Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

He's not. Yeah, they don't appear to be on, do they? Oh, and it doesn't look like

that might help. Okay. Fired up on First time put an okay it said that it had at least for that setting.

Okay. I don't see the screen up there. No, the screen's not Yeah, it's not it's not looking up, but you can see people on screen see more, but Okay. So, let me know if there's a hand up in the corner. Okay. Hey, can you text us? Yeah. Do you want me to call or call?

Anybody got a good joke? Interesting. We're having some difficulties here. The animal look like although first off we gave you one tonight. It's not registering. We have How' that happen?

Well, yeah. Yeah, it it powered up and now let's see. And and it looked like it was doing okay, but it's not now. What happened? Like it was, you know, coming online. It did the little hoop, but yeah. Now, here we go. Okay, we've got we that worked the unplugging and unplugging. Okay. And so, yeah.

Yeah. Let me come. It's showing that scar is just ironing the map. get started. Yeah, I think

I think we're good. Good to go. Okay. Welcome everyone. Thank you for being here on this beautiful meeting. I call to order our planning commission meeting for Thursday, April 23rd meeting. I have our motion to approve our agenda. So move second. Second. Any discussion? possible. Will you follow up? Commissioner, yes. Commissioner, yes. Commissioner Pierce Commission, yes. Commissioner Sinclair, yes. Commissioner Morris, yes. Commissioner Wade, yes. Chair, yes.

There's a new name on the panel tonight. Commissioner Jan Pierce Mush is with us tonight. No uh no newbie to uh service to the city of Canon Beach. um director of public works. Is that right? The chair of public works. Sorry, I gotta be careful about getting my director and on the designer for review board as well. Yes, I was on the design review also. So, no need to all you know this process. We won't uh we won't stop and explain as we're going. You've got this. Thank you. It's an honor. Thank you. Nice to have you. Thank you for joining. And we're all here tonight. I'm pretty sure this is a postco. We're all here not on TV, not with that.

Uh let's move to our consideration of the minutes from our March 26th meeting. Are there any amendments for those men? Yes. Okay. On page four of 10, it says that Bates did the vote, but it was me. Got it. So that was one. Oh, sorry. Can you repeat what motion was for? Pardon me. Which which agenda? Oh, it was item three. The very last three. Yeah.

In the middle of the page. And then um on page six of 10, last paragraph, it says um Rley clarified that this application only requires a decision on the setback, not the location and or uh relocating of the shed. So that was the other one. And then what do you mean on that one? Pardon me.

Asking what what was your clarification?

Oh, I was just clarifying that we didn't need to pick a location for the shed. Um, and then on page seven of 10, uh, it's you go down to five to where it says Carrie Richtor and shared that as this structure is now titled and argued for as a guest house, it is no longer applicable instead of now. Any other amendments?

And that's it. Um, uh, so Carrie's enlisted under the staff or the person present. Shouldn't she give us a bit online and consult them? But uh first page of the minutes where it says who's present and yeah I do that he's not can people speak up a little bit more? It's hard to hear down here.

Um he just requested I add Victor as staff present for the meeting. So the land use attorney involved The acoustics are tough in this room. Uh I'll try to speak louder. Last week I uh heard that and although really going to try to annunciate. Okay. Are there any other amendments to them? Uh may I have a motion to approve the amended minutes? I move to approve the amended minutes. Is there a second?

Second. Any further discussion? That's the way you call the role, please. Commissioner, yes. Commissioner War, yes. Commissioner, yes. Commissioner Wade, yes. Commissioner Orlo, yes. Sher, yes.

The amended amendments are approved. We'll move to our public comment section. So we have two items in front of us tonight. One is a sign variance. The other is work session items. If you are here uh regarding either of those two, we'll offer you the opportunity to speak uh when we come to those two items. If you are here about something else that you believe is within the purview of the planning commission, you have the opportunity now to bring that forward to our attention. We ask that you keep those comments to three minutes or less. And when coming uh to the um podium, please raise your hand, excuse me, your hand. I'll recognize you. State your name and mail. Does anyone have public comments they'd like to bring? Forward slone online.

Okay. And we will move ahead to our first item. SV 2601 Lesie Jones with a signed variance of permit for the city of Canon Beach Police Department. SV 2601 Lesley Jones of CEDA on behalf of the city of Canon Beach with a signed variance application for the new Canon Beach Police Station. The subject property is located at 81389 South High 101, tax plot 100, map 41006P in an institutional IR7. The application will be reviewed against the criteria of the mun municipal code 17.62.070 signer. Does anyone object to the jurisdiction of the planning commission to hear this matter at this time? Does any commission member believe he or she has a conflict of interest or a personal bias? Has any commission member had any expartite contacts or made a site list? May we have the staff report?

Yeah. Application is for variance to the standards of municip code 1762 signs for new signage both of the can be police department. The applicant request to exceed the total area of signage normally allowed in the high-in zone which is limited to 36 square feet during the 2024 review of the police station by the DRB. Signage was not part of the submission as the applicant had not developed a finalized sign design at that time. Municipal code 1790 variances does not apply to this application as those criteria are to address situations where strict application zone requirements is impractical for the development of property due to issues such as park size conditions or other unusual circumstances that create a hardship. Um so under the applicable criteria staff comment uh the application consists of two signs that will have an aggregated area of approximately 65 square ft. First will consist of uh building mounted wooden lettering on the west facade facing US Highway 101 use style letters up to 11 in in height and painted November storms. Echos paints 0543 which is described by the manufacturer as dark gray with undertones of blue and green. This paint is the same color that is used on the exterior door frames and vents of the new building. The second sign would be a cedar panel mounted on the southern facade near the public entrance measuring 32 square feet naturally colored with a white police badge and lettering. Details about the signs or placement of design are in figures one and two of the staff report. The applicant requests the use of large area signage on the western side in order to

increase the visibility of the police station. Motors traveling on US Highway 101. The letter size of 11 in will allow for clear readability from 100 ft away. The subject property is zoned in which allows for a maximum 36 square feet of total size area. request signage will exceed that amount by 29 square ft uh other than the aggregate area. The signage will be consistent with the design vernacular in a beach and conform to the materials and covering standards. No adverse effects to adjacent properties or traffic and safety hazards have been identified as a result of a proposed signage at this location. uh staff recommendation. Uh the community development department recommends the planning commission approve the application and um I also wanted to note that uh we received the support letter from the design review board that we forward to you guys and uh any other questions?

If there's no questions, is there any additional correspondents that uh we haven't seen? None came in late. Okay, we'll move to public testimony. The pertinent criteria to be considered are noted in the staff report listed on the criteria sheet on the meeting page of the city's website. Testimony, arguments, and evidence must be directed toward those criteria or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or municipal code which the person testifying believes applying to the decision. Failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision maker and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal based on that issue. Prior to the conclusion of the initial evidentiary hearing, any participant may request an opportunity to present additional testimony, arguments or evidence regarding an application. The planning commission shall grant such requests by continuing the public hearing or leaving the public of record open for additional written testimony, arguments or persons to testify shall first receive recognition from the chair that their full name and mailing address and if appearing in a representative capacity identify whom they represent. Is there a presentation by Gary? My name is Lesie Jones with Cena Architects and Engineers 15895 South of 72nd Avenue Sweet 200 in Portland. Uh and I'm also here on behalf of the the city for the um thank you Jeff for your summary. It covered a lot of what I had to say, but I did want to add that we worked with Ann Beach Design Company to develop the final signage for this and reiterate that the variance request is for the size of the signs

only uh not for the materials or other aspects of the signage code. The reason we're asking for that variance for the signage is for um twofold safety purposes primarily. Um Jeff mentioned the 100 ft. So the facade of the building is set back 100 ft from the highway. Um those 11 in letters on the west facade will be visible for um further than that and so that they're visible as the motor approaches. that would be approaching from the north that the west sign is visible. It's harder to see as a motorist approaches from the south. Um that's one of the reasons we're proposing two signs instead of one because the the signage on the southern facade will be the sign that becomes visible as someone drives um northbound on 101. Um the what the material was was covered those west facing letters. Um we based the the font on that was actually based on that existing city hall sign um and and other signage around the community. Um, I will say the font you see there is as close as we could get um with us the font, but the actual letters uh Kent Beach Design Company worked with that to to beef up some of those numbers so that they're more durable over time. Um, that one would be wood that is painted. The lower side, the lower one on the south faced steel. Um, and I'm happy to answer any questions related to the site.

Are there questions? I I had one. Um, I was a little surprised that the signs aren't intended to be lit. Is that true? I would I would have thought that we needed them. They are going to be lit. Okay. Um, and if I can paint them here, that way that small bar across the top is those are signed lighting. And has that already gone through the DRB process for as part of the lighting as part of the lighting packages? Yeah, they are dark compliant and within the total looming package for the set.

Thank you. Other questions? Okay, we will offer you another opportunity to come up before we wrap up if you hear something that you'd like to respond to. You're welcome. Are there presentations by proponents, people in favor of this? Okay. Anybody online? Sorry.

Okay. Um, are there presentations then by no one here? Sure. They're primarily for short-term rentals, but I saw this one. Um, doesn't seem to be there's a need for a variance for a second sign. Ask yourself, would you have authorized two signs for the Moon Family Business on Highway 101? Probably not. Does the RV park get a sign on Highway 10? No. Um, if folks could find the police department in its old location behind City Hall, it can be found in its new location. Uh, or can it be found in this new location? Yes, Google it. Neither Seaside nor Manzanita needs extra signage. Um, better yet, it'd be really good to restore the forest corridor and reinforce Canon Beach is a true tree city. Uh, Jan Sbert Warman suggested this on October 15th, 2023 to refor restore the forest canopy along the Southwind property. It was a good one. We should do it for her. Thank you. Are there other but I just want to echo what Randy said.

Michelle 1092. Okay.

Yeah. Are you ready? Michelle P box 719. Yeah, I don't see a necessity for two signs. Exactly what Randy said. And um I know that the materials is not part of part of this, but I would also say the staff to really watch the materials here because they do put in wood and say wood and paint and often it turns into vinyl and a variety of different so I don't think that there necessarily needs to be multiple signs and reinforce sounds good. Okay, that's it. I think other or Anyone online? Okay. As the applicant, you have the opportunity to respond to anything you've heard or if you're satisfied with what you presented, we'll close the record. There'll be no further opportunity to speak after the record.

I'll take four. Sure. Come on up. Um, I just wanted to to acknowledge um that

Oh, it seems counterintuitive, I know, but please direct the comments first. Um, I wanted to acknowledge that I remember when Dan made the the request for that forest corridor and even though it's not part of the signage, um, there was um, effort made to replant that hillside and so the plantings I did a site visit today recently went in um, lots of trees along there. So there was effort in that regard to reforest the corridor there. Um that said I think that also impedes at least approaching from the north that does impeach some visibility. So I think the need for both sides is there. The one on the west side is highway visibility from approaching from the north which I think is where most of the traffic will sound. on the sign facing south. It does present visibility from the highway. It is also on our parking. So it serves at the building entry for pedestrian as thank you. Any questions before the record?

Okay. Thank you again. We will move to um our consideration records now closed. who would like there was some comment made about the seaside signage for the police department and just from memory I know they've got one on the facade of their building and I think they have a higher one that is uh plastic and uh just comparing what's proposed here with seaside it seems like this would be to me a much better option And I was right driving along 101 today noticing what signs were there and visible. And uh this one's not going to be apart from the facade. It's not going to be a distraction for anybody driving down 101, but if they want to find the police department, then they can find it with uh I think with these signs in place rather than having one, you know, encroach into the uh area between the the highway and the police department, similar to what St. Peters has for the church a little bit further down. They've got one right on the edge of the highway. It's up high. It's similar to this total parking sign here advertises the church. Um, so it's not like that. It's not going to indulge into any of those areas. Um, and since it's on a facade, it really doesn't stick out very much. And we will watch the, you know, uh, materials that are used. I trust the police when they say they're not going to use anything but what they've presented they're going to use that that's what they're going to use. I don't have any kind of an issue with that. Um, and I know that the BRB and

city council will take into consideration additional sign restrictions sounds like over the next year or so, maybe several months. And um, so some other changes are coming, but I don't see that would affect this. Um, I personally am in favor of this. I think it's very tasteful and on the facade where it be seen, but not an abstraction. And I'm very glad to hear they're confined to the uh dark sky provisions. Um I think that's very important the engineering designs. So that's my comment. Would anyone else like to offer comment?

We're talking about sexual service here. Something that for a large sign being 100 feet off road would be essential service. Um the two signs make sense. One for identification, second for direction. Um DRB is already pro. So we really just here discuss the size and the allowance court. Um and to that point again I'll bring that essential service and we're not going to be setting a precedent for businesses by approving barriers for essential service. It would be like if we approve something for the fire station or or another. So um I myself something in favor of favor as well. I also agree that it makes sense to have a sign next to the entry door. It would actually be not to have a go.

No, I mean agreed with me. Um, no, I agree with um Mickey. It's, you know, it's really it's not a question of whether they need it or not and it's not good press on anything else. Yeah. Safety above everything else and visibility.

Okay. Someone like to put the motion forward. I move to approve uh SC 261 uh for the variance of the municipal code for 17.62 for the direction of the for the instruction of signs as detailed in the record. There second second. Any further discussion? Yes, we call Commissioner War. Yes. Commissioner Pierce Mush. Yes. Commissioner Ridley. Yes. Commissioner Santa Clara. Yes. Commissioner W.

Yes. Commissioner Olaf. Yes. Shar. Yes.

Permit for the Canon Beach Police Department is approved. All right. We'll move to our work session item. the review of chapter 17.84, short-term rentals, and a discussion regarding an ordinance amending chapter 17.84, short-term rental, seeking to cap the total number of short-term permits to 165 per year while abolishing and deleting references to the 5-year program. This is a reminder that the planning commission work sessions are an opportunity for the planning commission to gather and discuss information pertinent to specific topics and it is solely at the planning commission's discretion to allow public input on such topics. After the presentation by staff are the relevant material, the planning commission and planning commission question. I will ask the planning commission whether we would like to hear from the public at this moment. May we have the staff, please? Planning Commission discussion regarding the short-term rental cap began in April 9, 2024 has been on the planning commission's agenda immediately since the city council's December 19th, 2025 annual recreat. The council has to move the short-term rental cap ordinance forward. Uh the plan commission has held two work sessions in the proposed language changes to place a cap on the number of short day permits to 165. The current number of short-term rental permits continues to remain around 200 total permits with approximately 155 of those permits being 14-day permits. A cap of 165 would equate to a reduction of 17.5% permits if projected into the future as current time permits would eventually expire and would then be required to submit the guilty day permit to continue. The public has suggested limiting the future STR rentals by zone,

denying any new STR permits to properties east of Highway 101. There are currently six east of the highway as shown in the attached presentation attachment E. Uh the other proposed language regards placing a restriction no new STRs within 100 ft from an existing active permit. When these 100 foot buffers are considered, they would account for 55% of all properties in Canon Beach and the majority of the residentially zone problems. Other jurisdictions who have implemented pro proximity related measures such as zoning or buffers have faced attempts to gain the system by property owners where owners apply for STR permits with no intent on renting. just to ward off adjacent properties from having STRs. Staff provides language that would require permit holders to maintain active quarterly rentals if uh if the commission chooses to move proximity language forward. Staff recommendation. Uh staff requests the planning commission consider the feasibility of the proposed cap len language and suggests edits for the amendments to be brought forward for public consideration scheduled for the May public hearing. Arguments to further restrict short-term rentals beyond the proposed 165 in essence to protect long-term rentals do not have any persu persuasive evidence in the record. There have been suggestions made that these short-term rental units are competing for long-term rentals and yet we have not seen zoning and buffer changes seem to be attempts to design a better mouse pressure where none's needed as the number will reduce any pressures as we slowly decrease from our existing 200 to 165. There are also often unintended consequences

consequences to such actions as many other jurisdictions have found out by having overly complicated measures from administrative and enforcement concerns to placing pressures on areas that currently aren't experiencing pressures. For instance, defa highway 101 is no longer viable, those six units will likely arise elsewhere in the very limited footprint provided by the proposed zoning and buffer measures. Staff recommend uh moving the 165 cap mage forward, sealing the short-term rental share of housing at approximately 10% and revisiting language in five years if there are any concerns. Uh I have put together a um presentation for you that was uh in the packet there uh and I can speak to that if you have any questions. Uh I also put in that uh you'll see it from this regional and state comparisons. uh uh a the regional survey that I did of the other jurisdictions in Classic and Till counties showing the percentage of short-term rentals in each of those jurisdictions along with the second homes. I highlighted canon beaches share uh seasonal or recreational or other uses and you can see that uh we lead actually in those second homes and they have increased substantially even in the last 10 years and yet our short-term rentals have stayed pretty much the same and we're in keeping with uh the unincorporated areas with seaside as far as short-term rental percentages are concerned. concern and uh you can also see them in Zenita and Rockade Beach at

far exceed percentage of what we had in 13 months. Uh I did comparisons there uh also in your packet showing the 2010 versus 2020 uh Oregon versus Canon Beach just to show you that share of second homes and short-term rentals as compared to the average Oregon community. And then I did a little analysis there that if that's our house and anyone's house in your neighborhood in that center uh and you could you're living in Oregon in a normal community, you would have be surrounded by three renters, four owner units, and then one that falls into that bucket of all those others. Uh and then compared that to Canon Beach and you can see that on a Canon Beach you would be surrounded by one renter, one homeowner, one short-term rental, four seasonal or second homes and then the one that fall in that other jar. I think it's just a a convenient comparison to show what we're looking at. And then when we put that 100 foot buffer in there, you're grabbing not just one of them further than that. And then we're flying that. And so as you can see from the breakdown here of the northern end province that would be impacted by 100 foot buffers from every in the downtown hackana and south end areas just so that you guys have a comparison how that plays out. Um and so uh then I did the next thing that showed uh actually the lots that you take into account. So it's not simply where that buffer falls, it's those lots

that picks up. And so that kicks in as you can see from that a large chunk of our residential area. So if someone were to come in, let's just say hypothetically next month and they wanted one and put a one in place and they were by this buffer zone, they would have to fall in those areas there that are left vacant there and as you can see most of those are presidentials along actually we're out of there and so hack and you know a few of those and a lot of those that you're seeing that are still available or free properties that uh would not be possible. So, just wanted to highlight that and what that proper does. I think it's, you know, it's up to you guys, but I think that throws in something who wouldn't know how.

Any questions? Yes, I have one. Jeeoff, you've t been talking about and I appreciate all this. That was quite an eyeopener to see how close everyone is. But okay, so now we have 200. Yeah.

And we're working to 165. What is the revenue difference? It's not that much. I did do that I think in an earlier presentation before we came. uh it wasn't uh you know I'm trying to remember I even had a per unit average from that presentation uh I I couldn't tell you because of and and the one thing that we would have to I would have to break that down and analyze because those lifetime ones are you know they they have higher rates right so you're we're going to be dropping that's for sure right

uh so I'll be happy to have that if you guys want you when we go to public hearing and that and I'll have that kind of breakdown. I think we should all know what that means. Yeah. And if you guys want to continue this to another work session. Okay. Thank you. Other questions for Jim Jeff. What's uh with that 100 buffer said it defects 55% of the existing MR

that that uh it that 65% of all properties that's not including commercial industrial halls. Uh so yeah, I can get you one for the residential properties, but it's a significant. So do we suppose that 100 buffer then would include all the commercial properties? I mean because they really can't be STR anyway. So right, I did not I didn't I just got that percentage from I just did the number from our tool. Sure.

I can do it. Um well my real question is what kind of reduction do you think we might see if you had to estimate if we put in to effect the 100 foot buffer and not the 165 I mean do we need both? Does one of them do what we need it to do? Is it the 165 or is it the buffer? Because for me, you know, I don't want to complicate this uh with a 165 and 100 foot buffer and different zone home. I mean, pretty soon it's so complicated that uh the city staff is spending too much time determining, you know, having a waiting list and then having to go out and measure or get online and measure to see whether it's 100 ft, is it 101 ft. Yeah.

And then we've got exclusionary zones besides maybe the 100 foot zone on the east side as proposed. So I'd like to make this as straightforward as possible. I think that the simple solution is if it's a solution would make the most sense. Do you have a feel for what that might be on a limit for the diamond buffer?

I don't trust you. I I think you know just from doing this analysis that if you did that just by buffer um and then you start whittling down the lifetime think that's going to take a lot of those lifetimes you know I can't tell you I could have identified money separately um and I could pull them up but I think a lot of them are you know long Pacific typical along the ocean current there on um the majority of them are so I would think is those would window out yes by having that zone would put less along that area but you know so from a staff perspective I don't know if you if that serves you guys well you know uh or not or the community well because you know those are just going to then be second homes they're The majority of those will just be set homes that could return but they're not going to they'll fall in the dark some unit. So that's where your redundancy in other words is what I'm saying is most of the redundancy in other words ones that fall already within other buffers I think are in that general area in presidential and so um I think the best the buffer would do more or I don't think it limit you know I I haven't seen the numbers I repeatedly said I don't see the numbers going up we just haven't seen that. So, I couldn't tell you if it's going to affect uh others bringing up. I think you're going to just start losing um what I will call the high-end rentals to some of those highend lands on the

ocean front. Yes, they would be lost, but what would they be lost to? Quite frankly, second home. That's what we've seen and that's what I think. If through attrition we also lose homes because of the cap, wouldn't that have to be the same or um I mean we the one that we lose we'd lose they'd have to reapply for it could be

the 14 day and I think you're right. I think it be very similar kind of this. So that's why I think the 165 cap is probably the simplest of the the methods going forward. And like you said, all we are going to see likely majority is this getting smaller. You know, we're it's going to start shrinking about almost 20%. As it assurance, so it's going to be less pressure automatically when it's around here. The only potential uh I guess if I had my parameters I I would rather see them interspersed more evenly throughout so that not one area is inundated with STRs and I know especially uh along the uh west on a beach um most of those were uh intended to be STR and that's I mean nobody's ever bothered by that because they're all STRs and the whole strip there is a Chinese renters uh short-term renters so it doesn't really bother anybody but in the neighborhoods both the west and the east uh you know I would rather see less concentration and a uh more dispersion that is little more dispersed instead of concentrated into certain areas. You know, light or something. There are plenty of residents in the president's folk live there yourself and others um that probably would not like to see a

higher density. uh you know that 165 only doesn't do anything for for neighborhoods that feel like they're inundated with STRs. Um that that was what I was thinking on that. Um and the other thought I had was uh there there's been some discussion about uh creating the east side of 101 as an exclusionary zone and u some of the comments are that they're you know, children and uh folks riding their bikes and so forth up there. And I know that that's a really nice for the natural area for folks that live up there. It's very tight-knit community in that area. But but I also think that the sentiments that were raised by the folks on the east side of 101 are shared exactly by the people who live on the west side of I know in my neighborhood, I live on the west side of 101. Uh there are four children within 100 ft of me uh that are permanent resident. There are aging population that they're blocking too and dog walkers just on the way here for two cyclists coming up my street. So it's not unique to have those kinds of uh issues and concerns for every single neighborhood, not just the east side. So, I'm kind of uh torn between, you know, setting one neighborhood apart from the others because they're all my constituents. Um, and they all kind of feel the same way as everybody in the hack area. And while I sympathize with his exact rights, I also know that uh you know the west side has his own fairing problems and uh speeding problems and people who don't really respect the neighborhoods and they're

transient uh population all the tourists are and sometimes they don't stop and think about the impacts that they're having on the communities here. I sort of ran that you're bringing my memory of our last conversation back that you I I also I remember we had kind of a mixed conversation on that. I remember but I also now I'm remembering we talked about didn't we talk about grouping this with another like not wanting to just put this as one item and wanted to group this with another in as as in packaging

like a package so that we just don't beat ourselves and everybody else up with one after the other after the other. I that really resonated with me before um and it still resonates with me. Um so I think maybe if we want to revisit that with what we dive deep into all this because it is we are going to be going through uh some of the things we've already discussed ultimately maybe come back that same decision which is just dead but you guys don't start with that. I don't need to jump again but it did take my memory back to my shirt. Good job. What other uh items are we considering packaging with this? What's an example of how that might package?

Okay. Well, so we I I will be going next month, next the 28th, next week, uh we will have a housing opportunities session uh with the city council where we'll talk about uh opportunities and strengths on housing. Uh and then we will have some representatives from some uh organizations that are building affordable workforce housing and they will be talking about possibilities on city own land and building uh projects. And at that one uh will introduce the packaging scenario. And what we're really proposing is uh we have a the next housing ordinance would would be going hopefully in June at least uh if it's not a if it's not the actual public hearing there will be the final work session in June with uh with the city council and then those ones that have gone through you then go to as the first group we're hearing but also in June we'll have a work session with them on the curb rewrites pathway for talking about these packaging proposals. And what we're going to do is the first package will be housekeeping uh a lot of changes that I'm doing currently working on a lot of things that just have been dropped from when I was here prior. In fact, it was the first step that I wanted to get through. And remember we did that track one where we did the recombination and things like that. Well, this was supposedly track two along with the housing changes. So we want to package those housing keeping changes uh which are not a lot of policy uh sensitive things but we can package this with that and that we hope to start

at that meeting ask them bring that to you guys for uh to start immediately. So I would say we get to the public hearing phase of those items this fall. So in other words, we would be coming likely in July to a work session with you guys, probably another one uh in August, September, and then we'll finally get to that public for housing. And this that's that's what we're going to project is the first pathway. Then we'll be talking about those other things that we want to get to which we've talked about also about parking requirements not just in housing but in commercial areas. uh we're talking about in other environmental matters like dark sky, trees, other things and how we package those and that will be either in uh one or two at the most three packages moving forward and like you said every six months at best. Does that make sense? Yeah, I'm certainly not proposing that I or anybody make a motion, but I I do want to cover topics and thoughts and have this be a work session and I think we're going to open it up to public comment. uh possibly

we'll certainly talk about that I I think with with some sort of framework that the public understanding whether we are going to be moving ahead or it's just kind of talking really uh maybe we also need to uh you know take some of the comments from the 28th meeting that are presented to city council and take those back into consideration with another work session for the planning commission. I think I would like to hear as many comments as possible on this and find out the simplest way uh to implement the what we want to achieve and whether that's designing or amendment or whatever it might be but I'd like to hear from as many people as possible give as many ideas but maybe do some research on more research because I've done quite a bit on what other towns are doing with, you know, STRs and so forth. Mostly it's it's limiting uh the number and that kind of thing. But some of them make it overly complicated, it seems like. And that's what I'd like to do is simplify this so that staff, any permit uh applicants or any any constituents understand it more easily than some complicated formula. So after

would anyone else anyone else come?

I'd like to think out loud here for just a little bit. I had a question. So as I understood um the 165 target that we were asked to you know to consider that actually was based on maintaining about a 10% STR within the population of houses in this community. How important is that to the housing strategy that's going to be moved forward with the city? because if that's an important piece of the housing initiative, then I think we should maybe be prepared to move forward with that piece of it pretty quickly. Uh if it's not critical to the housing work that I'm not privy to, then uh you know, then I think that we can afford to to wait. As I'm I'm aware that while we were given the task of looking at a 165 cap, what the public feedback has been has been more about exclusion zones and buffers and and and I'm not nearly prepared to u I simply don't even have an opinion. I think those issues need to be publicly discussed much more broadly than they've been before I'd be willing to to to move forward with either one of them. Much like Steve said, you know, what's good for one area may be bad for another. And we need to weigh those in a way that I haven't heard discussed yet. Um, so we get back to do we need to to just focus on the 165 because it's part of a bigger plan and and

continue to have these discussions about buffers and exclusion zones. So if I understand Jen, you're saying the simplest approach is a capital 165 because we do get into complications regarding exploitation etc. If we talk about buffers, we get into community weighing, if we talk about zones. Um but I if I understand what you've presented in the last now three presentations what you are saying is that the short-term rental issue is not particularly a housing issue because the second homes are the the true housing issue. Am I correct about that?

I mean we I I have not seen any compelling evidence that it has not just Sarah. I mean I would like to find that in the data or what I've looked at. I mean um since G had started this discussions like you said this has been going on a while we have seen kind of people calling in you know uh I want to get the short-term rental application in because you guys are going to cap it and all that. We have seen that occasionally come and go in and flows but still you can look at the data it's not increased anything I mean we have not seen uh you know so I don't see it competing in general as if as if that's a competing element right now u you know uh if you got to steal that you see something or hear something that I don't know of or you know I'm happy didn't hear that, but I just don't see it. And I tell you, if we did see that, if if Tessa and Robert and I saw that coming in and we're getting more and more questions or we're getting more and more applications coming in, we'd be the first ones to bring it to you and say, "Hey, we need to do something about this and you know, let's move this forward immediately." But I haven't seen Tess, have you seen a a vast increase?

Wow. Yeah, this do I get a height? I miss what you said. So you would be just Oh, only when we have these discussions about a cap is there an increase in urgent inquiries.

I understand. Thank you. Well, um two things. Uh one, the 165 and zoning achieve entirely different things. The zoning of course is more like I don't want anymore in my backyard. the cap is for the city and there's still going to be higher density in some areas. The second thing is with the relating to uh rental availability or you know uh more residents moving in it looked like from the graphs that I've seen not only this presentation but others that if they're not STRs they're just going to be second homes uh and vacant uh for most of the year. uh for part of the year. Um the other thing is that the STRs don't turn into long-term rentals. I see additional building going on and doesn't look like any of those go into the rental pool at all. Uh you know, they're used by the uh relatives and family members. And if they're not a short term, again, they're a second home. And even if they don't use them frequently, sadly they don't go into the rental pool. Um for residents, I'd like to see more people living here. Over the last 10 years from 2010 to 2020, we've seen a reduction in residents. Uh just this last week, four friends of mine have decided to move to Eugene and Tiger. uh voting quality of life and some of that's STR, some of that is the influx of tourists, some of that is um access to medical, some of that is uh you know to traffic, speeding, uh those types of things. But uh I think without core uh in this town of residents, then of course we're going to have the Francine population becomes

nothing more than the truck stop. and who's here to care about the city, you know, who want to have those long-term residents here who care about where they live and want to contribute the way all of our citizens contribute to living here, making this a great place. Um but uh to Les's point, if there was uh if any of our decisions that were made uh could be made here tonight or within the next uh meeting or so would affect the number of rentals available or the number of housing units that are affordable, which quote unquote not affordable, then that would be all for moving forward doing that in expon exping that to the greatest ability we could if that was going to open up housing. But from over grass and all the information I've seen I guess sadly you know that's not not what's occurring. People are moving away their houses are being sold and they're turning to either uh you know STRs if they want to or most of the time because they second home. uh search or

okay on another note I have three self-handings two are becoming permanent residents and one is from Eugene so good all right so it's happening good glad to hear that

so if I was to sum up where we are sounds like there's not an urgency this could wait and be packaged for the housekeeping body of amendments. Um, which makes sense because we do need to clean up language around those long-term rentals. Um, and then the question is, do we continue to discuss this as an active agenda item or does this we wrap up with this work session and then we wait until we've had more feedback at the upcoming housing and council meetings and maybe within council that makes this conversation more meaningful. Sounds like a good summary to make a motion, but just an idea. How do people feel about it?

Point of order. Uh, sure. Uh is there a public comment before we'll come back to that in just a second. Um so if we want to go over that the next piece um Jeff did you agree that this will not be another work session item until we have specific something.

It's up to you guys whatever you'd like. You know I I've made notes of some of the things you guys have requested for the next time and I'm happy to bring that back whenever. Okay, Steve, you had suggested and I agree. Um I I like hanging from the public. I I would like a limited I think we we're coming back to it. We're coming back to it at some point the idea of moving it ahead, but I don't like closed sessions. So that's my opinion for Steve. Who else would like to How do we feel about public comments?

I'd like to hear it if people came to say something. I'd like them to be able to speak. Unlimited three minutes. I think three minutes makes sense. You know, with the option, we can let them go longer if there's time. You know, we're not going to run until 10 o'clock at night or something like that. Okay.

Okay. We'll hold it to three minutes if if um we can revisit that if we think we need to later. And we did that last. So we are going to take we haven't but I think we need to figure I have one other thing I want to mention with TJ so there's been some uh discussion about moving the 14 days into twice a month. Uh so when I was thinking about the 14 days versus twice a month, the biggest impact that I saw was that if somebody rents at the end of the month and then their stay encroaches into the next calendar month, then that's like one stay is that one stay or and then can they have two others in that month? If somebody doesn't check in but they check out check in. are thinking that it would it would be from either check in cycle you know two checkins per month in other words so yeah then they one would maybe fall into the first week of the next but that's not counted in that the next two

it's more the Christmas and New Year's situation it is yeah it would certainly simplify the algorithm I'll tell you what uh to determine uh to to go with two a month rather than 14 days. Uh those two check-ins per month. Uh but I'd like to hear public comment on that if anybody can think of any negative or positive impacts. Uh changing from 14 days twice a month. I think would make it would it make it simpler for staff to look at that on a calendar or not have to do the math on a 14-day thing.

You know, I heard that from everybody who knows anything about the 14-day thing. I said, "Oh my gosh, you know, having figured that out." So, uh I think that would make it easier for the industry and uh easier for the owners and just maybe maybe a championships. uh inoculous as far as the impact goes. Yeah. And I've reached out to Brian Ellison Beach

and you know because he did a short-term task force who brought that up back then. So I told when you know they said you were going to bring that up tonight and so next time we bring it forward I'll have them disagree on that as well. help anything else.

Okay, we are going to move to public comment tonight. We do value that you come here tonight. Appreciate that you come here tonight. That said, we are not advancing anything for our city council to consider tonight. That is going to be at a future date. We certainly want to hear you uh tonight and we're going to think about that between now and the next time we meet, but it will be important uh for us to hear you again when we come together when we're about to advance. Not that we're not going to hear you tonight. So that said, we are going to limit testimony to three minutes. If the bell goes off and right in the middle of it, please don't stop. We're not we're not about that. Uh but we have had time for people to do so. So, we're going to be cautious of our time. So, I'm gonna go a little

You got it. Okay. Thank you so much. Another great problem.

Yeah. And the reason we're not doing anything absolutely that a little bit we're not moving anything forward because we don't see any uh reason for expediency rather for efficiency in this case because there aren't going to be any impacts if we wait. The efficiencies come in where we gather information about several topics and then make those several recommendations to city council so that they consider those all in one go and we can pass those through at a at a at a clip than if we just peace meal at one and one and one and one. So that's why and they all seem to be related uh you know whether it's housing STRs and other issues for us many of those related to the point where it makes sense to put them in the same package and have city council consider those all at the same time. So uh some of the yeah package I know moving forward. Okay. So if you have public uh comment that you'd like to make, please uh raise your hand. I'll acknowledge you come up. You give us your name and mailing address and then anything you'd like us to consider.

See you first in front. Please come to Yes. be comfortable wherever you are. This is more conversation than any kind of

Okay. Well, my name is Marilyn Hley. My husband and I have been hacks and we've been full-time residents of Ken Beach for five years and as a river here and we're both engaged in volunteer activities to help you know for the community and just highlight we moved here from Friday Harbor and Long Island. So, we know that we understand crowding and traffic and no parking and all of that, but we also understand that everybody has to find a way to get along with especially in a small community like this. So, my plea would just be moving this forward in some kind of reasoned way that we all felt was fair. And I I know it's not like there's an urgency. You don't see the urgency, but and this is very personal, but we don't go into town in the summertime or because we're retired, we are able to pick and choose the times that we go and the times which we can get some parking. So we're we we're really like and I so I understand all that but it's also true that when I come home to my house that I have paid good money for and been trying to approve this for years I want to feel like that's home. I don't feel like there's a lot of wall and doors and other houses next to me across or on the next door. Um, next question.

Why don't we come back to a question? I think that would be the better format for Would anyone else like to come forward? Yes, I see your hand. Please come forward. Well, hi too from I'm Margar and he and PO Box 956 beach

and I do love beach. I've wanted to live here for so many years and I can't believe I get to do this. But um even in the short time that we've been there going on eight years and you mentioned that Steve I mean some very dynamic community changes in in our neighborhood. We've seen very dynamic changes in terms of going and transitioning from a neighborhood that was very full-time people to more and more second homes, more and more short-term rental. I would say that one of the wonderful things about our neighborhood is even the second homeowners have really integrated and really feel like I'm part of that community. They know who the residents are. They know which little kids to watch out for. They know, you know, who's walking their dog and those things. That's it, to me is a very huge differentiation between that and the short-term rental person who's very transient. They're on vacation. They don't, you know, they're on vacation. They don't really think or care about those things. and the transient nature of it makes it um much more concerning. Another thing specifically about our neighborhood as you all know when you go around Warren Way as a blind drive up in Hastack Heights

and when you have short-term rentals up there I'm not suggesting that you know we we are the ones that should not have that but from a safety standpoint people don't even who are transient don't understand how dangerous that whole curve is and we've had so many near misses and people drive way too fast around Warren Way. Um pedestrians even trying to stay the sidewalk have a lot of safety concerns. We've had emergency vehicle concerns up there where we had a natural gas uh leak right as we went up the neighborhood. You couldn't get in, you couldn't get out. And to place short-term rental people in that situation puts a lot of pressure on us as even full-time residents of not only protecting ourselves, but now we have people that don't even understand all those dynamics. So, I truly feel like we have a weak situation there because of the safety and emergency concerns along with the other concerns. And Steve, you brought up, you know, some of these same facts, uh, where the location where you live. Another comment that was brought up that was a concern, um, talking about, you know, the the numbers like 200 and I have it somewhere over a little over 200 STRs right now. The comment about reducing it to 165 right now. like maybe I'm misinterpreting, but it seems like you're just talking about 165 for the 14-day rentals. That's actually an increase in short-term rentals because right now we only have 153 that are in

the book. So by saying 165 who's actually priested I recognize the fact that that of the 50 let's see how many are there uh of the um homes that are you know the the long-term ones that can rent any time that slowly but surely through attrition those numbers will go away but there's no timeline on that because we don't know when those families may be selling those properties. So that is a concern of mine too that right now the 165 and the 14 day really it you know within you know who knows how long before that's really going to change anything in regards to numbers. And the last comment I would just like to say is in regards to looking at just data, which I recognize is important, leaves out the human portion of what we need to be thinking about for people who want to live here and that is the livability of neighborhoods. Um, and what makes a neighborhood and you know what are the the values that we as a community cherish and want to support so that people want to live here and I think that some communities and I will say seaside as an example by setting zones have uh we we know we live in a tourist area. People are always going to want to come here. But the one advantage of zoning areas is it does give people who want to invest and live in a community the opportunity to say, you know what, I personally love Canon Beach, but I don't want a short-term

rental and that transient n impact next to me. But I know that I can invest in this segment, this segment, this segment. that's the kind of neighborhood that I want to invest in and have my family uh raised in. So, I do feel like that is an advantage that does come with uh with zoning. And I also want to thank all of you for volunteering all your time because you put in endless hours and I in a small community if we didn't have volunteers we wouldn't get much done at all. So, thank you for your time. Thank you. Who else would like to come forward?

I had about two minutes, but I also heard a couple of things, so I want to see those. Um,

I realize you name 1092. Um, you know, I want to reiterate what Jeff talked about on the ordinance packages. I mean, you guys will only get the chance to put together two of those a year, maybe three of those a year. Um, there is one coming should be coming up. I think this stuff should be in that one. You know, like he said, the housekeeping, the state mandates, the things on parking and zoning and duplexes and ADU are all very important. And I think this one is a very important one as well. Um, you know, one of the things that Jeff mentioned was, you know, STRs are going away from the high-end homes. So, you know, basically we're on this path as a percentage of homes, it keeps declining and it's because as these homes get bigger and more expensive, people don't want to share those. Um the other one is uh you know the uh um you know we you somebody mentioned about the 10% uh the cap was intended to be a 10% of all you know of all units. I don't believe that. I you know I challenge you to go watch the uh the video of the council meeting. You know that was a numbers exercise. It was five people spitting out a number and then a mathematical average of 165. You know, it was 175, 175, 200, 100, 165. Um, so I don't think there's any logic in the original one. I don't necessarily have any problem with a cap, but I think it's a lot more important to uh have the exclusion zone and the density clauses. Both are pretty simple uh two sentence amendments. probably could be a a third one that would, you know, block the gamesmanship kinds of things. Um, and I'm glad that everybody's getting the, you know, short-term, this short-term

rental topic is not about housing. It's about livability. Every home that comes up for sale is going to be so primarily sold to a second homeowner. Um, and most are going to remain vacant and only a fraction of them will attempt to be an STR. most of in half of those don't last more than a year. The rate the housing issue is all about second homes. The short-term rental topic is all about livability. Uh while a 165 cap may provide a 17% reduction in numbers, it guarantees nothing to any individual homeowner or any neighborhood. Hastack Heights has seen a steady increase in STRs. It's had a a you know a lifetime one for a long time, but it saw another one. You know, it got a new one in two 2022, got another one in 2023, got a two more in 2024, and yet again now in 2025. And basically, that's that trend of, you know, the expensive homes aren't getting short-term rentals. People are coming in and buying the mid-pric homes and want to give it a try. and they're attacking places like Haystack Heights and it'll probably be, you know, El Creek Road on the other side of 101. Uh the graphs that Jeff had are pretty busy and confusing. I think it's best if you go back to look at my, you know, original maps snippets. There are 35 spots in town where there are more, you know, basically those 35 spots have an additional, you know, 50 SPRs that would need to go away. You know, maybe they go away and because of density can't go back there. Maybe they go away, but somebody else comes to town and lives in Tulana and they want to give it a try. Um um but you know the uh the density uh

thing basically guarantees a 25% reduction. It's like those 50 have to go away and they have to go away someplace else that will fit and they will fit in toana and south end. They'll fit in those little pockets that Jeff showed as yellow. you know, we're only talking 35 units that have to fit someplace. My personal feeling is, you know, out of those 50, 25 will go away and having a cap of 175 probably feels good and then the other 25 would pop up someplace else in town. Um, uh, these two simple clauses guarantee every short-term rental neighborhood gets a win. So Steve, your comment about, you know, I don't want to give something to Hack Heights when I can't give something to the presidentials. This gives everybody something. You know, Astack Heights, you know, they've got six that will prevent them from getting anymore. And then everybody in the presidentials will slowly get more relief uh from a density perspective. So everybody gets a win and basically nobody gets hurt. So you're talking about I do want to try to hold some. So let let Randy finish and we can have a discussion.

Um so basically everybody gets something, you know, it's not everything you want, but everybody gets something and nobody loses it, right? No short-term rental person has to give up their short-term rental. Um you know, and then uh um you know, you know, and a cat may feel good. Um but these two clauses is really what gets you the desired results. So that's all I have. Thank you. Would anyone else show 719? Um I realize you've all already made your minds up for um I feel the cap is an emergency. I I live The first place I lived in turned into an STR. The second one went for sale. And right now where I live, um could possibly turn into STR. I live with that threat every single day. Um I I just taking notes here. I'm uh what CD represents itself to be an artist and it's an artist community. I'm living a dream. So say I work seven days a week just trying to make a living. Um, my existence I think probably raises a lot of people's property values. Um, and there's just writing down um, Grace, Peter, Sam, Jess, Donnie, Lolly, Brent, Tyler, Gary, Lynn, N, and all people here that have had moved multiple times because whether sales or STRs. Um, I was part of the housing focus group for a year and a half. Lots of big ideas. Lots of big ideas going through I think one by one. I think putting a cat right now doing that would do something. And I think it's really important. It's an

emergency. I'm I feel so like like nobody cares. And I just I need somebody to show that they care. And it just feels like I know you made up your minds. I I know it's going to go somewhere eventually, but it's just I've been working on this forever. And um we are people. We're not just numbers. That's it. Thanks. Anyone else? Um, Zar Pox 956. Um, here eight years and having talked to people who live here even longer. Um, this discussion we're having this evening has been going on since forever. So, it's like I'm shoot. It's about time to do something. Um before I go any further, I thank all of you for your time. You know that's yes that's amazing that you do that. I don't have your patience. I did a lot of the boards but we used to live it from outside of sound. I can't do it anymore. So thank you for your time. Um but it's like yeah it's like we can talk and talk and talk and and come up with you know this this number or that but it's like something needs to be done to make this a little community people that live here. Um, you know, one of the comments was about Mar about not going downtown. I mean, basically, you know, from May to the end of September, I go downtown. Um, you know, it's, you know, that's pity me, but it's like um the livability that the short-term rentals infringes on, I guess, or diminishes. It's just like like, you know, do I want to be here? Um, and sometimes it's no, I don't I don't have a problem speeding. It's more like somebody taking 5 miles an hour down while taking pictures in the middle of the road. That doesn't turn my crank. Um anyway, um bless your hearts. You

know, please come up with some solution. Um and that is fair to everyone. I like your comment about that. Um so that's kind of what I'd like to say. Okay. Thank you for being anyone else. We got pretty close. All right. Then we will um come back to this body. Uh is there anything here that we have online? Look at that. I got tricked. Great. Um love to hear from anyone who's joined us online. Um I don't know who that is. Uh I don't give them a floor.

Hello. My name is Herb Florer. PO Box 546 Canon Beach. I don't know if you can hear us. We're having a little trouble being involved. We can hear you.

Okay. Um I I have actually spoken with you before and put some information in and I just kind of wanted to say I've been listening and appreciate uh all the comments. Uh but I think that once again there's some um conflation um with people about what goes on the the I've heard several people talk about the congestion downtown and we live here in town and a lot of business people live here in town and we all know that there is a lot of um problems getting to and from our mail, for example. But that has little or nothing to do with short-term rentals. The most of the people that are coming into town are coming in for the day. Uh they come in, they park, many of them park, and don't spend money in town. They go down to the beach. Uh short-term rentals have by code have to have parking spaces available to them. Uh, and so the the issue of the problems with downtown congestion really don't have to do with short-term rentals. I think people uh sometimes for whatever reasons um see short-term rentals as being the problem behind some of what we see in town, but that's not necessarily the case. And I heard another person talk about the the numbers and the percentages and the statistics. Well, I think the city has done a really good job of laying out facts and statistics. And the fact is that the numbers of,

you know, I'm going to say short-term rentals, but it's so confusing because there are different categories of them. Uh, and now I think there's a category called short-term rental that is just part of all of them. Um but the total number has been so consistent for 15 years now. It hasn't changed. It hasn't gone up. And the fact is that as some of the older categories go away and I think the city report again has done a really good job of this and and I appreciate their work on it. um shows that the total number of permits available for whatever category has been consistent has not changed. Uh and so to say that okay well we're going to say this category is such and such and should be such and such the total number has been so consistent. Uh and I don't think people realize that and again I appreciate uh your listening to us and your work and everything you've done and I think that's all I've got. Thanks very much.

Thank you for your time. Is there anyone else? Uh, no. There I I did want to point out though that I think Randy got it, but you know, you can always go to our website and you can pull up pretty much monthly put up not just the new list. There's a map and you can it takes you to a link to all the current um STRs and you can zoom in on your own. You don't have to look at any of my maps or ratings. You can just do that yourself and see if it's a 14 day, if it's a lifetime block or wherever you're interested in.

Just confirming we have no one else online. All right. So, um we've heard uh from a number of people with a number of different ideas and thoughts. anything anybody ever seen you think is important for us to come back to this time to talk about and um wait for us to put in our conscious and conscious before we meet again on this can I make one sure actually I'm gonna hold just for process and I guarantee down the road if not tonight I guarantee you'll have another opportunity any feel that way.

Guess I didn't understand that way. What do you mean? Yeah.

Okay. No need to further discuss anything that we haven't already discussed as the body tonight or anything that we heard tonight from regarding what we've discussed new information that they brought tonight. But maybe I'd like to reiterate one thing and that is the expediency issue. Um the reason that uh I personally don't feel like it's an expediency issue right now is because that 165 and I'm going to reduce the number of STRs as Jeff has said has been very consistent or as Mr. just said has been very consistent throughout. All the data shows that that STRs aren't increasing and they're not really decreasing. there's a bandwidth there that they stay within and that's true even as we build more houses stayed pretty consistent. So, um to reiterate, if this was an issue about housing or the last and uh get people to move here full-time or affordability, then I think there would be a reason to expedite things. But, um even if we passed the 165 or city council did uh next week, it would not reduce the number of STRs. we would have to uh reduce that 165 number down to some other number that are 150 to 150 something like that in order to reduce the SPRs that are existing right now. Um, so just to reiterate that point because I I feel you know Michelle makes some good points of course and as she said she's been working uh on the housing uh issue for she said a number of years I don't know how many but there's no simple solution. Um if there was more

hopefully we'd already had it in place but um well I think it's also important to clarify that when we talk about expediency we're not talking about a year from now.

No just saying this summer this would be part of a package is far more efficient for us to address it that way and to piece me then again something else that slows down the housing package. So I don't think we should call this somehow delay. It's just a matter of months different. Um, I did want to address something else that uh, you know, I've, uh, given comments to the public works committee and the public works director very recently and even as far back as a couple of years about speed bumps in different areas and one of the areas that I'm heavily recommended for speed bumps is the Hastack ice area for the very suggest the residents there. Uh, that is a blind quarter. I know you guys said one of the very few 15 mph speed limit signs in the city. I'm also advocating for more of those. uh more speed bumps uh in areas where upon sunset when it backs up some of the residents in that area on both sides where Daw or Elliot or Hills or Ross or Arbor

uh they all get to cut through you know they come through from what I understand 35 miles an hour just to get around that stop on sunset try and get around there bumps there too that's also happen but uh at your conference about the safety and so forth. Uh hopefully um you know I invite you to attend the public works committee meeting or talk to Chris the director public works uh because I'd like to see some motion on this. I would really like to see because I think that goes quality of life. Uh you know you feel a lot safer in your neighborhood. Um, you know, people that visit there aren't familiar with some of the the uh dangers of the neighborhood. People who live there and like you I friends very familiar with keep in contact with all second homeowners fire street and uh trying to navigate the community in that respect also. Um yeah, the public works like a place to go for additional signage bunks. Uh you know I told them every cone you see every personal sign that purges every row every strategically placed garbage can they are prize burn. So let's help the residents uh with the issues that they have about bar speeding etc. So I appreciate your comment. We want any additional comments or read

we're gonna have a lot of opportunity about it session

about that and please your friends I was asking if we wanted any additional comments or if we were going to if we were going to wrap up with our comments I'm seeing yes yes wrap it up wrap it up okay we'll come back see you again thank you everyone for being here means a lot to us your public comments are important to us and I can tell you having coming up on eight years now sitting here uh we navigate through a very tricky legal world that we've seen manipulated time and time again where we don't act properly. Your comments help shape that conversation and you know that you're here tonight because we have spent a lot of time in blending and getting educated through this. So thank you for being a part of that process. Yes sir.

Okay we move ahead to our chair report. Oh, I don't have the tree.

Any uh comments on the transport? Yes. I'm glad to see that they're all being replaced. See that what eight are seven or eight. So, I'm glad to see that all are taking place. Sometimes all replaced, but it's good to see they're all took good of the order. Can I say one? Absolutely. Yeah. No, I don't think it's short.

So, I just wanted to bring everybody's attention to we're having some spam issues uh at city hall. And so, um we've actually it's alert number I30926 PSA service announced the gate out March 926 from the FBI about this one scam that's happening and we're getting that. I'm just going to get this to you real quick. Just this is you know and you can see they're what they're doing. I mean they're even putting in um my director best regard saying the fees of the amount of like 5,000. Yeah. So it's it's a scheme that's actually I think what it does is it goes through our website and finds public records kind of things and you know we redact as much as we can but this

new AI stuff is free and it just gets from we we think this one we we found out where these are grabbing most recent ones so we're going to start pulling those in the back but it's grabbing them and So, just if you get anything like that or anything, uh, get it to us or get it to the police chief and we're we're trying they'll follow on this because I I think from what I saw today, uh, those that were getting and we need to come back and ask those that did were the first to get it, they're they're the ones that really have to file them with the FBI or whatever their online I filed site because those are, you know, book from the email that's not from you may have just you know I received something similar from Portland city and uh another state entity that was similar to this uh and it click and send money because it's so urgent and um etc. So yeah, watch out for not again beach ones, but any other quote unquote reputable source.

That's all I had. Thank you very much.

Anybody else? Okay, couple quick little housekeeping things for us as a body, especially because it's so nice to have us all here together in a new member for a community particularly. Um, when I call for um, uh, you know, have I ever looked on Google because I got jammed and couldn't be there. Yes, I count that as a site. I'm not hearing everybody say site visit and I'm not bringing it up, but I do think and let's I don't think it needs to go much further than this my comment. I do think it's important for us to check that box one way or the right. Um the other thing we had a uh a few months ago we had a tenative approval of an item. Um, the ten of approval was something that we did not initially do when I came onto this body, but it's something that we came up with as a way to check the staff's summary of our final so that we could look at it because it was complicated issue and it needed to be very active because either we didn't all agree or one word can change the meaning. And so we put that tenant of approval in place so that we could all come together and go this is what was meant. Now what what wasn't intended and um shame on me for not explaining this better. What wasn't intended was it to be a vote again on that item. It wasn't like let's change the vote on how we felt about this. The body that voted the idea was it was it would settle whether it was close vote or unanimous. The idea was for us to be able to come back and go this covers the sentiment of the majority vote. So, um, we may come back to that again, but, um, if the time that we bring the time if we do need to come back to it again, it means that we've

gotten to language that we think we need to revisit very carefully because, as we know, words matter, especially the terms that we're so we get to the tenant, it is not meant as a coming back to the vote, it is meant to make sure the language is correct for the intent of the majority that night. Those are just the two things I have comment on that. And then Jeff, you'll Yeah, she made the You probably already have this. You probably on it, but there's a code for planning commissioners and um pretty good. And we have training. I'm sure they'll bring another round train. Is there anything else?

Okay. Thank you everyone. the lab. Jeff, one question I had was here. It says we must respond within a timely man. Does it get more specific?

Is it one um inspection? It's very valid but timely manner can be to it. I think it should be. Okay. We are we're

Thank you. here. I can think about