Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

turn this on. I call this meeting of the Seaside Planning Commission to order. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algian Alrighty. This is the time and place duly advertised for the seaside. Oh, before I do that, I always forget. Mr. Flory, would you take attendance, please? Yes, Commissioner Haidider, if you're gonna attend via Zoom and want to participate, please turn on your camera and your microphone.

There we go. I am present. All right. I don't know if we're going to be able to hear him. Uh, Commissioner Mitchell here. Commissioner Craft, present. Commissioner Rose Vice Chair Cleit here. Chair Monto

here. Yay. Thank you. This is a 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 uh any corrections, deletions, or additions to the draft minutes from October 7th, 2025 hearing? None. Chair Monto. Yes, sir. Uh we have election of officers as well on the agenda. Just making sure you saw that. That's Yeah. Okay.

Right. Oh, so we probably should have done that first, huh? It's right on the right on the thing. So, before I get to clause six, thank you, Jeff. It is now time as our uh annual election of officers and happy new year to everybody. We're going to do it in two parts. First for uh chair and then for vice chair. Do I hear any nominations for planning commission chair?

Wait a second. Wait a second. Are there any other nominations? I'd like to nominate Brandon Craft for uh planning commission chair. Any other nominations? Okay, let's do a roll call vote, please. And Kevin, make sure your microphone's up. It's He's going to be out there because the system is not set up to broadcast in here. So, I don't know how that's going to work and not having time to mess with it. Sorry. Okay, we'll have to make it work. Um, roll call vote. State who your votes for. Uh, Commissioner Haidider. Uh, Commissioner Craft.

I heard Craft. Commissioner Mitchell. Commissioner. Commissioner Rose.

Me? Yeah. Commissioner Clelesic. Commissioner Montero. Chair Montero. Commissioner Craft. Commissioner Craft. Chair Montero. Oh, God's sakes. I can't vote for myself. No, we have a tie. Would anybody like to uh change their vote at this time? That seems a little self- serving. That was very All right. Myself. Well, there you go. Congratulations,

Commissioner Craft. You are now. Congratulations. Thanks. So, it is up to you to call for the vice chair. Um, roll. It's not on there, but we need to vote for the vice chair. Okay. Um, nominations and nominations for the vice chair.

I'll nominate um, Commissioner Roger Mitchell. Any other nominations? Any other nominations? Nope. Okay. Roll call vote. Commissioner Haidider. I

Commissioner Hider, who was your vote for uh Monttero or Mitchell? Commissioner Mitchell? Mitchell. Was it Mitchell? Okay. Uh, Commissioner Craft. Um, Commissioner Mitchell. Mitchell. Commissioner Rose. Mitchell. Vice Chair Cleles, Commissioner Montto, Commissioner Monttero, Mr. Mitchell. There you go. That's were there. So, okay. Okay. Great. Okay. Congratulations, Mr. Congratulations. There you go, big guys. Thanks.

Okay, that's election of officers. I will now stumble through this with all the rest of you. Where you at? You are going to I already did that. I already did the minutes. Nobody say anything. Yes, ma'am. Oh, we right. We still need to So, yes. Number four. Um, no. Number five. So, any corrections or deletions? Correct. Yes. Are there any corrections, deletions, or additions to the minutes for 107205? Hearing none, the minutes are adopted as written.

It point session minutes. Yes, the work session minutes are complete. The draft is uploaded to the website. I need to get it to the chair to sign. Okay. Thank you. 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 conflict of interest? The last item that was yesterday at the bottom. Which item are you just

Oh, the you're you're you're talking about the ordinance administration. So, not the actual public hearing items. Okay. Okay. I have an exparte contact uh for the um for the commercial site on um on Highway 101. Uh did not dis we made clear that I was on the planning commission. We did not discuss the site directly, but we did have conversations around it. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Hyde. Haidider Haidider, sorry. Nothing to report.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. The following public hearing requirements apply to the items on our agenda. The applicable criteria for hearing items are listed in the staff reports prepared for this hearing. Testimony and evidence shall be directed towards 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 the 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 time comes to hear from the members of the public attending electronically, there is a feature in the attendee view that allows you to electronically raise your hand by clicking on the control panel button 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 comments, administrative Oh, no. Mr. Jeff Flory. Planning Director Jeff Flory will monitor uh this area and let us know when citizens that quote virtually raise their hands are ready to make comments via Zoom or by phone. Background noise must be kept to a minimum while testifying or your testimony time will be ended early. Prior to testifying, please state your name, your full name, your address for the record, and please limit your comments to 3 minutes. Public hearing items. We have public hearing item 769-24-00000074-Png.

Mr. Director,

thank you, Chair Craft. Um, before we get into uh the staff report, I just want to remind the commission to please talk into your microphones as much as possible uh so it's picking you up and recording and broadcasting out to the world. Um, and I think we may John's able to help me solve this problem. So, we should hopefully hear Commissioner Haidider in our room and not have to strain as much. Uh, the first item uh is a uh retroactive modification to a conditional use approval for Captain Kid Amusement Park located at 2735 South Roosevelt. Uh, it's the property south of town. Um, several acres uh in total, but the park encompasses is about 3.1 acres. Um the history of the park uh was it was opened in the late 80s early 90s and uh purchased by the the current applicants um in around 2008. Uh in 2009 Mr. Wrath appeared in front of the planning commission and proposed a three-phase uh major renovation of the property uh that included moving the go-kart track and several other attractions. Um, and generally just making the property better, putting in a compliant parking lot, landscape buffer, fencing, um, taking kind of a more of a dilapidated property and turning it into to something that that is a a better suited feature for the end of town. Um, as you can see in the staff report, you can see what the park looked like in 2018. The uh the go-kart track was more central uh to the southern end. It's been moved uh currently to the north side. Um a few additional attractions have been uh replaced or added. Um a few buildings have been constructed more uh like grandstands type of things. Um ticket booths, that kind of stuff. Uh with a parking lot that's uh fully

compliant and striped to cover the parking necessity for the park. Um the applicants have uh enlisted the help of ODOT had discussions with them regarding their traffic analysis. Um have provided those statistics and that information to the commission. Um staff has prepared a a report that highlights the uh criteria uh proposed findings to be adopted by the commission or modified should they choose. um and listed as two specific conditions uh for approval. Condition one is the standard uh modification uh condition that allows minor modifications to be handled at a staff level. And condition two is uh to have the applicant submit a revised parking plan that provides for an off- streetet loading area, solid waste collection and storage, bicycle parking. Um, this use is not called out in our uh TSP uh for the required bic the bicycle parking requirements. Um, so it's charged to the planning commission to determine how many long-term and short-term bicycle parking spaces are needed for for this proposal. Again, long-term is covered and secured bicycle parking and short-term is your standard bicycle rack. Um the applicant has supplied a fairly lengthy application with uh the historical u issues with this park and uh the kind of the history behind how they came to the point we're at now. Um I can certainly answer any uh questions the commission might have. Applicants are both in the audience tonight. They can come up and and talk as well.

All right. Does the commission have any questions for Director Flory? Okay. Hearing none, uh, would the applicants like to please step forward? And if you could pull the mics up to you. Uh, I believe one of them, the light works, the other one does not, but they should both be on if that still stands. Yes. Yes. Right. If you could state your name and your address and let us know. My name is Tammy Wrath, 2735 South Roosevelt Drive, Seaside. Bruce Wrath. Same address. Okay. Tell us about your project.

Well, just started out as a simple remodel and um well out there, you know, we went through this floodway and all this and spent $100,000 figuring out it wasn't a floodway and uh and did the no rises and the las and on and on and on and uh here we are. We got it remodeled a little bit and I'm tired and I'm quitting. I just want to get this paperwork done so we can uh move on. Okay.

I want to say we're not here to uh say that we didn't have any fault in any of this. Um how it all played out as you can see from if you've read the packet. Um me and Bruce got married in 2019. His late wife passed in 2015. Um the park was uh they moved down here. We were all friends. they moved down here to start the park. Um, in his defense, he didn't just move forward and just do a bunch of stuff just to I mean, we're on Highway 101. We had cement trucks coming in and out of there. Um, there's been other things done. It doesn't we don't need to go into all the details unless you want them. Um, he's brought a house in that was never even before the planning commission. It's just a lot of mistakes were made by us and a lot of mistakes were made by the city and um, that was before Jeff. So, um, Jeff picked up the file and saw it and was like, "What happened?" And here we are. We've worked on this since 2021. We're ready to move forward. Whatever is going to happen is going to happen. Um, the park has been developed as far as we're going to develop it and we're going to sell it.

Okay. Thank you. All right. Uh, you guys can remain seated. Is there anybody here wants to who like to speak in support in favor in favor of this project? We don't have anybody else on the Zoom. I believe the other two participants uh Ben Shed and Mark Gyos are part of the next project. Okay. Are there any is there anybody here that would like to speak in opposition? Okay. hearing none. Turn it over to council to the commission.

I did not do that on purpose. Um I have a question for you and I'm sorry to let me just for say I'm sorry to see you guys moving off to Palm Beach or wherever. That's a shame. We're going to go do farming in Eastern Oregon. That's what I've wanted to do for a while. So, um what is uh your business permit classified as? I mean, are business permits classified? You know, hotel, restaurant, entertainment, business licensing. Yeah, business licensing. I'm just curious. We're we're not in the city limits, so we don't have a city permit, but we have um you know, state license and it's an amusement,

right? You're right. Right up there. Okay. That was one thing. Um, however, they are within our urban growth boundary. Yeah, that's what I thought. Yeah.

Okay. And icicle parking. We know about that. We know about that. Um, I will move on and uh I'll ask something later on, I'm sure, when I find it. So, please, anybody else? condition one. Have um have there been any code issues found in in the park as far as what code? Uh well, I'm looking under M recommended conditions. So,

uh condition one was to see if there's any any conflicts or anything that doesn't adhere to the code. Has anything been found? This this hearing right here is resolving those conflicts. Okay. Um the original plan was to phase this with planning commission review at each step along the way.

Those reviews did not happen and we're here with some semblance of what the original plan was. I don't I don't believe it's quite exact what the original plan was, but it's still well within the parameters of what could be done and what would be permitted. Um, so with this hearing, we're we're essentially providing a a new conditional use for a park uh amusement park to operate on this site. Um, and with this, it'll bring it into compliance with all of our ordinances as far as parking requirements, bicycle parking, TSP, all of that wrapped into one. um along with stuff that's not handled at a commission level like uh flood plane development. They've they've satisfied those items as well.

Okay. Thank you. I don't have anything else. I have one other question. Um Jeff, uh does does the situation just because I want to put it on record. Does the situation uh in any way put the city at risk at this time? I I can't comment on that. I don't know what risk we would have for not having

anybody's anybody's able to appeal the decision of the planning commission as we've seen before and follow the normal appeal appeal process. Um that appeal would have to be a base based upon are we following our code or not and this um was operating lawfully as an amusement park. It just went beyond the phases of what was originally permitted. This right here wraps that all into one package and gets uh the wraths into a situation where the the property no longer has zoning non-compliance issues. It'll be compliant. Great. Thank you,

Commissioner Kles. um questions that have been stated or asked in

Oh, sorry. It's the light. No, you're right. Sorry. Um, so my biggest question remaining that hasn't been answered already via the information that's been provided and the questions that have been asked is um, you stated that this is a commercial property and that it is a commercial license and it being used for amusement park, but it has also been stated that there is a a house there. So it is al there's also a residence there. So, does zoning allow for there to be a residence and therefore to be there to be residential dwellings and the residential compliance and zoning that goes along with that? We have documentation that it was lawfully permitted as a watchman's quarters for the amusement park.

I see those two different things. So, that's why I asked the question. Yep. And that's that was a separate process done uh when was that done? 2018 20 It was No, it was 20 I think. Um 2016

uh that was done in uh 2016 with uh Kevin Couples. Uh he called it a watchman shack. He looked it up in the municipal code. I don't know Jeff you might know the numbers but it's in the code that you can have a watchman shack. And uh the other thing I permitted through the city was a uh well we use as as an office and it's an electrical building. When I bought the park it was like uh you know sparky wired it. So we have completely redone the whole park. It's all underground now. And that was all

all brand new. That was all permitted and yeah, everything was that was in the this just got jumped ahead.

If I can explain this, there was three phases and after Patty passed, Bruce did nothing. Actually, as soon as it got approved, they did nothing. Patty got sick. So 2000, was it nine? And then they were planning on starting right away. Nothing nothing happened really except general clean up. I don't know. Um and when um we got together, he felt alive again and we both did. We both lost our spouses and we just started working. Um we didn't know he didn't realize that it was supposed to be done in phases. He we had got talked to Kevin many times, went to we bought another conditional use permit prior to the one we just bought. We've had three. Um it just got all messed up like you know the house being brought in that Kevin knew about that. it was if it was supposed to be part of something. I mean, he could have told Bruce, "Hey, nothing." He was just moving along just pretty I mean, I guess you could say ignorantly now, but um it just got pretty um messed up. It was when I discovered a box cuz we were both confused when Kevin finally realized you built the track the day we were going to buy our or pick up our brand new go-karts. You what what did you do? And it's like, where have you been? And this has been going on. He didn't realize. I mean, the cement trucks were coming in and out of there. It wasn't something we were trying to hide at all. I mean, these I remember when we first got together, there was a porch that he built and was permitted by the city. So, it's Anyway, it just got messed up. He thought that the condition used permit was sent to the county. The county doesn't have it. It's just a mess. That's all I can say. I found a bunch of stuff in the box and I finally Jeff got the file. I've still been confused on it. it. It's after several meetings, we finally have figured it all out. Um, meanwhile, we've gotten he had got Aloma prior to this. We've the floodway stuff came up. Our our engineer found a

mistakes in the mapping, but we've done massive engineering work on all of our properties and that's I guess, you know, a little bitterness there because it's mapped wrong, but that is what it is and here we are. So, um, now we just want it um to move forward. what a wedding um and move on with our life. It's been a lot of stress and and I'm I understand all of those things. My concern is that there's a difference between a watchman's shack and a house. And I don't want us to have another open thing laying out there that could cause issues. So, is there anything that we need to do to allow a residence on the property that is not a watchman's shack? That to me is an entirely different animal and purpose than what seems to be there now.

I'd have to go back and and find that uh approval and my memory is correct. It was approved as a permanent watch and it was it was permitted and installed as a double wide as a permanent residence which is different than what a watchman shack would be right which I guess it would be left up to interpretation being a temporary. You remember being temporary approved I'd have to go back and find you did nothing wrong on that. It was not approved. It was that's why I did pick a mobile home. Someday that property will be worth a lot if somebody wants to build a motel or whatever they're building.

Uh it can be moved off, destroyed. It's not that it's not a home. It's just just a place to stay. Keep an eye on these thieves that are walking up and down the highway every day. And I understand the reason why you need somebody being there. I'm just want to make sure that we as a city are not causing more problems by skipping this as a I would agree with that because we're going to be selling and I don't want conflict.

Let's fix things. Let's fix all of it and make sure that we're allowing for a permanent residence there rather than a watchman shack which to me is an employee in shifts and not necessarily somebody actually living there. They would have a home someplace else. That's open to interpretation, but allowing a permanent residence to be as part of this conditional use, I think, under these conditions would be important. Yeah. You you would have to change your building code because that that's the permanent structure and permanent residence are different things. Yeah.

That's in your code, but any anyhow that that's why it it is a temporary thing. It's uh it's C3 property. Mhm. And that's why there's no house built there. It's just a trailer house. You tore down a house, though. I did tear down a house that was there. Yeah. So, if it is indeed permitted as a temporary, then we don't actually h then we don't have an issue. Correct. Yeah. There was a house there. So, that's why I'm wondering too. He tore down a house documents. So, the house was right. Okay. Sorry. What was that? Director Flory, I need to dig up the documents. So, we all are operating off of the correct information.

Okay. And unfortunately, I don't think they're digital, so I don't have access to them here. They're probably over in a drawer at my office somewhere. Okay. So, I I guess uh Commissioner Klesix's to Commissioner Cleles's point, the options for the commission would be to um approve this tonight without that information, set it over till the next meeting, uh give staff an opportunity to dig up that information and look at review criteria or anything else that could potentially be caused by that issue and and address it at the next meeting. I mean, it's it's up to the commission on what the commission wants to do. Okay. Thank you,

Mr. Haidider. Do you have anything to add?

Not able to hear you, sir. Okay. Sorry, audio issues. All right. Anything else? I mean, I just think that that would be an important thing to clear up because especially since you stated you want to sell this. I would hate to have you go through all of this. Well, it's going on the market regardless, right? Go and sell it. Somebody ask about whether they can live there and then turn out that it's not permitted as a as a residence. Sure. That would need to be resolved, of course. Okay. You do it.

All right. Uh, Commissioner Rose, no. No comments.

No comments. Okay. Um, in the finding, planning commission will need to determine if the bicycle parking for the proposed use falls in an existing commercial recreation use or if it falls under other categories. We'll need to determine the number of bicycle parking spaces necessary for the proposed use. Um, looking under the bicycle parking analysis that was provided under commercial outdoor recreation, if I'm reading this correctly, it's two or one per 10 uh auto spaces. So, Mr. Flory, we would need to to determine tonight whether we want you have I believe it was 50 spaces. Correct.

Mhm. Whether it's five spaces or 10. Correct. One one per 10 auto spaces. So that would be five or Yeah. And the way this is written, it's two as a minimum or one per 10 auto spaces um depending on how many vehicle parking spaces are in the lot. Okay. So air on the side of of two two would be the the the minimum allowed. If there's more than 10 parking spaces essentially, then you follow one per 10 auto spaces. Oh, okay. So since there's 50, we do one per per 10. So five is is is five.

Thank you. It just says two comma or one per. So that was Thank you for clarifying that. So only five. Uh and I also read that there is a um you've not there's not uh applicants have not provided a location for bicycle parking. However, there is sufficient space near the entrance to meet the bike parking requirements. My question is how many how many bikes individuals with bikes do you guys get that come up out of curiosity? Not a lot of people come down 101 on their bikes, right? I wouldn't I mean but occasionally I mean we do from Avenue U one time. Okay. We have them park in the park so their bikes don't get stolen.

Yeah. And I know where and I know the space because I you know years past I've been there. It's fantastic little uh park. Uh so I that's I was curious about that. So that would be five space or bike. Yeah, I I think that uh honestly, not to try to sway you, but I don't remember one bike last summer.

Okay, thank you. Um Mr. Flory, on number uh article six, conditional use, I just had a clarification. Number six, limiting this number, size, location, lighting of signs. that says finding signage is required to meet city's sign code. Does it not meet the code or is was that just a statement? That's just a a a generic statement that any signage that they propose will be required to meet the city's sign ordinance. I have not done an analysis on their current signage to determine whether it meets it or not.

Thank you. Um and then I'm looking at the the list of items in each phase. Um, you guys don't have a log flume, right? Is there a log flume right there? No. Okay. Um, of the items that you provided on this list, you're not planning on obviously doing any more than what's you know what the commission's required. Okay. And then um Okay. I don't want to go through each. Which list are you looking at? The past one or kind of the background. It gave us a list of each phase and what you're planning to do in each phase. That's the old There's not probably a lot of those rides are not even there.

Yeah. Aircraft that was that was put in the report to show the history of the um how we got to today. Got it. What they're proposing is on their site plan that they've provided. I put it up on the Yeah, that's what there that's that's the park as it currently stands and that's what they're pro proposing to maintain it as. Okay. Okay. So then is there any other additional comment from the commission? I have one more question. Go ahead. Um can you tell me what uh the high life adventure the climbing thing is classified as as far as a business? I can't. No,

but that's also within the city limits. I I don't know. It's tough to tell in that area because some properties are in the city, some are out. They're all within the UGB. Got it. Just didn't know was just for reference like similar type business what it how its parking was classified.

Yeah, that I I don't have that information. Okay, give me just a second. It was a long application. Lots of information. Um Jeff was patient. The first one I submitted.

All right. Um All right. So, under staff recommendations, there was only one clarif clarifications and then um uh Commissioner, how would you like to proceed? Um Kathy, Commissioner Klesic, with your um concern about the dwelling. Um if we hear if we were to hear a motion tonight to move forward with this, would that that would be something that you would want um the staff to clear up prior to

Well, yeah. Yeah. I mean, if we're going to if we're going to issue them, you know, a conditional permit that covers and and forgives all previous things, I'd like to make sure that we are not setting basically a trap for them that says you're all covered for this, but now you've said you have a house there, so oopsie, I don't want to do that. I want to make sure that we're we're covering all of it so that if we're going to give them a conditional permit that is retroactive and is going to allow what has happened so far that we're covering them and ourselves as far as being thorough and complete is concerned. Sure. And I can absolutely appreciate that sentiment. Um did we address everything that needed to be done? Awesome.

Yeah. And if you if the commission would like to hold off on uh rendering a decision until that information is provided, they can certainly um set this over uh until that next meeting. Okay. Um is that the direction the commission wants to go? Do I hear? I'll make

I'll make a motion to uh hold over. What number are you? 769-24-00000047-P plg Captain Kit Amusement Park until further information is forthcoming. Until the next meeting, please. Okay. Open. Just just for um clarification and um th this will hold the record open until the next meeting as more information will be provided and public comment can still be accepted. Understood for that. Okay. So there's a motion. Um it's open for open for discussion. Second it

second after. Okay. My first time doing this. Thank you. Um okay. I hear a second. Any other uh further discussion? Mr. Haidider, we're going to attempt. Not at this time. I I feel the same way as Commissioner Cle. Fantastic. We heard you loud and clear. Thank you. Um Okay. So, this will be uh Okay. Do I uh All those Thank you. All those in agreement say I I I oppose. I

I Okay, it's unanimous. We'll hold it over until we get clarity on that just to make sure that everybody is covered so there's no surprises. So, and when is that next meeting? Be the first Tuesday in March. I'll send you guys an email, let you know. Thank you so much. You can't find that paper. Okay. I'll I'll look and be in touch with you guys and we'll discuss it before we bring you in.

Okay. For our next item on the agenda is 769-25-0000103 PLNG um Gilbert Hospitality. And I'll now call the planning director to provide staff port.

As pointed out by chaircraft earlier to me today, um I there is a spelling error in Gilbert. It is with an e, not a u. Um so just disregard that. Uh this application is for another conditional use. Uh it's the Gilbert building Holiday and Broadway. Uh the applicant is looking to uh convert the upstairs, which um by all accounts has been just vacant space um as far back as I was able to find in history, even looking at some of the old Sanborn maps. Um into a 28 unit apartment uh development, 21 studios and seven onebedrooms. Um the applicant has also submitted a Senate Bill 1537 application for parking requirements. Um this will allow them to keep the secondary lot across the street um for the commercial uses and then have parking on the interior on the same lot as the dwellings uh for the apartments. And again, Senate Bill 1537 allows for a complete uh land use adjustment for any parking requirements for net new housing, which this would be net new housing. Um staff has provided a little bit of history on the building uh in the staff report along with the uh um conditional use uh ordinance requirements and and the the uh proposed findings should the commission decide to adopt them or modify them. as well as uh two conditions of approval with the first being again the minor modifications uh can be approved at a staff level and uh condition two which will require a uh a parking lot design, outdoor lighting plan and a storm drainage plan to be reviewed by uh city staff um to ensure it's compliant with ordinances uh

governing those items and sure storm water is appropriately directed um from the site to a uh a approved storm system. Um the applicant has a few people here including the projects engineer as well as some folks that are via Zoom and I can turn it over to the commission and answer any questions you may have.

Great. Thank you. Um I I should have declared this earlier. I don't have a conflict of interest. I do want to state that um my hotel the Holiday and Express is next door adjacent to it there. I don't feel there's any conflicts at all. I just I forgot to state that when the we called for it earlier. So, um Okay.

All right. Would anybody here like to step forward and discuss this project? Do you guys need these gentlemen to speak as well? Probably not. Okay. Mark me 89643 Ocean Drive Warrington Oregon and this is Dan Lund 91683 loose on Clark Road.

So as Jeff said we're looking at converting the upstairs to 28 units. It's been previously an office with a restroom at the corner of Broadway and Holiday and the rest of it has been vacant and stuff full of stuff. I mean, if you saw it the first time I went up there, you would have been going, "What is all this?" It literally took like three months to haul everything out from up there. So, it was piled full of everything from every tenant that had been in that building forever. So, we're looking at doing that. The first floor will remain basically the same except for we'll be adding one more entrance to the parking lot side to come in with a central elevator to get up to the upstairs. There's two stairways right now. One off Broadway, one off Holiday. Those two will remain to be able to get to the upstairs. The parking lot right now it's pretty bad, I would call it. So, we're going to go in, clean up some of the out buildings that have been added over the years, get all that cleaned up. The power back in there is a disaster. The power company, when you built the hotel, they basically put a transformer in and refed the one power pole and said, "We don't want to touch it until someday later." And we've met with the power company. And so, now we have a good idea what they want. So, we're going to be redoing all the power meters as far as part of the project because it's if you look at all the wires in there, it's a mess. The garbage, we're going to have a couple of different garbage areas. Right now, they just have individual cans scattered around and one dumpster that kind of moves around. And so, we'll have actual garbage collection areas. the let's see bike parking. We're

proposing just inside the back door of putting in a little room with six place for six bicycles in there so that tenants don't have to take them upstairs. They can bring them in, secure them, and hopefully not get them lost. That's also our elevators going in that room. And then I believe we're going to put uh try to try to get our u mailboxes in there, right? be the same place inside as long as the post office lets us. Yeah.

And so that will bring an entrance off the back. Right now, a bunch of the tenants have entrances off the back and the front. And then with the two stairways going upstairs, they'll have access out the front and the back of the building. The storm water, there's already catch basins there. We're going to relocate a couple of them, but there's already a storm sewer system in there that we're going to reuse. And we've got to regrade that parking lot so that it actually drains instead of what it does now. It kind of runs to the building on the west. Yeah.

Doesn't quite run in the doors, but that's where most of the storm water runs to for many years. And other than that, the downstairs will stay pretty much the same. Hopefully they get some more tenants in the downstairs. And then there'll be some painting on the outside and upstairs. Part of the windows were replaced with vinyl windows years ago and part of them are still original wood windows that'll have to be replaced. So that will be done. And then put a new roof on that. Yeah. And a new roof first. That's pretty bad. It's It leaks a lot. Yeah.

And then upstairs right now there is a ton of little rooms that were framed, but they were never finished. and they were supposed to be sleeping rooms with some common restroom building spots. And it's all framed, but you know it that just doesn't work for apartments the way it was set up. So, we're going to be reframing the whole upstairs. And other than that, that's what we're trying to do is make some housing downtown. Mr. Lond have anything to add? Uh, no. That sums it up pretty well.

All right. Thank you. Is there anybody here that would like to speak in favor of this project on Zoom? Anybody? Uh, nobody's raising their hands. Okay. Is there anybody here that would be opposed like to speak in opposition of this project? All right. Hearing none, I'll open it up for discussion to the commission. Mr. Mitchell.

Um, I think it's a it's a great project and and you know, we could all use the the new net housing. Uh, and you spoke about some of the issues with the building like the electric and and it sounds as if the the the basement floods quite a bit as well. It does when the sump pumps quit. Yeah. So, we have to redo those. Yeah. So, uh, and it's it's not sprinkled yet, is it? No, we'll be sprinkling the apartment area, but we won't be sprinkling the rest of the building as far as fire sprinklers. Okay. That's the way the building code is set up. And the has the fire marshall been through or is this are we still in the planning phases?

They went through probably a year ago, but we've submitted plans to the building department stuff with a sprinkler plan included with it. So, I don't know if they've looked at that yet, but there is a sprinkler plan in there for them to look at. The the actual construction plans are on hold until there's a planning approval uh to go with them. Okay. Yeah, that's all I have. Thanks. Okay. Uh, Commissioner Montto. Well, hello. Hello, Mr. Me. Nobody knows that building better than you by now. Yeah. Um, I just want to confirm there are no plans above the rooftop.

Nope. Leave the roof alone. Okay. Put a new roof on, but leaving it as as is. That's great. Maintaining the integrity of the the uh heritage. Um, also I know that there is sleeping quarters and bathroom and kitchen on the main floor probably around where the massage uh business is. There will not, and I want to hear it, there will not be any residential apartments on that lower floor. Correct. There. No, there will not be. Those people will be evicted out as soon as they close on the building. I don't know if we're aware of that. We haven't. Yeah, that's that little shed area. Oh, yeah. Will and Avery. That's Yeah. Yeah.

Okay. I'll leave it alone. Um also, uh let's see. Yes, the lighting plan is is required for the parking lot area. Um is as well as the lighting plan will be required for the off-site parking. Off-site parking across the street. So, they're putting in a Senate Bill 1537 application. They have put one in to not utilize that parking as part of the oh the housing development. It'll it'll maintain They're, as far as I know, they intend to maintain that as a parking lot, but it won't be attached to the parking. Oh, so it's not on the improvement schedule, just restriping stripes back where they used to be.

Okay. And uh the north entrance that's on holiday that's adjacent to the holiday, is that entrance an easement? How does that work? I've, you know, as many times as I've seen you here, I've never asked that question. It's an easement for ingress, egress, and utilities. And it also allows people to go clear back to the river to go down the riverwalk as far as going through there. But it's for ingress, egress, and utilities. And it's from years and years ago. So, I've read through the paperwork on it, and I don't quite know the history, but I it's there and it's in effect. So that's what we'll be using as far as entrance to the back parking lot.

Okay. And with that being said, as stewards of that um area, you will be respon or taking on the responsibility for repairing those gigantic potholes and maintaining the surface. We're going to be redoing part of the sewer line which is causing some of the potholes. So fixing the potholes and redoing that whole thing. So that's a part of the plan is to maintain that that easement if you will maintain it and and make it better than it is.

Wonderful. That's always nice to hear. Um and I see that you've got um I I do like the second floor layout with both uh handicap um apartments, one on either side of the elevator. You've got entrance there. And I think I found the new entry in the back parking lot. You've got your covered parking. And what were you going to say? I heard your intake of breath. Nothing. Okay. And I think those are the only thing I were concerned with. So I will defer.

Okay. Commissioner Rose, I have no questions. Commissioner Cleles. Uh, just one question. Is the building on the historic register or heritage building? Not as far as I know. It was never put there. Okay. But that would mainly affect the outside which were not changing. So, okay. With the exception, let me ask you because you just mentioned it. So, are the wind wood windows on the second floor going or are the vinyl windows going? Which are being replaced? The vinyl windows will stay because of the state energy codes and then the wood ones will be replaced with new vinyl ones the rest of them. Okay. So that would have been in violation of any historic

Yeah. It doesn't mean that it was it is I'm just saying it's it's loved historically around town but not on the register. Okay. Just Yep. Everything else has been asked. Thank you. Um along those lines, getting this far in the process, everybody involved would know by now if it was on the historical registry. Correct. Yeah, we we don't have I think the only building that potentially may be on the historic register is the old hospital building. Yeah.

U in Seaside. We do have an inventory of historical resources. I believe it was from the 80s that does does inventory historical buildings and houses and places around Seaside, but that's not part of the National Historic Registry that has enforcable covenants uh that would dictate what remodel or what work or equipment or materials are allowed to be used.

Great. Excellent. Um, I actually, as I stated earlier, I have the hotel right next door. Um, I had no questions. I think I think it's a fantastic project. I would like to pose one suggestion that is not uh any sort of requirement or anything. And notice where you put your dumpster really close to the parking spots that are right there. If I'm looking at this correctly, um, that may become problematic. Just something to think about when you open up the doors for your trash corral, right? Hitting other vehicles and what you said earlier about the runaway garbage can. Yes, I have I have personally dragged that that dumpster over sometimes. So, yes.

Um, so that was the honestly those only thing that I I thought about considering. I saw the photos uh of the interior. It just, you know, net income or the net housing fantastic. I think it's it's it's a great project if you guys can can make it happen. Um, and so I have no other questions.

Uh, Mr. Haidider, I apologize I went out of order. It's all right. Yeah, I think it's a great project as well. I'm happy to see some uh more residential housing going in using up some of the uh the space that's in those downtown buildings that uh this has been empty for a while and improving the roads. Yeah, this is this is a good good project. Thank you. I think it'll also I I think it would also um maybe help improve the the business tenant situation, too. So, just just a side note, what we're hoping. All right. Okay. If there's nothing else, do I hear a motion from the commission?

Well, push a darn button. Well, I move to uh approve 769-25-0000103-plg uh uh as u written along with the understanding of the various plans that still need to be submitted and approved by uh Mr. Flory. All right, I have a motion. Do I have a second? That both is there two conditions? Well, the plan. Okay. All right. Uh, Commissioner Rose seconds. Any further discussion? Okay. Uh, all in favor say I. I. Opposed. I. I.

All right. You see unanimous. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Me. That's marvelous. Up another building. Give me that. Oh, yes. Well, actually, you got Well, go ahead. there. All right. Yeah. Yeah. You guys don't have to stay. I promise this will be cleaner next time.

Oh, you took it. Okay. Uh now that we are done with the public hearing items, uh moving on to ordinance administration, Mr. Flory.

Yeah, thank you uh Chaircraft. Um I submitted a letter uh was it yesterday that was submitted to our office uh requesting a u interpretation on a minor minor modification to a an existing conditional use permit approved by the planning commission. This is a uh uh a storage unit facility on the north end of town on Roosevelt. Uh partially under construction right now. Um the second building that was going to be constructed was proposed to be about a 20,000 square foot twotory uh building. The applicants asking uh if this would be considered a minor modification to um not build the 20,000 square foot building at two stories, but instead maintain a similar footprint and drop that to a single story at 9,000 approximately 9,900 ft, which would uh drop the number of units from about 169 down to 87. Um the uh the applicant has provided a letter to the commission um discussing some of the changes to the the site that would benefit from a smaller footprint such as setbacks off of neighboring properties and um the need for as many parking spaces that was originally going to be provided. Um, this is brought under ad ordinance administration because I'm asking the commission's uh opinion on whether this would be considered a minor modification or the uh the other um option would be for the applicant to submit a new conditional use modification application which would then come before the commission in a public hearing uh as a land use uh decision. Um the use is not changing. The use is still the same. It's just modifying the size of the

development. Um, so on an ordin on this type of thing, we do we need a motion to accept or to to make that decision or is this open for discussion? And

it's it's open for discussion as this is an interpretation for the planning commission as minor modification is not clearly defined as to what is minor. Um there are situations when we do the land use review and then move into the building permit review where certain things need to be adjusted and typically they are moving buildings within a few inches or a few feet of the original placement but not materially changing the size of the building. um moving uh parking spaces from where they originally proposed to other locations nearby or within the same vicinity without changing the number or size of parking spaces. Those are things that I would typically comp consider as minor. Um something like this I I don't know. Uh that's why I've brought it under ordinance administration for the commission to discuss and make a determination and uh whatever outcome is uh the path that the uh the applicant will take. If the commission considers this a minor modification, the applicant will just submit new building plans to construct this building instead of the two-story building that was originally proposed to the commission.

Okay. Thank you, commission. Open for discussion.

As this is a reduction and not an increase by any means. If it were an increase, obviously we wouldn't be having this conversation. Um but um let's say we turn it over to you and that's what they're going to do. It's they've agreed to um you know take their modifications as as where they're going to go. Uh they have no they they can't come back and say, "Oh, no. I want to go back to the second story and do it all over again." Or is this once it's said it's done? Once this is said, I will I will render this into writing so it goes in the file and uh and have the reviewed by the chair to ensure that the planning commission this is the intention behind this discussion. Okay.

And at that point that's what they will construct and any modification that would require an actual modification to a conditional use to come back to the planning commission and okay and that answer my question. Thank you. So although I tend to agree with Commissioner, although I tend to agree with Comm Commissioner Montero, um to me this is kind of an objective look at this and objectively this is more than half different on all of these things. And to me, more than half on anything makes it not minor.

And so to me, this makes this not a minor modification. Um, if we're looking at this objectively and as it's been presented um, without any other information other than this, they're changing more than half of the plans that they submitted. To me, this isn't minor. Mr. Rose, well, I'm supposed to recuse myself. Oh, that's correct. I'm sorry, Commissioner Mitchell.

Yes. So, uh I mean it's a it's a less intensive use and uh I mean if we if we stick to the original plan we're we're pretty much making them build out the entire first development right where it would be a two-story development otherwise we wouldn't sign off on it. they they would have to build to the original plan or come into the commission as a modification to a conditional use permit which would then go back through public hearing process and uh public notice and and then a formal vote and decision by the commission.

Yeah. To me this seems if you're if you're reducing the size of the development and you're making it a less intensive use that that does not seem to me to warrant coming back in front of the planning commission. Thank you, Mr. Haidider. I fully agree uh for reducing scope and I I don't see a need to come back reapply and and plead a case here.

Thank you. Um under the on in the letter the setback enhancement we have reduced the building footprint by approx approximately 3 ft to provide additional setback from the neighboring properties. So making that set setback um more parking modifications. we removed covered pull-in area for drop off and have um instead created additional parking spaces to better accommodate customers. So, if they're adding more parking spaces than before with less units, um I like that. Um I think councelor Monttero may have just read my notes cuz earlier I wrote this is this is a project this project is a reduction. I do consider it minor and I'm fine for staff approval. Do we need to take a roll call vote on this?

I don't think you need to do a roll call vote, but a vote would be appropriate since there is um difference of opinion. Okay. So, there's consensus. Your your consensus with this? I mean, I disagree, but that doesn't mean that I have more say than any of the other voices. And so, um objectively, I I in principle, I also think that it's a reduction. It's there's no harms done. However, objectively, if we're looking at this versus other and we're setting a precedent, more than half of this is change it changed. And so for therefore, I think that this is not a minor change. But I'm not oppo I'm not going to oppose what the rest of the council says because of that.

It's not necessarily a minor change. The whole purpose is whether or not this be decided upon. Oh, thank you. uh whether the decision can be decided upon at staff level or if it needs to come before the commission again, right? Which is the definition of that is minor changes can be made by staff. Things that are not minor need to come back before the commission. That's the that's the wording. That's the definition of it. Reduction or not, it's more than minor. Sure. Again, not I'm okay with everybody else's. I'm not. No problem.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you. I I fully understand what you're saying. Um there is a consensus that this is that the staff can decide this. Okay. Yeah. Um on that same topic, would it be a future should it be a future discussion to better define what is minor, major, or is that something that should just be left ambiguous? I don't think I don't think it should be left ambiguous, but I certainly think it's appropriate for staff to bring these questions to the commission for discussion.

Okay. Um, and on things like this, I'm not going to, you know, make a determination whether this is minor or major without a discussion with the commission and and advice. Um, if the commission wants to have those discussions, we're we're in the process of reworking a lot of our ordinances and codes. So, uh, if you want to put that in there, um, we can certainly have that discussion, um, and, uh, and make it as a part of an adjustment process for minor adjustments, uh, and put parameters on it and make it more, um, well defined. Anybody on the council like to have that discussion at a later date?

Sure. Okay. So, maybe on the next uh, next one maybe for March. March. Sure. Okay. Great. Okay. Comments from city city staff. Nothing more until our work session. All right. Uh comments from the commission. Mr. Mitchell. Okay. It's Monttero. Happy New Year. Happy New Year. Councelor Haidider. No comment at this time. Excellent. Will we see you in person at the next meeting? I would certainly hope so.

Okay. Councelor Cleles. Sorry, Commissioner Klesic. Director, Commissioner, that's all. Uh, nothing at this time. Okay, Commissioner Rose. All right. Um, I just want to say thank you for this surprise vote of confidence in my ability to read from a script and to lead the the commission for this next year in the chair position. And welcome, Mr. Mitchell. Yeah, thank you so much, Councelor Montero. Thank you. Do I need to watch my back?

Great. Um, okay. If there is nothing else, we are adjourned. I know.

Is that why you're here for the good time? I was here for the last couple. Do you want us to sign? All right. Um, I wanted to update the uh, commission on where we're at with our comprehensive plan and have a discussion around a couple of items that were brought up based on your guys's feedback um, from the survey that was sent out. Uh, this is just a QR code that takes you to our comp plan. If anybody uh, following along at home or in the audience would like to read it, they can uh, just scan it and go. Um, director, did we did we lose Mr. Haidider? Is he still there? Isn't he still there? Um it looks like he disappeared on us. He must have left the meeting.

Okay, got it.

Uh so, uh right now we are waiting on comments back from uh DLCD. I've been assured that they are going to start trickling in anytime now. Um, we've gotten some of the uh the more difficult um sections covered as far as the ocean shores uh stuff that's highly regulated by state law and falls in line with a lot of what the county does um that really the commission and council doesn't have a lot of um input over because we h these are a lot of items we have to put in. So, we've gotten comments back on that. We're still waiting for other factions of DLC to to send us those and and they're starting to roll in. In fact, I think we got some today from uh one of the se sections. So, we made the decision to not push forward the public hearing until we've incorporated those comments. Um it's important for us to be compliant with state law before we get too far into the process. We want to make sure all of of those requirements are met before we we get into the actual adoption process. We also wanted to make sure incorporate the commission's comments in as well where we can. So, there were a few items I pulled out um and just quote from the actual comment that was supplied by one of the commissioners. Um, and this was sent to me. I have no idea who wrote which comments because there's no names attached to them. Um, but

Director Flory, are we going to get a copy of all of those comments that have been submitted? Um, that should all be public. Are they accessible? Yeah, that's I can I can make that happen. Yeah, that' be great. Sure. Yep.

So, this says uh policy 1.5. I think evaluating development of projects adjacent to open space is a great idea. For example, building height and setback or landscaping review, which would be separate from other zones restrictions. For example, you can have a commercial business in a residential zone as long as it's along Highway 101. Policy 1.5 says all proposed development adjacent to designated open space shall be evaluated for the potential impact on the open space. So, this comment was from a commissioner and what I I guess what would we want to add to strengthen policy 1.5 if the commission thinks that we should uh look at height restrictions next to open space um or setbacks or landscape review next to open space. And then to piggyback on that, um, do we want to look at allowing highway fronting properties regardless of zoning have a commercial use? Um, this is not dissimilar to what we already have in our codes as a long holiday if it's adjacent to commercial even though it's in a residential zone can be office space. Um, the R3 zone allows for uh mini mart convenience store type commercial applications. So this isn't something stepping way outside the lines here as we already allow some of this to uh to take place. So is there is there any discussion the commission wants to have on strengthening this policy to include uh some of the things in the comment?

Would this be along any thoroughfare or just Highway 101 be a decision for the commission to recommend to the council? I feel like this needs a I it needs to be I need to work this in my head quite a bit because for example allowing commercial business in a residential zone as long as it's Highway 101 could impact the availability of residential properties. and residences. And so in in a way,

many of the state laws are going the exact opposite direction. Sure. And not allow and saying in commercial zones that residential of certain types is outright allowed. Not this direction would be kind of self-defeating of those trying to create more ability to create housing. Um, so this there's a lot in that jumble and I'm not sure which piece to pull out right away. I agree with you kind of.

Um, for example, you could have a commercial business and residential zone as long as it's Highway 101 that Yeah, you're you're you're right. There's like there's multiple elements to that. I I think there could be a lot of unintended downstream uh you know issues, you know, like like let's say the apartment building that's going up next to the Red Lion, right? There's a ton of units there. Is that suddenly commercial? And if so, can it just automat I mean I assume it's a commercial zone anyway? It is a commercial zone. Yeah. Right.

Um well then let's not take that one as an example, but I I think there could be unintended consequences. And I would also like to have some time to think about it. Yeah, I'd like to Well, we have time so we can certainly uh you know, no decisions have to be made tonight. This was more just to start having some discussions about some of the concepts in our plan that we can fine-tune. So, I just have some concerns with how this process is not being done in the public. So, there's no public access to these comments. There's no so comments breed comments. Sure.

And so um although that may delay the process because it breeds more comments, I think in general that's a good thing so that we can make sure we consider the different variables and perspectives. If people are willing to comment then they're willing to comment and especially if it's if it's amongst us you know one comment could breed another thought and another you know idea of how to tackle things. So, um I think it's really important that not just the comp plan as it is is available to the public, but also the comments that are made also be available to the public. Sure. Um

I think this process invites that as the comments are being put up here and it is on record. I do agree that what we're doing here um is just reviewing those going through every comment. No, we will not be going through every comment. That's 500 later. I was like, wait, I might have misunderstood.

These are some that I pulled out based on, you know, different ideas that could potentially um change some of the policies in the in the uh in the current comp plan and the proposed comp plan. Mainly, this one was more for when we look at our our open space and our sensitive zones, do we want to look at height restrictions on those? Now, is it a one-sizefits-all because we have the prominade and the large open space directly to the west of it? Um, you know, so does it a one-sizefitit all approach? Probably not. But when you start talking open space and um setbacks off of that,

uh, is there more that we want to be doing as a as a community, as a commission, and as a council? Well, it's getting comments like this that help us fine-tune because that was a pretty big ball of wax that we've been molding and molding and molding and molding and these are the kind of things that now are the details. Yep. And these details do matter. So, I certainly like everybody else would have like to have access to this so I can okay review and digest. I don't want to uh roll the dice right now. That's me. We can go on to the next comment then. I was just looking at zoning here

and and I and I can say too a lot of the comments provided by the commission um some of them are things that we don't have control over and can change. Uh the ones that I picked out today we do have control over and can can make changes to them. Um, see here if I can move through this without Okay. Um, this has come up as a topic of discussion in a lot of uh, land use hearings both at this commission's level and at appeal at the city council. This was a comment. We definitely need more sidewalks for pedestrian travel. Um so in this goal statement uh we have a lot of discussions around automobile travel uh bike trails but there's nothing in here that specifically states or firms up any mandate to install um sidewalks. Now, for example, if a building permit is pulled from our office with a val a construction value of $5,000 or more, the city's code requires sidewalk installation to be um part of that permit. There is a program or a process in place to have those sidewalks deferred if the city council chooses to have those sidewalks installed at a later date. Um, so where you see a lot of this is, you know, if you walk through town on a sidewalk and then oops, there's no sidewalk on this house and then you pick it up a couple of houses later. This is the intention is to fill this in. Is there any discussion the commission wants to have to put stronger language in there requiring just requiring sidewalks?

Is the comp plan the appropriate place for that? It would be the appropriate place, I think, to put in as a goal, not necessarily the rule. Right. Okay. Thank you. Thanks. That's the that's the hair I needed to split in my mind. Mhm. I personally I think if it's already in, like you said, you know, over $5,000 and it's, you know, that that requirement's triggered. I believe it's over on Avenue S where those uh where the um correct me if I'm wrong, where the um storage units just went in.

Yeah. uh there was already a plan uh in place for the city to put those in. So they weren't responsible for that because of that reason. So that's the the catch putting. Okay, great. Um personally, I I don't see a need to to clarify that on on my end. Um

I don't agree on this one. Unfortunately, I think that we should be putting in sidewalks when there is work being done and that includes the city. So, if the city is doing repairs or fixes on things and they are working in that area, they should then be installing the sidewalks um on whatever road improvements or things that they're doing. So, there needs to be a shared responsibility there. And it's not just, oh, when somebody develops that property. No, when you're going to redo that road, if you're going to redo that neighborhood, if you're going to pave that street, you then also share that responsibility. You, the city, shares the responsibility of putting in those sidewalks. So, it's not just on the potential individual b property owner.

Correct. And I maybe I stated it wrong when I was using the Avenue S um uh example when that project came to us as a planning commission. Um I was I don't know who who asked about the sidewalks and say it's not required of our project because the city has already a plan to do so. Therefore, it wasn't being required. So I agree that it should be done. But if the city's already committed to doing it, it shouldn't be pushed off on the uh on the the business developer to have to do something done at the time that the business is being developed or the property is being developed. Whatever that work is being done different that depends on also infrastructure though. If the city's ripping up a road or has a plan to rip up a road to put in a to to redo

sewer sewer or something, then there's no reason for this business who's developing to put in a sidewalk to have it ripped up to have the city just redo it. So, I just I I see I see what you're saying. I just I don't know. To me, it's how it's written as it is is just to me it makes sense. So I think that there's there's a place to put this in potentially here to mention it and then to readress it and the to me the right place to seems to be in a TSP is to say this is where this goes and and sidewalks are required when you do X Y and Z regardless of who's doing it.

Yep. Yeah. You know, I'm a big sidewalk fan. And of course, in in some places like on the north end, anything, you know, north of first where we've only got 20 foot wide streets. If they're doing if the city's doing anything up there, you can't add sidewalks because they're only 20 foot wide, which are barely enough for emergency vehicles as it is. So, there's going to be exceptions, but I want sidewalks everywhere else. Transportation system plan. Sorry. Okay. Okay. And as long as it's reference referenced in our comp plan to go from here to find it there, that's great. Yeah.

Um this was another one that I wanted to make sure we get clarification on um and actually have a discussion around. Um so the bottom outlined in red is the current comprehensive plan language and I can read it. And it says except for those activities and uses that are by their nature are conducted outdoors, commercial and industrial activities shall and uses shall primarily occur in an enclosed structure that complies with applicable building code requirements or behind a site obscuring buffer or wall. The language in the draft leaves out in an enclosed structure. Um, so that doesn't necessarily permit activities outside of an enclosed structure, but it doesn't necessarily prohibit them like it does now. Um, so I I was wanted to bring this to the commission to have this discussion just to kind of see where you guys stand on this, if policy 3.1 should be left as drafted or more closely mirror what uh it currently says in the comp plan. And this the the the potential ramifications of this could be the uh introduction of of food carts if permitted through ordinance in the future without a comprehensive plan amendment. Whereas right now it would require a comp plan amendment in order to do any kind of commercial use outside of a enclosed building or enclosed structure. Glad you said something out loud because I was trying like heck to put this in context. I was like, where are we?

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, so we issue um temporary permits, event permits for different events around town that um are hosted that have food service uh shows where they sell their goods uh alongside of another event. Those are fireworks stands. Those are all very temporary in nature and they're under a special event permit that allows for it. This would allow for those more permanent type of outdoor sales type um activities if enacted and permitted through ordinance. It would still have to be a permitted use in a zone and a permitted use based on what the code requirements say, which currently our code does not allow for this use.

So, I have a Another reference that just came to mind that might fit in this qu in this category. We don't currently have any chainsaw artists that sell their work and do displays in town. Under our current comp plan, they would be required to do that inside a building. That's correct. This would allow them to do it outside. Okay. Where the trees are. No chainsaw. No, it's where the ice cube is. The big big blocks of ice. Oh, that type. Okay. Okay. Well, I was thinking of the I was thinking tree. Well, yeah, but Okay,

keep going. So, I just again needed to put it in my mind of something and and although I think food carts might potentially be more controversial, I think that we're eliminating some options as far as businesses by requiring them to be inside because they inherently either need to be outdoors or would benefit via the marketing of being outdoors, of being available. So, what triggered this change? Was it did you ha were the requests that came forward? Were you like sorry you have to do that indoors?

We've we've we have those inquiries quite often. Every year people inquire about having food carts in seaside and the default answer is no. The comprehensive plan and the ordinances don't allow it. This isn't saying that this is going to allow it. This this leaves it that window available in the future if the the city wanted to implement them through our zoning codes in a permitting process that regulates them without a comprehensive plan amendment. Okay. Okay. I have no problem with it. I like the way it the the revision. Okay. Yeah. It's a it's a minor minor things but words matter, right? So

Oh, yes. Words matter. Any other discussion? I I agree. I like it as it's written. The revision. The revision. Yes. Okay. That's that's all I have for now. Um I I you know I'm I'm also here to say we are still working on this plan. And I know this has been a long process, but we also want uh to make sure that this is the product that the commission wants to recommend to the council before we get to that point. Um, so I'm I'm I'd like to wrap it up, but I'm in no hurry to rush it at all. I have since I wasn't especially since I wasn't here at the last work session, I I I have a request

that a that I already stated that we're able to see the comments that have been made already and that we're able to continue to comment. And at the last work session, there was an Excel sheet that crosswalked the old from the new um that was not distributed. If we could all get that Yeah, I'll uh I'll talk to our consultants and see if I can't get that uploaded to the website and get it pushed out to you guys as well. Great. Thank you. See what we can do. That's all I have tonight unless the commission has any other questions regarding comp plan. So, you'll have this done tomorrow, right? All done. Complete. Uh thank you for your work on this and for everybody involved. Um anything further?

So, Papa notices for this have not been submitted yet?

No. Um, and that's that's intentionally. I want to make sure you guys are comfortable with where we're at before we start going down the public notice path. And that's not saying you're dead set. This is how it's going to be. This says we have a good working draft that can still be modified, but I don't want to I don't want to jump the gun and send out Papa notices and not have all the feedback, one from from DLCD that we need to have. Um, and two that we're as a commission, you guys are all comfortable with the the product that's ready to go forward to public hearing. Um, but you know that 35 days notice is a state requirement. It will happen once we're ready to schedule that first public hearing. Great.

Okay. Um, and I will say I think part of our plan too is when we schedule that first public hearing, we're going to put that a similar type survey that went to the commission. We're going to put that out to the public as well so we can accept feedback through that method through the entire notification public process and all the way through to when the city council uh has their hearings and goes through to us. We'll we'll open up a a way for the public to bring more comments in. Great. All right. Thank you. Have a good night, everybody.