Strada water river and it wants to you know connects the Portland Trail Network on the Unum side with the Four River Preserve side. And the city has an easement on the Stroudwater Preserve property and has potential to be future land bank property. It's not land bank property yet, but we have the right provisions that we hold on it. So it's treated like land bank property. That date got changed. that ceremony is not yet taking place so it's september 18th at 1 30. if it'll be a small event but we i think the mayor is coming and the district 3 counselor and we'll have a ceremony with portland trails to celebrate the installation of that bridge september 18th 1 30 p.m and maybe Jess can send details on that to folks to come on parking is [Speaker B (unidentified): a little] tricky, but she's got some details on that.
[59:16] Speaker A (unidentified): It will be.
[59:18] Speaker E (unidentified): We will create a thing and it will go into the weekly roundup for the city that comes out every Friday, and then we'll also do a social media announcement of that in the next couple days, and
[59:35] Speaker F (unidentified): then Al's Nest is public parking, right, that's public street you can park in. I mean, I know it's still limited and there's construction going on and there's other issues, but there is some on the street parking, yeah, and
[59:53] Speaker B (unidentified): you know some of parks, of course, what's
[1:00:00] Speaker F (unidentified): happening is a park.
[1:00:03] Speaker C (unidentified): Our last meeting was a workshop meeting, so it's when everyone splits off into their separate
[1:00:11] Speaker G (unidentified): committees. I think it will be three committees.
[1:00:14] Speaker C (unidentified): There's an outreach committee, there might only be one person on that. There's a signage committee for interpretive signage and hearing loss support, that one might have more members, and then there's a committee for the annual report, which I got to have before, so I can help with that, and our next meeting we will be offering recommendations on which capital and urban projects commissioner like to see, so we each pick three from the long list that Alex presented on our last meeting. That's it. Question, so
[1:00:58] Speaker F (unidentified): that's coming up rather
[1:00:59] Speaker B (unidentified): other than picking capital and food. Nope.
[1:01:03] Speaker C (unidentified): Hopefully we'll be doing our webbing work next year. It was canceled this year. That'll be soon in the summer. Yes. OK.
[1:01:19] Speaker F (unidentified): Any future agenda items?
[1:01:27] Speaker C (unidentified): Last year and from the next one.
[1:01:31] Speaker F (unidentified): If you think you'll have information, we can do that. Yeah, put it on. Okay, that'd be about Portland House, Portland House,
[1:01:46] Speaker C (unidentified): Portland House is catchy, great.
[1:01:51] Speaker E (unidentified): Portland House, yeah, I think there's a folder for the, for Portland House in the drive, I think it exists under that name. Okay, it could be wrong, but really maybe not, we should look because
[1:02:08] Speaker F (unidentified): It's a, yeah, I don't think we've got a scorecard though. Yeah, that might be a different house. I think I know what you're talking about. I don't, I don't think it's just Portland. Any other agenda items? You can put my flyer back on. Yeah, we'll have revisions on and some, I think some clarity. I watched reporting from last time, but so I heard really talking about it, and there's some, and clarifications that I can make in terms of the what it isn't, its intention is in mostly that I don't have any care about the format or
[1:02:48] Speaker G (unidentified): delivery of it. That's
[1:02:50] Speaker F (unidentified): something I need to rely on the city to finally be once we have
[1:02:54] Speaker G (unidentified): copied on nine things. Yeah. And
[1:03:02] Speaker F (unidentified): we just, we've already, your item may not be an agenda item necessarily next meeting. First, I guess I'm, I'll have a letter hopefully dropping one of them. Okay, so yeah, let's put it on that. 'll be there. Our action is to review the letter and [Speaker A (unidentified): anything else] when is our next report to you in your book
[1:03:49] Speaker C (unidentified): I think I dropped November, December, reviewed it, and then finalized it early in March.
[1:04:00] Speaker F (unidentified): Is our actual mandate the end of the year? There is an ordinance. There's an ordinance date, which I think is the end of the year. I only bring it up to wonder if you want to just, if we have a light agenda next time, if it warrants front-loading that report with active properties, updates, just so that we're not, like, October, November, December, right, we're a quarter away from having some preliminary report done.
[1:04:36] Speaker C (unidentified): under tension. I'm kind of keeping track regardless. I
[1:04:42] Speaker G (unidentified): do feel comfortable that you're not like, I'm gonna have to go
[1:04:45] Speaker C (unidentified): back and get all the minutes and all that. I am somewhere. I can't find this mobile, but I know I keep track somewhere. That's a good point. We should, I didn't cross my mind. That was actually the race.
[1:05:02] Speaker F (unidentified): It just takes a little time to get on the council, which is by sometimes end up in March, right? I'm pretty sure it's December 31, or something.
[1:05:21] Speaker G (unidentified): Maybe, yes, I would say let's put in your report. And if you
[1:05:25] Speaker F (unidentified): don't mind, potentially adding last year's report to the packet. Sure.
[1:05:35] Speaker E (unidentified): That is in the drive as well. And I think we have it on our
[1:05:39] Speaker D (unidentified): what's it, 's actually 24 on there, i don't see 25, that was just before, i was trying to recall, i think we've done these calendar year, sometimes city reports are done on the fiscal year and sometimes on the calendar year and it
[1:06:00] Speaker F (unidentified): looks like these have been done on the calendar year. We have a date on the 20 on the, on the google drive, the last date modified was february 24th. Yeah.
[1:06:22] Speaker D (unidentified): We did, yeah, the landline, the 2025 report was presented to council in February because it
[1:06:31] Speaker E (unidentified): got pushed back from January, I remember on agenda, and then they had to push it for the next month.
[1:06:36] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah, it was a busy night and I was there to present and the council just said thank you for the part, we're going to improve it, so that's like cool, it's me, can I be A1 on your list next
[1:06:49] Speaker D (unidentified): time? Yeah, I remember that, yeah, long wait, yeah, I mean this is the exhibit prepared by Rob,
[1:07:01] Speaker F (unidentified): reviewed by John on 211, updated and finalized on 211. Okay, we'll add that, anything else, last chance, I
[1:07:19] Speaker G (unidentified): don't know, it's really worth the agenda, but will we, will we be revisiting
[1:07:24] Speaker C (unidentified): the, I guess the city college with respect to the land bank and the proximity? Yes, yeah, I've
[1:07:33] Speaker D (unidentified): got that, I've been continually discussing it with Corp Council, that's something they're aware of and are working on keeping open battle, yeah, I'm
[1:07:43] Speaker C (unidentified): just thinking of some ambiguities with respect to, yeah, funding also looking up today perspective the field space, yeah, putting space, so I mean if it's coming up down the road probably doesn't make sense to revise, but I guess I'm like this, oh, I
[1:08:05] Speaker D (unidentified): always think about changing the name, yeah, it makes sense, right, the land bank, land bank is a misnomer and it causes constant confusion in other cities, a land bank is holding surplus property or derelict properties and actively working to redevelop them, right, that's like Pittsburgh, Detroit, like Albany, you know, that's what a land bank is, so people get here and are confused, like why are there no homes, so what are you doing, like that's not, yeah, how the land back here operates, it has a whole different purpose it just has it 's missing yeah so yeah i would i would i would push harder
[1:08:50] Speaker F (unidentified): for changing the name [Speaker H (unidentified): to observation] something like that
[1:08:55] Speaker A (unidentified): the space commission
[1:08:56] Speaker H (unidentified): open space commission
[1:08:59] Speaker G (unidentified): that's a great
[1:09:00] Speaker F (unidentified): and what Rob's referring to
[1:09:03] Speaker D (unidentified): was there's been talk over the years of combining the parks commission and the land bank commission because they have overlapping purposes and it's sometimes confusing for commissioners, it's confusing for the public and the ordinances overlap and contradict each other sometimes, so it would just be like a, you know, transparency and kind of cut a red tape and also make it easier to recruit members, there's times when we've been hard to find volunteers and so, there's been talk about that in general census that it's a good idea, but we just haven't written the documents we've got yet, so but that's, it's not in progress, so I'm about, I'm
[1:09:50] Speaker C (unidentified): About to brought her up. Yeah, that makes sense. So in terms of like other smaller things, we just, I guess, we wait until that is not supposed to. Yes, there's more things now, right? Yeah, I think it
[1:10:04] Speaker D (unidentified): would make sense to wait for that mining, yeah, versus going with separate changes because that
[1:10:13] Speaker B (unidentified): Yeah.
[1:10:16] Speaker C (unidentified): Thank you. Yeah. Open space and parks.
[1:10:19] Speaker H (unidentified): Sounds like, I mean, the city of Portland
[1:10:21] Speaker F (unidentified): map says parks, open space and land bank holdings. Like that's, that's the title of the PDF map
[1:10:27] Speaker H (unidentified): with the parks and land banks.
[1:10:30] Speaker D (unidentified): I have no doubt on it currently. It's like, you know, right.
[1:10:33] Speaker G (unidentified): It just said parks and open space.
[1:10:36] Speaker H (unidentified): That would be enough. Yeah.
[1:10:40] Speaker F (unidentified): Sounds like an AI exercise.
[1:10:42] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, I mean, really, and it's your,, my, these two things, my, these principles of mine. Yeah.
[1:11:47] Speaker A (unidentified): I don't know if you may be able to call it something else, but it still warrants the same levels of understanding and action versus what might be.
[1:12:07] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah, I was anticipating that whatever it becomes would do both, not one or the other.
[1:12:14] Speaker D (unidentified): The land bank property is actually more protected. It's more difficult to dispose of the land bank property. If the city council decided they wanted to do something different with property like a sewage treatment plant or a police station, they just need a 7 out of 9 to dispose of the park, whereas land bank is 8 out of 9
[1:12:38] Speaker A (unidentified): provided there's no eastbound, so
[1:12:44] Speaker D (unidentified): that's a whole other discussion, but to your question, yes, it's still
[1:12:50] Speaker H (unidentified): not have a land bank in the formal sense
[1:12:52] Speaker F (unidentified): of what the rest of the country thinks about it, like right now they own bayside parcels as a city of port, right
[1:13:01] Speaker C (unidentified): I think there are some discussions with the city council that was about trying to create the typical land bank for the city. Right.
[1:13:16] Speaker F (unidentified): Which access to different funds, the federal government releases funds sometimes for some of that kind of stuff. It's just a different world. Yeah.
[1:13:24] Speaker A (unidentified): Yeah. Perfect. But I would call it the power.
[1:13:29] Speaker B (unidentified): The world calls it a land bank.
[1:13:31] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, it is a land bank. Everywhere else you go other than Portland. Yeah.
[1:13:36] Speaker F (unidentified): If you Google land bank, it's like, you know, re-energizing downtown Detroit.
[1:13:44] Speaker D (unidentified): Like, you know, that's what they're trying to do with the land bank's mission.
[1:13:48] Speaker A (unidentified): It's not a member of the corporation.
[1:13:54] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah. Yeah. It's a different place. Right? Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. Yeah, right, like some sort of weird main development corporation also gets involved
[1:14:05] Speaker D (unidentified): and the SBA gets involved in life, yeah
[1:14:11] Speaker F (unidentified): and then, you know, is there a motion to adjourn? All right. [Speaker B (unidentified): Thank you.] More importantly, I have based on what I had