Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Commissioner Cleleszik, are you able to hear me? Yes, I can. Thank you. Go ahead and put us back on mute.

I call this meeting of the seaside planning commission to order. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance. Debbie, could you please take roll call?

Here

vice chair here. I was just going to say your microphones are cutting out. I'm not hearing anything. Commissioner Rose present. Commissioner Mitchell here. Perfect.

This is the time and place duly advertised for the Seaside Planning Commission to hold its monthly meeting. Agenda items can be initiated by the general public, any legal property owner, Seaside City Council, City Staff, and the Seaside Planning Commission. Does anyone present feel the commission lacks the authority to hear any item on the agenda? Hearing none. Are there any corrections, deletions, additions to the minutes to the draft minutes of September I write this down every time. September 2nd, 2025. I just had a note, Debbie, that um Sadie Mercer was also in attendance and was a speaker last month and um I believe it was John Lancing was present and not necessarily representative uh Javat in person. He was representing uh representative Javati. A lot of representing going on.

Got it. So just that note there. Anything else? Okay, we'll move on. It is standard procedure for the members of the commission to visit the sites to be dealt with at these meetings. Do any of the commissioners wish to declare an exparte contact or possible conflict of interest? Uh I live within a couple hundred feet of this project. I don't think it's a conflict, but noted. I'm a neighbor. Okay. Thank you. I own the uh property across the street from the restoration house. Noted. The following public hearing requirements apply to the items on our agenda. The applicable criteria for the hearing. Monttero, sorry to interrupt you. Commissioner Cleles has her hand up.

Yes, ma'am. I just want to state that I don't feel like I have a conflict, but that I do represent that I also am on the board of the transportation district that may be impacted by one of the items that we will be discussing. Wonderful. Thank you. And sorry I didn't see you there. I'm used to you being right here. Ah, I know. I would have hit elbowed you. Thank you.

Uh, the following public hearing requirements are uh apply to the items on our agenda. The applicable criteria for the hearing items are listed in the staff reports prepared for this hearing. Testimony and evidence shall be directed toward the applicable criteria listed in the staff reports or other criteria in the plan or land use regulation which you believe applies 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 that issue precludes appeal to the land use board of appeals on that issue. The applicant will testify first followed by any others in favor of the request. Then any in opposition will testify and then the applicant will be given time for rebuttal. For testimony, we will hear from in-person attendees followed by electronic attendees. When the time comes to hear from the members of the public attending electronically, there's a feature in the attendee view that allows you to electronically raise your hand by clicking on the control pan panel at the bottom of your screen. Phone attendees can raise their hand by pressing star9. You will then be placed into a queue and when your time comes to speak, you will be unmuted and can address the commission. Our moderator of the comments, administrative assistant Debbie Kenyon, will monitor this area and let us know when citizens that have virtually raised their hand are ready to make comments via Zoom or by phone. Background background noise must be kept to a minimum while testifying or your testimony will time will be ended shortly. Prior to testifying, please state your full name and your address for the record and please limit your comments to five minutes. Public hearing items. Here we go, folks. Public hearing 769-25000085 PLNG. Mr. Planner.

Thank you, Chair Montto. Tonight we have Evergreen Energy Group represented by Yan Sucha. Um their request is uh for a highway overlay zone review to construct a gas station and convenience store near the intersection of 14th Avenue and Highway 101. It's just north of the movie theater that sits off at 12th. Um as you can see the uh proposal will access uh the site via 14th Avenue as well as a easement that goes through the back parking area for the cinema. Um the applicants provided a site plan proposes pedestrian access through the remainder part of the 13th Avenue rightway uh that exists. You can see there on the bottom part of the string the south end of the development where there is still a public rideway that accesses the highway um through what used to be the railroad uh rightway that's runs along the highway. The remainder of that had been vacated previously. Um the applicant site plan shows EV charging banks, fuel station, as well as a just what is it just over a thousand foot or so um uh convenience store. Uh the applicants provided renderings of what the elevations potentially could look like for this project as well as a photograph of a similar project that was done uh in another part of Oregon of a similar type and of fuel station that they're looking to install. Um staff's provided findings uh justification statements and conclusions as well as uh excerpts from the applicants traffic impact analysis they had completed. Um there

community development director Flory just before you go any further could I please interrupt um I can't see anything that you're showing the commission is would it be possible to share the that screen as well or reference where that is in the packet so that I can be following along at the same time as what you're talking about it needs to be

trying to get the camera system uh it's hard to operate and present at the same time So, sure. Are you able to see what I'm seeing now? What I'm showing? Not yet. This should be a photograph of Highway 101

um via Zoom. I don't know if we're going to be able to um broadcast that. Uh I don't know if the system has that capability, nor do we have the knowledge to do it. It's hard to try to run this and do the presentation as well. So, uh, in the packet you have to look through to see if the applicant I'm not sure if they put that rendering in there, but the site plans in the application as well as the elevations um are all part of the the packet in the applicant's uh application. Uh, the rendering itself is not and unfortunately I can't get that to you via Zoom. Sorry. Anything else, Jeff?

I'm trying to figure out where I was at. One second, please. Okay. Sorry. Yeah, I thought I saw a rendering. Oh, the rendering is on page 28. Kathy, can you look at your uh um your laptop and uh talk at the same time? I don't mean literally, but you know what I mean. So, it's on page 28 of the packet. Is that what you're saying? That uh Yeah, the the plan, the elevation plans is on 28. The site plan is page 27.

Yes. But what I was seeing in the distance there didn't look like this. So, that's why I was asking. Okay. Thank you.

All right. Uh staff's provided five conditions for approval. Um the applicant's going to need to provide a detailed lighting plan for the proposed development uh at uh uh building permit review. Um sidewalks will be required along Highway 101 as per their um their TIA. Uh it was a recommendation that uh was part of the findings of the TIA to provide that pedestrian path and connectivity. Um, bicycle parking. Uh, I believe their site plan showed some bicycle parking. Now I got to stare into the sun, too. This is really fun. Um, provide some bicycle parking. However, we need uh to show covered spaces. So, that's something in the final development plans the applicant can incorporate. Uh, as well as uh the 13th Avenue right ofway. um that will either need to be a street vacation for the applicant's use or um since they are installing a sidewalk, I think it may be appropriate for the city council to consider a um license agreement to utilize part of that right away for their signage and the remainder of it as public access because it will benefit both uh the applicant's development and the uh the business to the south, the cinema, that pedestrian connectivity will um be utilized for both uh locations. Uh at this point, I don't have anything further. I can certainly try to answer any questions that the uh commission may have.

Wonderful. Thank you. And who here would like to come up and represent this project? Have a seat. Oh, you can have a you can have a seat at the table. Wow. And please introduce yourself and your address, please. Yan Shuka. I'm here to talk about the uh property that's neighboring 101 and on 14th uh in between 13th and 14th just north of the theater. And what's your address? Your personal address? My personal address? Yes. Uh 7716 Palasio Drive in Carlsbad, California. Thank you.

You're welcome. Um so this we uh drive markets all all up and down uh the Oregon coast. Um we saw a need for uh a gas station in this portion of town. The other southern portion of town is is pretty well uh pumped. Uh and uh our business projects to have approximately 10 jobs. Um, it's a 4,000q ft² convenience store. We'll have hot and fresh food. Um, we'll have snap items. Um, and uh the a majority of the traffic will be coming from um already traffic patterns. That's fairly standard for gas stations. Uh the lighting uh is going to be only with wall packs facing the east side of the property where there's no other housing. And the uh west side will not have wallpack lighting uh that's facing the 101 corridor, nor will there be wall packs to the north or to the south, meaning lights facing outward uh toward those areas. There will be lighting under the canopy, but we use LED lighting, which is very direct light, so it will shine down on the dispensers, but doesn't really shine out uh like the oldfashioned H hallogen lighting. Um and uh yeah, we hope that it it's a it's a nice new development that enhances the community.

Wonderful. Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to speak uh in favor of this project? Hearing none. Is there anybody opposed to this project? Debbie, do we have anybody called in other than Kathy? Okay. Well, we do not. Okay. In that case, I'll turn it over to the commission to ask questions. Kathy, I'm going to start with you so I don't forget you. Oh, I would never think that you would ever forget me front here. And make sure your microphone's turned on.

So, I guess my my first questions would be regarding the traffic flow through the easement in the back. um what kind of traffic is that is being accounted for there flowing through there while there's a queue um to get to the pumps? I'm assuming it's a oneway pump and one way out.

Uh no, currently there isn't uh a single directional uh plan for those dispensers. um just with the nature of you know our real fuel projections there shouldn't be uh so much crowding that that cars are blocked out but um the distance between 13th I think that's the direction you're concerned about or are you concerned off of 14th 14th and the easement

okay um well the queueing uh should be fairly easy there's a lot of room on on both 14th and 13th headed back toward the the theater. Um the pumps go dual directions, but it's a fourack, so it means it's two pumps uh back to back stacked away from each other. Um, so realistically, uh, it's unlikely that the current traffic would warrant, you know, more pumps or more, uh, queuing than is is there. Uh, and it's probably a very unlikely scenario that that the cars would stack up uh anywhere near um backing up 14th where it couldn't be used for access to the theater or uh and certainly not 13th because that's a very very long easement and um a long stack option. So clarify for me what what you mean by 13th because to me it looks like your store is between the pumps and 13th. So physically impossible that there would be stacking to there. So you're talking about stacking along the the easement all the way to 13th. Is that what you're saying?

Yes, that's what that's what I'm saying. I'm saying that that's very very like unlikely even in a crisis situation. So, will your pumps be servicing RVs as well as passenger vehicles? Uh, I believe we are trying to make the canopy height large enough to be able to service RVs, in which case they would be blocking two pumps when they come in to to fuel. Um, that's just the unfortunate nature of of

the size of those vehicles. uh we don't expect to be fueling uh much in terms of commercial vehicles that would be taking up substantial spaces while that those tend to have fleet cards and and we'll probably pump at the Willox and Fagel site uh further to the north.

Okay. Um there's just my concern is the other traffic that will be using for that uses 14th as well as that that pathway between the business that would be to the north which includes a community college and the the cinema. Um the transit district, the people that get to the outlet mall using that road. um and blockage that could be could happen because of the you know on the highway and on 14th and on getting through that whole road based on usage of just the gas pumps. So, I'm just trying to find out how much that has been considered in this plan because we do get a lot of RVs and yes, they will be excited to get fuel at the north end if they're coming in and heading south before they get through all of the traffic. Um, so I mean, I'm not saying that I don't think this is a good plan. I'm just hoping that there's been some planning and consideration that you can discuss in that regard.

Yeah. Well, I know that we laid out some different stacking options. It it appears that we could probably go five cars deep in that direction if all lanes were facing from 14th. And that's multiplied by the the two different sides of the dispensers, right? So that's 20 cars could stack if they were all coming in from 14th headed that southerntherly direction. Now again, they're going to be coming from both directions, so that's an unlikely outcome. So you could maybe cut that in half to be more realistic and say that there's approximately stacking from for somewhere around um 10 cars if there's cars already coming in the other direction. um which should be more than adequate unless there's again some sort of extreme event like a tsunami type event where

people shouldn't be stopping at a gas station if we have a tsunami that won't be happening. Yeah, they they rush in to fuel up and we had this experience the latest last tsunami warning at our newly built site in in Northbend. It happens. It's a but it's a rare emergency event.

Okay. So, I guess to me the my concerns are the traffic that could be caused by by stacking that um which could include RVs which block visibility um birectional traffic trying to get to the to the fuel canopy and then the safety of people walking in and out of the the store, walking to your facility that I I foresee as being a very busy place considering it is going to be near the community college. It's near the movie theater. It's near a couple new housing developments. There's going to be a lot of foot traffic there. So, um, did you request a variance for there not being a sidewalk on 14th?

No, we did not. Okay. Just wondering why that was granted without a a request for a variance on that.

This is their preliminary site plan. there's conditions that require that connectivity. So, their development plans will have sidewalks showing that, but there's complications to that as they don't own the property directly adjacent to the highway. So, that needs to be uh vetted with ODOT permitting to allow them to to put that in. Um they don't own the property adjacent to the highway. There's there is an ODOT piece of property in between their development and the highway. So, the condition that requires the sidewalk, that's going to have to come with ODOT approval. Otherwise, there's no possible way for them to put a a sidewalk along the highway frontage.

Yeah, we could put a sidewalk in. We have a landscape buffer right now that's over 50% larger than what you guys require for this 101 overlay. Uh but it would kind of be a sidewalk to nowhere because it couldn't connect to another sidewalk uh further down the street because it'd be running into parking spaces for the theater that's inside of that buffer zone. Is there a sidewalk over by the theater as well? I couldn't hear an answer if there was one. Not that I'm aware.

Okay. So, I I mean I think that that's a a good theory that we don't build sidewalks because they don't connect to anything, but that is not create more sidewalks and the ability for other people to connect to sidewalks. So, um our zoning code says that if an area is developed that sidewalks are to be provided as well and so I would like to see sidewalks put in along 14th and along the highway allow, you know, considering the ODOT allowances that are needed for that. Um, and I say 14th even though that's a short road because there will be a lot of foot traffic there and we need to provide a safe way for people not to be crossing only at 101 so that the people that are coming from the community college from the apartments that are up the road there can can cross the road straight safely and get around um your complex and get to all the different things being safe on a sidewalk. Okay. I mean, I feel good about committing to building a sidewalk along 14th. Um, and we're fine with building a sidewalk along our property uh so long as ODOT allows it.

Understood. That's the the the fact that that 14th was called out as not needing a sidewalk that I'm um pointing to at this point. So, okay. I'd like to reserve any further questions for later, Robin. I think that that's all I have for right now. All righty. Commissioner Cleles, can we go over condition three so I can make a note if you want to change it? Yes.

Condition three reads, "The final development plan is required to install a sidewalk along the highway 101 in conjunction with ODOT and the public work director's approval. The sidewalk must meet the wit standards in the TSP 68 ft wide. Ped pedestrian paths accessing the proposed convenience store from the public rideways will be required on all on the final development site plans." So it says pedestrian paths connecting to that sidewalk from the public rideways which includes 14th. Does that suffice for what your intention is or would you prefer to alter that too? I would like to specifically call out that 14th should be included in that because in some of your findings you stated that 14th does not need a sidewalk.

Okay, we can alter that. Thank you. And can you point out the finding to me? I will find that while I while somebody else is asking questions. Yeah. Okay, wonderful. Okay, thank you so much. And oops, sorry about that, Mr. Mitchell. Mr. Rose, no comments, Miss Stmer. I have no questions. Oh, for crying out loud. That was half an hour. Oh, I know. Okay. Well, I do have a question. Um, and don't hesitate to bring your microphone a little to more toward you. Just bring the whole thing. I've got it.

There you go. Uh Jeff, you mentioned um the uh well, let me let me ask something else first. As far as the easements concerned uh with uh let's see, it's Northwest Capital Investment Group. I believe they they own that property and the mall. Are those in place or is it those are currently in place? They are. So they're out of conversation and they are in place. Yes, they're they're

okay. That's a good thing. Um the question for Jeff was uh you mentioned on the southwest corner where the uh vacation of 13th has to be um a possible uh right-of-way agreement with the city uh whe if they don't vacate it or what have you. How long of a rightway agreement? What's the term of that agreement? So the rightway agreement isn't for their sidewalk. Sidewalk would be an allowed I'm I'm sorry. specifically for the signage. Yes. Uh that would have to be a discussion with our attorneys on how that would be written and how it would be entered into. Um but it would be again specifically for the signage, not for the pedestrian path. So,

Right. Right. Um again, that's and it would be a discretionary matter for the city council. The city council could say, "No, we're not going to do that." Um but if that's where they'd like to place their sign, that would that would be the requirement to go through for them. And and again, we would check dur duration and what the standard for that would be through our attorneys to to draft the agreement. Do we have other rightway agreements like that on file? Uh none from our new attorneys. Oh, okay. I I'll put it that way. Because I know that portion of 13th that was vacated in 1990. Why they just didn't the whole darn thing? I have no idea.

I don't know when the railroad rightway that runs north south was vacated. It looks to me like that was vacated while the railroad rightway was still in play. So they vacated the remainder of 13th and left the tag end. Yeah. And that never got vacated um in in the '9s when it happened. So Okay. Well, thank you for that. Uh easement lighting plan is coming. Hey, uh on the lighting plan, Yes. on the east side of the building, you were talking about wall packs. Wall pack. Tell me what a wall pack is. Uh it's a light that shines out for customer parking safety.

No visible uh there's no windows planned for that side of the store and it's just to create like a safe parking and customer environment there. Okay. So it's actual lighting that shines outward outward which we don't have any other lighting to the west, south or to the north that's going to be shining outward. Only the canopy lighting that's shining down. Right. Okay. The reason I'm asking is I and thank you for wanting to illuminate for safety and that goes across the easement obviously. Okay. And beyond that easement is the river and then we have residential across the way.

Are we going to have if I've got my house looking directly at your wallpack, am I going to get blinded? There's a bunch of foliage along that side uh to the west of the river. So, I don't believe so, but maybe if someone's high enough, but that would be properties that are further out. So, I think that that should be fine. I It's not very farreaching light. It's not a like super bright light. That's what I was wondering what the distance is from. It's just like a from the back of the building. Kind of like a parking light. Okay. Um, and in essence, I, you know, I guess we could also build them to be gooseeneck lights that shine down more, some type of a shield. Yeah.

Um, and that's an option to mitigate any light pollution further out. But it seemed like there was enough foliage there that that that light wouldn't impact anyone further to the to the east. The foliage is there for now. I'm thinking of the dead of winter, but yeah. Um yeah, something can over the face of that just so it doesn't like I said blind the neighbors across the pond there. Um architect yeah modify for gooseeneck lighting on that side. Does anybody else have any comment on that? [Music] Okay, I do. I do. I do.

Yes, ma'am. Yes, that was the other thing that I wanted to bring up is that we um direct the lighting downward rather than outward, not just for the neighbors, but also because that's a riparian zone um along the river. I'm sticking my thumb up, Kathy. You can't see that, but if you can. Yeah, I believe the gooseseneck lighting will solve that. Those are okay from those. Wonderful. Thank you on that. Uh let's see. We discussed the sidewalk. Um Jeff, can you um just educate me on why bicycle parking needs to be covered? It's part of the appendix G of the transportation system plan code changes that were adopted that

we're working on getting codified into our actual zoning ordinance where they belong. Got it. Uh but it specifies long-term bicycle parking is covered and or enclosed and short-term bicycle parking is your standard what you see with the extensions and this use is going to require I believe two long-term two short-term got it uh required because I think we have five in there all all together if we have that building awning that the kind of overhang the sloped roof uh in our elevation plan would that be considered adequate cover if it's below a an awning structure.

We'll leave that up to the commission to interpret if if it's how how how big of an awning is it? What are we what are we talking about? Uh well, likely we'd need to extend it out a little further if if we were planning to cover bikes as well. I I think we had planned like maybe a three or four foot awning. So, it' probably have to go out to maybe five or six feet. This is off the front side of the building. Off the front side of the building. Are you talking about on page 28 the elevation drawing? Uh not sure what page, but the elevation drawing he showed previously. Yes, that's correct.

Because in plan view it looks like you've got 20 foot clearance at the sorry at the highest point and probably 12t 10 foot outward. Okay. So that could be larger than I thought it was. I'm just and that should be that should be hopefully adequate for cover for any weather events for the bicycles which I think is probably the me I assume just thought I just I wanted to ask well there you go now we got an answer to that too is that

well I think the intent behind it and the commission can certainly weigh in on this is to provide covered and secured uh bicycle parking for long-term storage to you know in in this specific type of use think of an employee that's going to work an 8 hour shift and store their bike there for an extended period of time. Um, it's the the short term is for the folks patronizing the business. The long term is for the folks that are there for a a longer duration. So, I don't know if a awning off the side of the building is going to quite meet the intent of that with with a rack. I'm sorry. The the rack I think was already in our plan. Yeah. But assuming the bike rack is up against under the awning section,

um, I'll let I'll let the commission weigh in. Adequate cover. You know, nobody likes to ride home on a wet bicycle seat after an eight hour day. I'm just saying. I mean, a car is one thing because you can go in and out of it with a door. Bicycle, you're kind of stuck. um because there isn't um in the elevation drawing doesn't even show a bike rack which is here nor there. I mean, that's a a technical thing that you've just got to have. But, um, if you had a covered area, I mean, enclosed area, something with three sides, people talk. What do you think? Where would that be?

Three side enclosure. Well, you know, something of course. Yeah. Some, you know, at least three. Well, theoretically, there could be bicycle parking. along the landscaped area that's along the 101. Not in that landscaped area, but next to it under the awning. And theoretically, we could put a another wall there, but I believe that I mean, I'm an avid cyclist that I would want there to be visibility on the bikes so that theft was less likely. So, you'd probably want to have that other side open uh to discourage the theft. Sure, I understand that.

So, I'm thinking with the covered portion, what I was if the canopy goes out far enough so that rain doesn't or weather elements don't come down onto the bikes and the rack is under the awning effectively weather protecting the the bikes that are locked to the rack. um you know, would that achieve the goal? I don't know. Kathy, did you have some two cents on that?

Yes, I I do. Um and I and I just would want to say that I would maybe look at some place near where the EV charging is to create more of a shelter for the bicycles that is secure because um our rain doesn't just come down. it it comes sideways and the um awning is during those times of year not going to really provide much protection for the bicycles at all um that are store would be stored just up chained up to a rack. So I I agree that I believe the intent of the um mention in the code is that we provide secured sheltered parking so that if an employee were to ride their bike to work, they would know their bike was safe and dry when they went when they went to go leave from work to go back home again. And so I think a three-walled or at least two walled shelter at minimum would be needed. So I mean if it was somehow added on to the the EV charging area would be kind of my thought if it was built into that area somehow.

Yeah, there's I know it looks there. Um there's potential again to add it against that landscape area maybe with just some of those sheltered um bike enclosures that you can lock. You know the the ones that are like a plastic top and a hinge you pull your bike in and then cover it. Would that be adequate? So we'd have two of those and then two open uh slots. To me that is secured parking. Yes. Okay. All right. Well, we'll add that to our plan. And I'm not the only commissioner that gets to speak on it. Every wouldn't be the first time I've been overruled. Yeah, if if it's adequate, we'll add that to our plan.

I have a question for you. So, on the south side of the building, um, in looking at your site plan, number 11 is that's the bike rack, right? Yes. Okay. Correct. five minimum is. And there's a door back there on the south side of the building. An exit. Uh I think we do have a door planned back there. Um but it's an emergency exit. It's not a it's not a uh entrance to be utiliz

Oh, no. That's that's fine. No, I was thinking Well, it seems how you have a bike rack back there. Um, instead of trying to fit long-term bike and your um, what is that? Your mechanical trash by the trash enclosure. Could you put a longterm on the south side? Yes. You mean southwest instead of southeast? Well, you've got the five five spot bike rack

for customers or whomever. Um, but uh something uh that's long for the uh employees that's a little bit more covered up and like a you said you're a bicycle enthusiast. You know what it's all about. Can you put that on the south side in conjunction with your um five-spot bicycle rack? Uh we could I think if we were going to have covered parking with the realistic amount of employees working and uh customer travelers in in an ideal scenario it would be more like the three open spaces and two covered spaces if two is what's required for long-term employee parking.

Okay. It just historically I've noticed that they're not overly utilized, but also based on the number of employees that we're going to have there, it's very unlikely that we'd have more than two riding bicycles to work for any given shift. Well, and those ones are just they're fairly expensive is the only reason. If I may interject here, the code also specifies that bicycle parking needs to be as near as practical as a close vehicular parking spot as well.

Okay. So, I believe the applicant's on to a good path with the overhang off the front of the building for both his long-term and short-term parking. It puts it nearest the front door. Um, it's just how do we how do we position the long-term parking so that it doesn't impede pedestrian traffic to that door. And I think I think anywhere along the front of that, if it was to the west closest to the vegetation for the long-term parking and then maybe to the east side for the short-term parking, we can probably get him there. and and that that's great. I was just about to say I will def defer the detail to you, but we definitely need something um covered. Commissioner Gleas got a comment.

Yes, thank you. I'm sorry. I did not see that 11 was the the key for um the bicycle parking proposal. I would have said something to start out with um that I didn't think that that was a good spot for the bicycle parking to be because it wouldn't provide a vis visibility and it is not close to the door. So um yes, I agree with the with director Flor's assessment that front of building um long-term and short-term should be park bicycle parking should be located in the front of the building there someplace can be opposite sides can be arranged in in that area but it should be someplace convenient and visible. Can I can I ask a quick question with if we were to get the covered lockable parking for the bikes, which means those are hard covers that can't be vandalized. The the bicycle can't be vandalized. If we put the hard two hard covers for the long-term parking at the back corner where 11 is now, and we put the three open parking spaces, but now they're covered. So, there's an additional cover beyond what's required by code. and those are visible because the the long-term ones don't don't need visibility since they're since we're switching to a covered model. And I believe that was an emission in our plan before when we weren't planning to provide covered parking. But

if we're providing covered parking where it is in the key today at 11, it would be a hard shell cover where the bike itself couldn't be vanalized. like you couldn't take the wheels off or you couldn't touch it as the non-owner of that locked cover. Mhm. Um so if we split them out that would allow both pedestrian access to remain unimpeded but also solve the visibility issue for the bikes that aren't covered and and a cost issue for us so we don't have to get five of those covered bike receptacles.

Yeah. Yeah. No, and I wasn't saying you needed to get five of the covered bike receptacles. Um I think that your proposal for um getting the covered ones and putting them by near the landscaping in the front and then jet the community development director Flor's suggestion to put the um short-term ones maybe on the other side of the front area uh under the awning still was also a good suggestion. I will leave it to the rest of the commission to decide what they what they think about this because um I think I've belabored it enough and I've given my opinion of what

I do. I have a a comment. Um so you had talked about how the only um what do you call those things? The light packs are on the on the west on the east side. Um so it sounds like there is not a lot of lighting on the back side of this store. Correct. And I would be very concerned as a cyclist to leave my bike um even in one of those locked things um without a lot of light around here in this town. Okay. Yeah, I understand there it is susceptible I guess to somebody that's capable of destroying one of the locks. They are very like high security devices because

I'm a cyclist myself familiar with them but um I would be and no eyes on it. Nobody and nobody's if you put them in the front where um Jeff is um suggesting then people are by that area all the time. If it's in the back then nobody's no pedestrians are going by there. there's no eyes on people who have time to jimmy the locks and start to destroy things. So, I um that's my two cents on why not to put it where number 11 is.

Well, let me just ask, why isn't there any lighting on the south wall? Uh because I think one of the highway overlay zone goals was to reduce light pollution along 101 corridor specifically and lighting going to the south. While it wouldn't shine on 101 directly, it indirectly creates a lighting source that can be distracting. um when when in theory we could also do gooseenecks back there, but it's it's just a very it's going to be a y low utilization area in general.

Um when staff reviews a lighting plan, we'll have the applicant or the applicant's engineer submit um a plan that shows the amount of lighting from the ambient light of the street lights, the neighboring properties, as well as the lighting that they'll put together. And then with I work with the public works director on this as well. Uh we look at it and determine if that's going to be sufficient to light pedestrian paths, driveways, and the important things without casting, as Commissioner Klesic brought up, light into our riparian areas or onto the highway.

So the there there is a fairly comprehensive review that uh takes place when we do look at a lighting plan to make sure that it's going to be sufficient for the proposal and sufficient to protect that dark sky compliance that we shoot to achieve. And there is no fencing on the uh the south side of the property. Correct. No, not planned. Okay. Uh let me see. Uh we will have security cameras as well uh across the site.

That's probably a good idea. Let's see. Ask that. That's that. I This is just a a just a question that I had. So I'm I'm the fuel truck. I'm going to come fill up your tanks. I have to come southbound and head east into your station. Is that right? Southbound on 101. Correct. Okay. And uh so they need to go into the center lane where it's a turn lane and Q and then turn.

Okay. And then you come out through the easement and then you exit to the right at the stoplight at at 12. Okay. I'm just thinking that's a tight corner, but that's all right. I don't think I have anything else. Anybody have any further comments? One last quick question. Um, and this is probably going to I I probably already know my answer. Um, is there a crosswalk striping being planned for crossing over uh 14th? Good point. Uh, there was none in our plan.

You know, that might u behoove you. I'm I'm not necessarily suggesting to make it a condition, but that might behoove you with uh just beyond that are apartment buildings being built. Okay? And and if you're a a store, you're looking for young customers, you're looking for customers in general, that might be behoove you to do that. And it might actually direct the pedestrians to cross just there rather than at other places. it might help. This is this is especially for the younger pedestrians. This is certainly within the realm of the commission to um add that as a condition

um along with the uh I'm hearing there's potential for changes to condition five. So maybe the Oh, sorry that was the wrong one. Condition three. So maybe the commission can discuss that. Uh regarding the path on 14th, I know Commissioner Clelesic mentioned that she wanted that specifically called out in the condition that there is a connected sidewalk um on 14th to the development. Um and then that could be added as well if the commission chooses to ensure a crosswalk is striped on 14th. But I'll let you guys discuss and decide.

Well, now I'll now I'll say it. Let's do a crosswalk on 14th. What do you all say? I think it's good. I agree, Mr. Rose. That sounds good, Mr. Mitchell. By the way, what page are your conditions on? I know I have them here, but there are 90 pages. If you can find them, just page 13. 13. Start section L. There they are. Thank you. I even put stars on them, but it's just hard to find them sometimes. Great. Okay. So, let's add in that crosswalk. Zebra striped crosswalk. Add crosswalk on 14th. Zebra striped crosswalk. I beg your pardon.

Zebra striped crosswalk. Zebra. Okay. You can do any animal you wish. Well, I I would I would defer to public works on their standards for crosswalk striping and not um ensure that that standard is is met on what what our public works director is wanting there. 14th. Okay. Anything else before I ask for a motion? Nothing. And the and the connected sidewalk that's included in there as well.

Connected. So, let's go over just to make sure. So, the sidewalk uh connecting 14th Avenue to the the rest of the development. Um a crosswalk to cross 14th Avenue and uh the uh do you want to add something specific about the um bicycle parking? Uh it's condition four. Um the condition is is fairly vague. It doesn't specify locations. Um, we can you guys can add if you wanted it in the front of the building, in the lighted area, uh, or lighted area of the building would be my addition. Okay. What did you say, Kathy?

Front lighted area of the building. I can go for that. And we don't need to add anything about the gooseeneck lighting. [Music] No, because that's already been talked about in the lighting plan. Okay.

Okay. All right. And on that note, I will entertain a motion. I move we approve planning. I was trying to skip to the beginning of this without missing it. Sorry. Um, application 769250085 PLNG with the uh is it five conditions as amended? I have a motion. Do I have a second? A second.

Commissioner Cleac and Commissioner Stalmer. All those in favor say I. I. Okay. Any opposed? Hurrah. You've been approved. Thank you very much. Thank you and good luck. That's going to be a great location. Appreciate that. [Music] All right. Now, let's get to the other stuff here. Okay. And now we are on to I believe this is considered ordinance administration. Is that right, Jeff?

Yeah, that's correct.

Okay. Okay, there we go. Had to get the picture. So, ordinance administration on 769-24-000066. Uh this is a request by uh restoration house through their uh representative Christian um for a uh extension of their conditional use. Uh as some of you may recall um last year a u restoration house had brought forth a proposal to extend the number of beds that they uh have to service their clients u for serious and persistent mental ill patients. uh to join their their facility. Along with that, um they've been working on uh site design, getting grant funding, and um their conditional use, I believe, expired or was set to expire October 1st. They came in in August, August 26, and filed a request to extend it. Um so, it's within the 10day requirement. Um, and if the extension is granted, then their new expiration date will be 6 months from now. So, April of uh 2026. Um, I'll let the applicant if they'd like to speak. Uh, I do have some Sorry, Commissioner Cleles. I don't know if we're going to be able to get this on Zoom.

Jeff, I do have a question. Um, two questions. This hearing is uh strictly for the extent six-month extension of that permit. Correct? Yeah. There's no public hearing requirement. It's just for the uh that's strictly the extension only. Okay. And um the six months uh is the work has to have started and not necessarily completed but just begun. Begun. That's correct. Okay. and and usually we mark that by the issuance of a building permit of some sort. Okay. Okay. All righty. So, did you have anything else?

I have nothing further unless the commission wants me to go over where this is located. There it is. All good. All right. Kristen, you're all right. Introduce yourself. I will. We know who you are. Evening everybody. Christian Zubanchic, 615 Broadway Street, sweet 216, Seaside, Oregon, 97138, here on behalf of Restoration House. Um, it's been a year, so we're we're back. And the reason that we're asking to extend this, um, the reason why it's taking a little bit longer than we hoped is, if you all can recall from a year ago, we had to vacate the right of way. Um, that process happened through the city council. Just got completed, I think, two weeks ago. Is that right, Jeff?

Yeah, this last month.

Yeah, something like that. So, that was just completed. That definitely affected a lot of the site plan issues that we had. So, we wanted to know whether that was going to happen or not. Um, I had a feeling that it was going to take that long. That's why I applied for this extension in August. So, the again, this is a six-month extension. Um and in conjunction with this um in the last month after I had made this request uh we also had an architect approach us Stuart Emmens who's here with us today and he's located in Atoria. He's he's got some um really kind of novel and exciting new type of architecture that we might be able to employ as a part of this. So it may alter a part of our site plan. Uh but the important part is that nothing that has already been approved is going to change. Um there was an aspect I think that um um that Mr. Flory had put in there that said something about 10 additional beds and I just wanted to correct that. It's 10 additional units. Uh so just as a refresher, 21 addition 21 total residents. That's what's been approved. 14 was the number before the commission approved seven additional. It's 10 additional units. The residents are going to get shuffled around. That's why the numbers seem a little bit odd, but 10 additional units. What uh Mr. Emmens is proposing here are 10 additional units. And these are just for the SPMI or the the severe and persistent mental illness folks. They're basically they're almost like Legos. They're um like little tiny homes, I guess you could call them, but they're modular apartments. And again, he's here, knows far more about this than I do, but they would get stacked five on

the bottom, five on the top. Um, and the difference from our existing site plan is that we're not necessarily modifying the building itself, but these units would get placed right outside the building. essentially where that old cottage was that's getting torn down, the one that was sitting in the estuary and that we're going to take out and um basically rebuild the estuary. So, it's going to be off to the side of that. Do do you happen to have that um that particular site plan that was in that email? I can plug it in if needed, but

I do. Yeah. But I I think it might be prudent to deal with the existing commission conditional use and um have the commission discuss that extension of that one and then talk about um and what what Mr. Svantress is getting to is what's a minor modification compared to a major modification. Um and there's specific reasons for um maybe both of these going forward at once because of funding opportunity. So, um, the the first matter definitely is the extension and and if the commission is going to grant that. Um, and then the second matter we can discuss is the other side of this.

I have I'll just speak first. I have no um issue with extending this conditional use 6 months. Anybody else? No. Nothing? No. Roger. You have a a concern? No. Oh, okay. Yeah. Me, too. Okay. Well, there you go. We agree on the extension. All right. Good. Okay. Now, phase two. What did What kind of worms are you opening up?

Oh, there's so many worms. Um, so in conjunction with this extension, I'm hoping that we um can be able to meet this new April deadline um that's going to be a product of this current extension. The reason is, and here's a picture of what these units would look like. Um you can see they're they're pretty simple. Um they're very very narrow, but they do provide more room for each resident. Everybody essentially gets a private bathroom. Um very very tiny living area, a little kitchenet, those sorts of things. But the question really um and again if you look at the previous conditional use um permit, the the one that we just modified, as Mr. Floyd was saying, there's a difference between a minor modification and a major modification. The minor one really is with planning director approval. A major one would uh be one that would require me to come back in front of the commission and say is this okay? This one we believe is a minor because there's no uh it's just a change to the site plan. There's no change to the number of residents, the number of additional units uh or parking which again is a minimum of three. There will still be a covered bike area. This is uh again this is the possible plan that we have in motion here. Another thing that's important to note about this is this is an alternative plan. It's not that we have committed to this completely and the reason is there was a recent uh Senate bill that just went through the Oregon legislature that has committed funding to this sort of thing but not necessarily to this project. So, we don't know if we'll get funding for this particular type of building. We won't know that until probably February, March next year. So, I'm hoping that we know enough in advance that I don't have to come back to you and ask for another

extension. Um, but we're going to push on this as hard as we can. Um, so again, this is an alternative site plan and I again, I don't want to have to come back to the commission. You probably don't um want to be talking about the particulars of a site plan. It seems to me that the commission generally cares about how many residents do we have, how many units, how many parking spots do we have covered parking, that sort of a thing. All that stuff will be the same. So again, um I believe this is minor and it's in the alternative. One of the reasons that this is attractive to us is because it solves uh a major problem of relocation for the residents. We've been trying to figure out where to put these existing residents during construction and not a lot of options are panning out. We definitely tried uh I think it's called Hawkbeard Apartments, the one that's in the old red line, Hawk Eye, right?

Um did not work out. So, um this solves that problem pretty readily. The existing residents can stay in the house while that construction is happening. these units go up pretty quickly and soon as they're ready to go, they can move in. So again, we don't know if this is going to happen or not. Um, and we won't know probably until February, March of next year. If we don't get the funding, we'd like to just go back to the old plan and we'll figure out how to relocate the residents. If it does happen, um, we're going to go as fast as we possibly can. So, but in the interest of full transparency, we wanted to let the commission know that we had this idea in mind uh that Mr. Emmens is here working with us currently. So, and I'm sure that he'd be happy to answer any questions about how this design works as well.

Real quick, Commissioner Klesic, I'm trying some new stuff with our technology. Did the site plan come up on your screen? Are you able to see it? Yes, I'm seeing your whole slide deck. Um, if you put it into presenter mode, I will see it a little bit bigger and just that. So, yeah, let's try it. See what happens. There you go. So, this is the rendering of the cubed units that we showed previously. And this is the site plan that uh the applicant's discussing. Okay. Thank you. That really helps. Okay. All right. What questions do we have for Christian? I have no questions. Mr. Rose, no questions.

Mr. Mitchell, Miss Clelesac, um Jeff, can you go back to the rendering of the cube? Yeah. Um and that's by the way, not that's more than 10 units. So, this is just an example obviously. Sure. Sure. Sure. And yeah, just seeing it as an example um versus what was there, what is there now versus what we were

the the application was for. This is an entirely different project to to me. Um it would be housing the same people, but this is now a whole different project. So I don't understand the framing that this is a minor modification. the it's really about site plan. Uh site plans definitely get modified fairly frequently and they're subject to approval by uh building department, not necessarily planning. So planning is going to obviously tell me uh what uses can you make of the land, how many occupants can you have, how many total units can you have, how many parking spots, all these sort of very general questions that are going to be applicable regardless of what the site plan looks like. So, for example, the site plan that we talked about with the original conditional use permit was a modification and adding some rooms to the building. Once you go to the building department, they may say, well, code says you need to rearrange those rooms in some other fashion, which is fine. Um, basically, you can modify that site plan to fit whatever the building department is going to require from you. This again is just taking the 10 units that we're going to add inside the building and putting them outside the building. Again, the parking is going to get rearranged, but will still be there. Same with covered bike parking uh and everything else. So, it's really a it's not a modification to the use that was approved. It's only a modification to the design. And that is why um I would again I would consider it a minor modification because it's more of a building department issue than a planning issue.

Adding an extra building to the property, increasing the density on that property, maintaining the same building footprint that already exists there and adding this to it. So I would say that that still is not a minor modification.

Sure. And it's and it's up to the commission whether they want to consider it minor or or major. The difference procedurally would be whether it's something I need to uh clear through only a planning director or through the planning commission itself. So either way is is fine. But again, I just wanted to have full transparency about the way that we're thinking about possibly arranging these units. um the addition that we previously talked about that expanded the building footprint would not happen. Um that footprint would stay the way it is, but the uh the lock coverage of course couldn't be changed all either. That's that's definitely set by zoning requirements. So, we can't change that. Um it' just be that the footprint would be relocated to the side of the building and not connected to the building. Is there a is there a graphic of the the lot layout with the additional building on it

right there? Yeah. So, okay. So, if you look at that, I mean, if you were to take that box right there that says uh Micro Studios, it's kind of bottom left. Um, if you were to shove that to the right of the building, it would uh rotate it and shove it to the right of the building. It might look more like our original plan. Um, but as of now, it's rotated and pushed to the left. So, again, it's a it's definitely a reconfigured site plan. Um, same amount of units.

I'm um looking at the original site plan that you submitted back on 101 uh 24 and it is exactly that. It's like you cut and pasted it and moved it over. Right. Um, right. I'm just curious, the square footage really doesn't matter because you're within the parameters of what was decided to begin with as far as the setbacks and all that jazz, right?

Third Avenue has been vacated. Yeah, this is a a big deal. However, um I would hate to see Hate to see you have to come and do this all over again. Yeah. Um, I have no problem in referring to this as I hate to even call it a minor modification because it's not a minor modification. However, um, I personally would approve of the the design change. Everything else is still the same as far as the parking,

you know, um, the building in the back is still going to be gone. It's it is literally as if you just cut off the back and turned it. Um I'm curious though the I'm curious about how you are going to and it has nothing to do with the planning commission. How you're going to be servicing your your clients there when there's no longer connected to the building.

Uh there's there's still going to be a central office. Um, and I think that that the location of that office might change based on these additional units. I don't exactly know where. Um, I think the idea is to give these SPMI residents more autonomy. Um, rather than their own room that does not have their own bathroom or a little kitchenet, that was the old plan. Um, each one of these units does. So, and and that's more in keeping I think with their condition I should say is that it's better for them to have those those sorts of facilities. So that I mean and again on top of that it solves our relocation issue and is also an extremely efficient way to be actually building affordable housing. So, um, this is this is a brand new thing that the Oregon legislature has said, "Yeah, this could be the future of how we start building some affordable housing units, which is exciting for us." So, but again, you know, whether you you consider this a minor modification or major, that's that was a matter of caution that I wanted to bring this to the commission and just say,

you know, however you want to look at it. Um, I wanted to show everybody what we were looking at and let you decide for yourselves. Um, if this is okay. I just have one other question. You have no plans on putting a third story on that on on those units? Mhm. Your architect's shaking his head. No. Yeah. I don't think it would work. Yeah. I was just wondering. I was just wondering. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I don't think we have the approval at the baseline for that kind of thing anyway because that would be 15 units. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

Um, so every you got my two cents. I don't see a problem with just deferring this back to the uh planning office to deal with. I don't want to have to see restoration house have to come forward again. Just to clarify because I think I heard this. This isn't going to change the amount of tenants um clients that will be uh residing on the property.

Correct. The original approval a year ago was from 14 to 21 and that's going to stay the same. It was always 10 additional units. Those 10 additional units were going to be inside the building. Now they're out. Um and again, this is an alternative plan. We we may have to scrap this because the funding doesn't come through in February, March, or whenever we're hoping that it will. We may have to go back to the old one. So, um, uh, that's and that's important in the sense of, um, procedurally speaking, me saying, I I'd kind of like to have both alternatives available and approved at the same time so that we can execute on either one, and I'd have to come back in April and say, can I get an extension and another approval? Um, so that we just kind of tie it all up as as much as we can today. Chris,

was your original plan in your original plan were these clients each going to get their own individual room? They were. Yeah. So, right now we have some SPMI residents who don't have their own room and they were going to get shuffled so that they would get their own room. Um, the old plan it was their own room and that was it. There's no bathrooms or anything like that, no little kitchenets. So th this would be better for them overall.

Kathy, what do you say? Now that I've seen I've been able to zoom in on the image and I can see it better. I can place it in where it is. Um I don't have any problems with this. Thank you, Miss Dummer. I'm good with it, Mr. Rose. And Mr. Mitchell, I'm good with it. There you go. You got your work cut out for you.

Yeah. And just a point of clarification for the commission. Anytime there's a question like this that not conveniently defined and there's ambiguity, I will defer that to you to make the determination on what uh what what the interpretation is. Mhm. And um I I don't know if you were unaware or not, but um at the time that we got this, we had no new site plan. We had no new groovy drawings. So yeah, this came about pretty recently. This week things were coming together this week. So yeah. Yeah. Really very quickly. Yeah. Yeah. Anyway, yeah. Well, congratulations and fingers are crossed on the funding.

Yeah. We'll see. Cross your fingers, too, for them. Yeah, because we need that. Thank you so much. Thanks a lot. All righty. Let's see. That one's done. That one's done. Uh, that's that's done. Let's see. Comments from city staff. I have any comments? Nothing. Uh, the draft comp plan was released to the steering committee uh yesterday. It's very exciting folks.

Um the graphics are mostly in, the pictures are mostly in. Um the steering committee meeting was recorded so it is on YouTube and we are pushing forward hopefully to have the comments incorporated from the steering committee and from our technical advisory uh group. Uh and that will lead us to hopefully a November uh work session where the comp plan will be released to the public and to the planning commission to start uh having those discussions and working our way through the uh the adoption process. I think we're getting close to the finish line on this one.

It's very exciting. It's very exciting. Uh just a note here, uh the middle housing code update that was for our work session immediately following has been uh uh postponed. So you can get home sooner than later. Okay. And what kind of comments do we have from the commission, Miss Clelesac?

Um it's been busy in my world. I apologize for not being there in person. uh work has me all over the state and this is conference season. So uh I've been talking to lots of people and it was good to speak to our 3J consultant just last week and they are very excited about the the big reveal. So that's all I have to say. Wonderful. See you in Bend next week. Yeah, she'll probably be there. I will be in Bend next week. Yes. See you there. Mr. Mitchell, I don't have anything. Mr. Rose, no. Miss Summer.

Well, tonight's my last meeting and I wanted to thank you all for the opportunity to serve on the commission with you. I have learned a lot and um I have enjoyed it. Thank you. And I want to say thank you so much. Going to miss you. I I'm going to miss you. But we know where you'll be at on Tuesday night at six o'clock. So, um, and I have nothing else to say other than that that, uh, comprehensive plan, uh, presentation is pretty flipping awesome. Almost slipped there, but I didn't. It's pretty awesome. Okay. And with that,