[0:00] Motion will come in from

[0:02] all over but there's a lot of people

[0:04] here.

[0:04] >> Call this meeting call this meeting to

[0:06] order.

[0:08] Please rise

[0:13] aliance to the flag of the United States

[0:16] of America and to the republic for it

[0:19] stands. One nation

[0:22] indivisible with liberty justice for

[0:25] all.

[0:27] right,

[0:29] roll call, please.

[0:33] >> Commissioner Wagner is absent um today.

[0:37] Commissioner Idka.

[0:47] » Commissioner Idka,

[0:50] >> I'm present. Sorry, I'm having

[0:52] technological issues this morning. So, I

[0:54] appreciate your patience. Thank you.

[0:59] Commissioner Linder,

[1:02] >> I'm here.

[1:05] >> Commissioner Satanovich,

[1:07] >> I'm present.

[1:10] >> Commissioner Carmichael,

[1:11] >> present.

[1:12] >> Vice Chair Johnson,

[1:14] >> present.

[1:14] >> Chair Crushau,

[1:15] >> present.

[1:18] Thank you. Uh,

[1:21] we can we get a motion to adopt the

[1:23] agenda?

[1:24] >> Move to adopt agenda. motion. Do we have

[1:27] a second?

[1:27] >> Second.

[1:28] >> All those in favor to adopt the agenda.

[1:30] >> Agenda I

[1:32] >> agenda adopted. Thank you.

[1:35] >> Uh business from the public, this is an

[1:37] opportunity for anyone to give a brief

[1:39] presentation about any land use planning

[1:41] issue or county concern that is not on

[1:44] the agenda.

[1:48] Hearing none, we'll move on to

[1:51] discussion. Work session

[1:54] item number two, 2526 work plan update.

[1:59] >> Yeah, thank you. Good morning,

[2:00] commissioners. For the record, Gail

[2:02] Hendrickson, community development

[2:03] director. So, um, every quarter we've

[2:06] been bringing you the work plan that

[2:08] your uh, planning commission reviews

[2:10] before we submit it for the budget uh,

[2:12] usually in January or February each

[2:14] year. And then we just want to keep you

[2:16] informed of where we're at of the work

[2:18] plan so that there's accountability for

[2:20] the planning staff as well as

[2:22] transparency for the public. Uh a couple

[2:24] of things to point out

[2:27] uh in the uh work plan. We did complete

[2:30] uh several different things with the

[2:32] adoption of goal 16, 17, and 18 earlier

[2:36] this year. That officially

[2:39] completed the comp plan update process.

[2:41] It only took six years, give or take.

[2:45] Um, but especially thank you to David

[2:47] who shephered the last three goals

[2:49] through and, uh, got those, uh, wrapped

[2:51] up for us. So, well done. Um, with the

[2:55] transportation system plan update, uh,

[2:57] which I think is near the end of the

[2:59] work program. We last updated the TSP in

[3:04] 2015, so we're really due for an update.

[3:07] We've applied the past two years for a

[3:09] transportation and growth management

[3:11] grant uh and have not been awarded

[3:13] either year. So this year we are

[3:16] considering applying again for a third

[3:18] time. But it also looks fairly certain

[3:21] that we will be getting some money from

[3:22] ODOT and that ODOT will actually be

[3:26] hiring the consultant and paying for the

[3:28] consultant on behalf of Classic County

[3:30] so we can get the plan updated. And so

[3:32] we do have um some of uh meetings

[3:35] scheduled to review uh consultant

[3:38] proposals later this month I believe or

[3:41] into May um and then hopefully with a

[3:44] start date of July 1st. So, as we're

[3:46] moving through that process, uh, that

[3:48] funding comes through for us, this will

[3:50] be something that we'll be bringing back

[3:52] to your planning commission, giving you

[3:53] updates, and then, uh, looking to you to

[3:55] make a recommendation to the board on

[3:57] whether or not to adopt the

[3:59] transportation system plan once we're

[4:01] completed with it. Uh, I don't want to

[4:04] go too much into my director's report.

[4:07] Um, but really, we are just, um,

[4:10] continuing to plug along at things. We

[4:12] will be bringing in June the goal five

[4:14] updates for the cultural resources and

[4:17] the new rule making. And then yesterday

[4:19] we just got the 2026 legislative summary

[4:23] from Department of Land Conservation and

[4:25] Development. So sometime in the fall,

[4:27] you'll be seeing those legislative

[4:28] amendments that we do annually coming

[4:30] through to your planning commission as

[4:32] well. Um other than that, I will just

[4:35] stop there and see if there's any

[4:37] questions about anything on the work

[4:38] plan. Thank you.

[4:42] Uh, I have a question about the

[4:44] transportation plan and what would be

[4:47] included in the transportation plan

[4:48] updates and specifically about um things

[4:52] that have been talked about for years um

[4:54] such as a truck route around Atoria or

[4:56] also known as a bypass

[5:01] and I know it could be a long shot but

[5:04] maybe it would be important to have it

[5:05] as a part of this plan that u if if it

[5:08] was supported by the committ

[5:11] and others that that should be included

[5:14] in at least looked at as a part of this

[5:16] process.

[5:17] >> Okay. Yeah. So, I will make a note of

[5:20] that uh so that we can pass that along

[5:23] to whatever consultants we do are

[5:25] selected. Um I forgot to add too that we

[5:28] also had the state uh department of land

[5:31] conservation and development review the

[5:32] current transportation system plan and

[5:34] gave us a a long list of items that we

[5:37] need to focus on. I don't remember

[5:39] specifically if the bypass was one of

[5:41] them. I don't think it was, but they did

[5:44] do the code uh the plan audit and then

[5:46] kind of laid out a path for us moving

[5:48] forward. But I'll make sure that gets

[5:50] passed along.

[5:50] >> Okay.

[5:54] » Any other commissioners?

[5:57] >> None. Thank you.

[6:00] » All right. Moving on. Uh project status

[6:04] report. April 2026 project status

[6:06] report.

[6:11] Thank you. Good morning, planning

[6:12] commissioners. My name is David Cook,

[6:13] uh, planning manager with the community

[6:15] development department. Um, a couple

[6:18] updates on the project status report for

[6:21] this month. The first one I'll I'll

[6:23] mention is for ordinance 26-02,

[6:26] which was our digital zoning maps um,

[6:29] ordinance. Um, your commission saw this

[6:32] back in March and we just took it to the

[6:35] board of commissioners for a first

[6:36] reading on April 8th. Um, they seem

[6:39] generally supportive of it and it will

[6:40] be going to its second hearing um on

[6:44] April 22nd with the board and that will

[6:46] be the vote to uh adopt or or not um

[6:50] that order. Um, Commissioner Director Henrikson um took

[6:56] the administrative variance ordinance um

[6:58] 26-05

[7:00] to the uh board of commissioners um last

[7:04] month and was approved and adopted. And

[7:06] so we are starting to use um or starting

[7:10] to be able to use the um code language

[7:13] that your um commission recommended to

[7:16] the board that allowed administrative

[7:18] variances for small deviations to the land use code. So we're we're

[7:22] excited to be able to use that to to try

[7:24] and help people um with uh meeting our

[7:28] standards. Uh couple other small things.

[7:31] We we're still working on the commercial

[7:33] and industrial uh zone audits. um trying

[7:36] to wrap in a pretty comprehensive look

[7:40] at those zones to see how we can make

[7:43] permitting streamlined for um commercial

[7:46] and industrial uses in those zones with

[7:48] it where they are designated to be. So

[7:50] hoping to bring that to your commission

[7:53] in June. Um Director Henrikson also

[7:57] mentioned the goal five uh updates that

[7:59] we're looking to bring in June um as

[8:02] well. So, um, that's all I've got on

[8:04] your project status report, unless you

[8:05] have any questions for me.

[8:07] >> Thank you. Thank you.

[8:10] Any questions?

[8:12] >> No.

[8:12] >> Nope.

[8:13] >> All right. Director's report. April

[8:15] 2026, director's report.

[8:17] >> Okay. So, we had a lot to report on this

[8:20] month. Uh, the fairgrounds strategic

[8:22] plan update continues. We're doing our

[8:25] first public openhouse this Saturday

[8:26] from noon to 2. We will be in the annex

[8:30] building which is between the dairy barn

[8:33] and behind the uh main exhibit hall. So

[8:36] uh I would encourage if you can't be

[8:38] there uh go online clatsoccount.gov take

[8:41] the survey which will be open until

[8:44] April 30th. Uh as of last Tuesday we had 46 respondents in about a 10-day

[8:51] period which I thought was pretty good.

[8:53] So we're hoping to um increase that

[8:55] significantly. Uh but definitely if you

[8:57] can be out there uh again Saturday noon

[9:00] to 2 at the fairgrounds.

[9:02] Uh the housing assistance grant that we

[9:05] received from Department of Land

[9:06] Conservation and Development uh this is

[9:09] going to have their kickoff meeting on

[9:10] April 21st. Uh we'll be meeting with the

[9:13] consultants and DLCD staff to um set up

[9:17] a schedule and a plan for uh completing

[9:20] the grant work. The grant work is going

[9:22] to be focused on uh sites within the

[9:25] unincorporated area and within the

[9:27] cities uh and looking taking a deeper

[9:30] dive into the what we're calling

[9:32] opportunity sites to see what sorts of

[9:34] regulatory infrastructure or natural

[9:37] hazard constraints might be preventing

[9:39] development on these particular sites.

[9:41] and uh just uh the consultant will be

[9:44] putting together um drafts scenarios and

[9:48] uh some market analysis to determine the

[9:50] feasibility of getting those sites

[9:52] developed and that work is expected to

[9:54] be completed in March of 2027. So as we

[9:58] work through that grant process uh we'll

[10:00] be keeping you informed of any important

[10:02] dates or progress.

[10:04] Uh the task force will have its monthly

[10:06] meeting uh on this uh also I believe

[10:10] April 21st whatever that Wednesday is at

[10:12] the end of the month. Um and actually we

[10:16] moved it sorry to May 22nd because there

[10:18] was a conflict uh but we will be uh

[10:21] having some presentations and just

[10:23] discussing uh the housing grant status

[10:26] and uh working with that group. Um FEMA

[10:30] seemed to have a lot of activity uh over

[10:33] the past quarter or month or two. Uh the

[10:37] reports threw out the lawsuit that had

[10:40] been filed by some environmentalist

[10:42] groups in 2023 saying that FEMA was not

[10:44] moving quick enough to implement the

[10:46] buyout. the uh courts throughout the

[10:49] case because they felt that it wasn't

[10:50] ripe uh for a lawsuit at this point

[10:53] simply because FEMA has until September

[10:56] of 2027 to fully implement the

[10:58] biological opinion and so the court

[11:00] dismissed that case. Um there's no

[11:03] update on what it means for the

[11:04] injunction that was filed uh and what

[11:06] the status of that is. So that's still

[11:08] lingering out there somewhere in pending

[11:11] lawsuit land. Um there's also with the

[11:15] uh federal budget funding um challenges

[11:19] that uh some aspects of FEMA's program

[11:23] have not been uh funded or renewed

[11:26] including um some funding related to the

[11:30] new risk maps which we talked about

[11:32] maybe maybe about nine months ago that

[11:35] FEMA was proposing that would have added

[11:37] significantly more acreage especially in

[11:39] the Warrington area and about a thousand

[11:41] new structures in the Warrington ion

[11:42] area. So due to lack of funding for

[11:45] their contractors that implement that

[11:47] program primarily, uh that program's

[11:49] kind of on hold as well right now and so

[11:51] we don't know what will be happening to

[11:53] that in the in the near future. Uh

[11:56] there's also been some federal

[11:58] legislation introduced by Representative

[12:00] Bence uh from Oregon about clarifying

[12:04] the role that the Endangered Species Act

[12:07] plays with the National Flood Insurance

[12:09] Program. The last I had heard, there

[12:11] were no co-sponsors for that bill, and I

[12:13] don't believe that the last time I

[12:15] checked, there have been any hearings or

[12:16] anything scheduled on that, but it was

[12:18] filed.

[12:20] Um, planning commissioner terms. Our

[12:23] application period closes May 3rd. I

[12:26] have Commissioner Carmichael's

[12:27] application and I've got about four

[12:29] others, but um Jeremy and Katie, if you

[12:33] plan to apply uh reapply for reappoint,

[12:38] then we just need you to submit your

[12:39] applications by May 3rd, please. And

[12:42] then depending on uh the number of

[12:44] applicants, the board will probably

[12:45] conduct interviews. Uh they may not. Uh

[12:48] we're still waiting to determine that

[12:50] based on the number of applicants and

[12:51] who applies.

[12:53] Uh we held not we but the county held an

[12:56] elected officials committee meeting back

[12:58] on March 12th over at the fairgrounds.

[13:00] This was a meeting between the board of

[13:02] commissioners and the elected council

[13:04] people from the various cities along

[13:06] with the sheriff and uh representatives

[13:09] legal law enforcement representatives

[13:12] from the city of Atoria and Seaside and

[13:14] the topic was 911 consolidation. Uh so

[13:17] there was quite a big discussion about

[13:19] that. No decisions were made. Obviously,

[13:22] this wasn't a formal meeting to vote on

[13:24] anything, but to lay out the different

[13:26] pathways that could be taken to create a

[13:28] unified 911 system, and then um law

[13:32] enforcement will be working with the

[13:33] county manager's office and the cities

[13:36] to um move that forward during the

[13:38] remainder of this year and into next

[13:39] year.

[13:42] Um, one thing that has been on our work

[13:45] plan for quite a long time, probably a

[13:47] couple years, is the watershed alliance

[13:49] grant. Uh the county did not fund the

[13:52] grant, but the county agreed to provide

[13:55] some inkind services to assist with the

[13:57] grant work and so um probably a year or

[14:01] so had gone by where we hadn't had any

[14:03] updates from the watershed alliance, but

[14:05] we did get one back at the beginning of

[14:07] March. Uh and I've included that

[14:09] information for you in your packet. This

[14:11] was the final report and what the grant

[14:14] was focused on was looking at the

[14:16] impacts of chemical runoff from uh a

[14:21] chemical that I forget the name but uh

[14:25] it is basically a coating that's found

[14:27] on your tires on your vehicles and as

[14:30] that chemical breaks down on the

[14:33] roadways it gets washed into the

[14:34] waterways and so they were studying the

[14:36] impacts of that on um salmon and so

[14:40] those conclusions are found in here.

[14:42] They're going to continue to do uh

[14:45] long-term monitoring of water

[14:46] temperature at various locations

[14:48] throughout the county and public works

[14:49] has been assisting with that in terms of

[14:51] placing temperature gauges. Um so uh I

[14:54] don't know that we'll have any more

[14:55] updates on that, but that's what the

[14:57] outcome of the grant.

[15:00] And then let's see here. Ah yeah, state

[15:03] rulemaking which never seems to cease

[15:05] and desist. Uh so the newest uh state

[15:09] rule making that's coming up that we

[15:11] need to take note of uh is one that is

[15:14] going to look at housing in

[15:17] unincorporated communities. And so

[15:20] Classup County is kind of I think at the

[15:22] forefront of this because our board was

[15:24] very progressive in their housing

[15:26] amendments and we've already made a lot

[15:28] of changes to our unincorporated

[15:30] communities of Arch Cape, Westport,

[15:33] Miles Crossing, Jeff Gardens, um, Napa

[15:36] Swenson to incorporate a lot of

[15:39] different housing types including

[15:40] duplexes, multipplexes, cottage

[15:43] clusters, those types of middle housing

[15:44] units and making those changes, reducing

[15:47] lot sizes, reducing setbacks, things

[15:50] like that, reducing parking. So, uh, the

[15:53] state now has taken this to heart and is

[15:57] going to be looking at uninccorporated

[15:58] communities throughout the state and

[16:00] doing rule making regarding middle

[16:02] housing in those types of communities.

[16:05] uh staff is probably going to be

[16:07] requesting to be placed or at least

[16:09] apply to be on that rulemaking advisory

[16:11] committee uh simply because we've been

[16:13] through this and there may be new things

[16:16] that come out that could um assist the

[16:18] county in its housing efforts as well.

[16:21] So that's kind of a positive thing. And

[16:23] then there's the undersea infrastructure

[16:25] easements and fees which right now has

[16:28] minimal impact in the county but could

[16:31] potentially in the future have more

[16:33] significant impact. And what is

[16:35] happening is that um the department of

[16:38] state lands is increasing its fees that

[16:41] they're charging applicants for new

[16:43] cable landings to renew a cable landing

[16:46] to decommission a cable landing and for

[16:49] the easements. And uh there were some

[16:51] calculations that were provided and I

[16:54] don't know if you had a chance to follow

[16:55] the link but um there these are

[16:57] significant increases. I mean in some

[16:59] cases the application fees are going up

[17:01] 200% um that you are going to be paying

[17:06] by length of cable. Uh and so in some

[17:09] cases in the example they cited it ended

[17:11] up being a $1.8 million fee for the

[17:15] decommissioning. Um so it's it's

[17:18] significant but again of limited impact

[17:20] here but it also apparently affects

[17:23] things not just cable landings but

[17:25] outfalls that will um are on the ocean

[17:28] beach. Uh so if there's any water

[17:31] districts or any of the municipalities

[17:33] have outfalls this could potentially

[17:35] impact them. So that was the reason we

[17:37] brought it to your commission's

[17:38] attention um just so that you're aware

[17:40] of it in case you hear rumblings about

[17:43] it in the future.

[17:45] And uh I think oh a couple of other

[17:47] things um we do we have hired an

[17:50] electrical inspector. He will be

[17:52] starting on June 15th. He's coming from

[17:54] Beaverton. Uh his name is Eric

[17:56] Elmsshauser and uh again he'll be here

[17:59] at the middle of June starting and our

[18:02] recruitment for building official closed

[18:04] on Sunday. So we're in the process now

[18:07] of reviewing the applicants and

[18:09] scheduling interviews. And again, Matt

[18:11] Moore's last day will be June 30th. And

[18:15] then we'll hopefully have a new building

[18:17] inspector or building official on board

[18:19] before then. And other than that, I'm

[18:22] happy to answer any questions you might

[18:23] have.

[18:24] >> How long has Matt How long has Matt been

[18:25] with the county now?

[18:26] >> Oh goodness. You know, I should know

[18:27] this. I want to say

[18:32] nine years, 10 years, maybe a little bit

[18:34] more. Yeah.

[18:35] >> Like he's been here a while. Good while.

[18:37] >> Yeah. Um,

[18:40] let's see who's proposing the one the fees for the decommissioning in the cable land.

[18:46] >> Uh, it's depart Department of State

[18:48] Lands because those landings are

[18:49] occurring on lands owned by the state

[18:51] even if they're submerged.

[18:53] >> Okay. So, that's was that a rule making

[18:56] process? Legislative.

[18:57] >> Yeah, rulem.

[19:02] » All right. So, we won't have a whole lot

[19:03] of say that. We could I mean I suppose

[19:05] the county could weigh in and and

[19:08] provide whatever feedback we want. Would

[19:11] that be something that our planning

[19:12] commission would do or is that something

[19:13] staff or the the

[19:15] >> um we would likely as staff and

[19:17] definitely if the planning commission

[19:19] wanted to weigh in, but we would want

[19:20] probably the letter to come directly

[19:22] from the board of commissioners um with

[19:24] any input from the planning commission

[19:26] that you might want to give. So I

[19:29] believe that they are still at the very

[19:31] beginning of the process. I think that

[19:32] they have had either one or two meetings

[19:35] right now and there's still several more

[19:37] months of meetings to go. And these

[19:39] meetings, these rulemaking advisory

[19:41] committee meetings are all open to the

[19:43] public. Um and then there will be a

[19:45] public comment period once the proposed

[19:47] rules are drafted and posted for um

[19:50] consideration.

[19:53] >> Um can you give us any highlights or uh

[19:56] significant changes to the fairground

[19:58] strategic plan? anything I mean other

[20:00] than show up to the meeting and find

[20:01] out.

[20:02] >> So um for the past couple of months uh

[20:05] David and I have been doing a lot of

[20:07] work with the fair board behind the

[20:09] scenes uh just putting together the

[20:11] questions they want to ask the

[20:13] fairgrounds they want to interview the

[20:15] alternative venues they want to have us

[20:17] look at and then the stakeholders we

[20:19] need to talk to. So now this is really

[20:21] the first time where we're really going

[20:22] public. Um so there's not any

[20:25] recommendations so far at this point. Uh

[20:28] we'll get to that probably in late May,

[20:30] early June. Uh we do have a second open

[20:32] house scheduled in on May 20th, which is

[20:35] a Wednesday evening from 5:30 to 7:30 at

[20:38] the fairgrounds, which is when we would

[20:40] look at any new recommendations that

[20:42] might come out. What we're seeing

[20:44] initially from the surveys that have

[20:46] been turned in, um there's an emphasis

[20:50] on deferred maintenance. Um, the

[20:53] responses we got from the fair board

[20:55] identified the need to expand the

[20:57] kitchen and remodel the one that's right

[20:59] now in the exhibit hall. Adding cooking

[21:02] facilities and restrooms to the annex

[21:04] andor the dairy barn. Um, those are some

[21:07] of the big things. Uh, signage, the need

[21:10] to improve signage because the

[21:11] fairgrounds is a little bit out of the

[21:13] way compared to many other fairgrounds

[21:15] around the state. Um, electrical and

[21:18] security upgrades. Um, and not I would

[21:22] say electrical, but really technology

[21:23] upgrades. Uh, things like the Wi-Fi and

[21:26] having an electronic reader board and a

[21:28] unified PA system so that you can talk

[21:32] to everybody at once throughout the

[21:33] fairgrounds and those types of things.

[21:36] Um, we're also looking at fees compared

[21:38] to other fairgrounds and alternative

[21:40] venues just to get an idea of how we sit

[21:43] in comparison. uh the surveys we've

[21:45] received so far, the majority of people

[21:47] thought our fees were about right for

[21:49] the services that are being provided. Um

[21:52] but we'll look at that and see what

[21:53] comes out of that as well.

[21:54] >> Yeah, I think that's really important

[21:56] work and uh fairgrounds is a tremendous

[21:58] asset to the entire county and we all

[22:02] want to see it be successful. So glad

[22:04] that that's going through.

[22:07] >> That's all I had.

[22:08] >> Okay. Yeah, we did meet uh with 4 last

[22:12] not last Friday but the Friday before

[22:14] and they are looking to do some

[22:16] improvements to their building or

[22:17] possibly replace the building because

[22:19] they need more space and more storage

[22:21] area and so they've got a lot of big

[22:23] plans as well. So probably um in in the

[22:27] next year you'll probably see them

[22:29] coming forward and then um David do you

[22:32] want to talk about uh the public

[22:35] hearing?

[22:36] So, we may actually have to have a

[22:38] meeting in May. We had talked about

[22:39] this, but yeah.

[22:41] >> Yeah. So, um

[22:45] earlier this year, I guess it would have

[22:47] been in February,

[22:50] our department received a conditional

[22:51] use permit application for the Nest

[22:54] Bakery, which is on Sunset Lake and

[22:55] Lewis Road, right there at the corner.

[22:57] Um the um the restaurant was previously

[23:02] approved to have no interior seating. Um

[23:07] because the addition of seating requires

[23:10] off- streetet parking and if you kind of

[23:12] know the area and you know their site,

[23:14] they have zero space to put any off-

[23:16] streetet parking. Um they now want to

[23:19] include some seats in their restaurant.

[23:22] Um and so that necessitates the need for

[23:24] parking. Of course, there is no place to

[23:26] put off- streetet parking

[23:29] except there is public land across the

[23:32] street which is the Sunset Lake Park and boat ramp.

[23:36] um that land is not part of the county

[23:39] park system. It's seated to the public.

[23:41] It's maintained by the public. So, it's

[23:44] been a little

[23:46] strange

[23:47] uh or or not not typical how we would

[23:52] approve a private business to delineate

[23:56] parking spaces on land that's deed to

[23:58] and maintained by the public. Um,

[24:02] so how we're thinking of doing this is

[24:06] um upon a recommendation from your Let

[24:11] me I'll back up a little bit. So we sent

[24:13] this this application out um through a

[24:16] public notice to surrounding property

[24:17] owners. It ended up getting a fair bit

[24:19] of attention in social media and so so

[24:21] we got over 60 public comments on this

[24:23] application. Um, so we've decided to

[24:28] bring the application forward to your

[24:30] commission for for a a review and a vote

[24:34] whether to conditionally approve or or

[24:37] to deny the application. Um, as part of

[24:40] that, there's going to be a

[24:44] um like a a resolution that we would ask

[24:47] for your commission to make a

[24:49] recommendation on to the board of

[24:50] commissioners where the board of

[24:52] commissioners would then decide um if

[24:55] they would grant a certain area within

[24:58] the public land at the park or the

[25:02] creation of a parking lot that would

[25:05] serve not only this restaurant, but

[25:08] would also will just be available to the

[25:10] public. So, it would be kind of like a

[25:12] public park improvement that this

[25:14] business has to pay for and maintain

[25:17] that helps them meet their parking

[25:19] requirement, but is not strictly for

[25:21] their business alone.

[25:24] >> The county doesn't own that parking lot.

[25:26] It's how how do we approve something

[25:29] that's not our

[25:32] >> Well, in probably a weird situation, but

[25:35] >> yeah, it's it's definitely not normal.

[25:37] So, in chatting with with county

[25:39] council, there is case law um that that

[25:44] says basically, you know, land that's deed to the public

[25:49] when when land owner authorization is

[25:53] needed for something occurring on that

[25:54] land, the county has uh the say

[25:59] basically county gets to to to apply for

[26:02] or approve these things.

[26:04] So, I don't understand. Deed to the

[26:06] public, but it's not it's a county, not

[26:10] state of Oregon. It's correct. Deed to

[26:12] the public.

[26:12] >> Y and if you go on to um the county's

[26:16] web maps and put in public the there are

[26:19] several properties like that that were

[26:21] deeded in as parts of plats usually for

[26:23] parks or boat ramps. Um but it's no

[26:26] different than a public street that's

[26:28] not part of a county road system that's

[26:30] maintained by the public, open to the

[26:32] public. It's the same concept. What is

[26:34] that noise?

[26:35] >> The microphone.

[26:42] » Just just curious. Sorry.

[26:44] >> Which one it is?

[26:44] >> So if there's maintenance there

[26:47] and I understand what the public is, but

[26:49] like who who pays for it?

[26:51] >> The the paying for it. So there was in

[26:55] the '9s um approval that was given by

[26:58] the county to a private organization

[27:00] that was proposing with volleyball court

[27:03] and play area and I forget what else.

[27:05] >> Yeah. Whatever features they have there

[27:07] right now.

[27:08] >> Yeah. And then improvements uh to the boat launch have been paid for by

[27:13] private persons.

[27:15] >> Oh,

[27:17] it's I go to the bakery often on the

[27:20] weekends. I mean, and it's whether

[27:22] they're seating inside or not, it's

[27:24] packed. I mean, it it there's a lot of

[27:26] people. And I myself either park over at

[27:29] the park or park along the road, which

[27:31] as you know, there's not really I mean,

[27:33] I have a wide truck and I stick out in

[27:35] the road when I park there. There's But

[27:37] it's pretty flourishing business and and

[27:41] they could probably use some parking.

[27:43] >> Yeah. and and and so as far as the

[27:45] public comments we received um that had

[27:48] issues with the application, parking and

[27:51] traffic in the surrounding area is by

[27:54] far the most

[27:56] uh pressing issue for for people who who

[27:59] have a an issue with the application.

[28:02] >> Well, I I can applaud staff for trying

[28:04] to come up with a creative solution and

[28:06] trying to create a win-win here for the

[28:08] public. If there's a developed parking

[28:09] lot that everybody has access to for

[28:11] there is more facilities there like that

[28:13] boat ramp that people do use um that

[28:16] could provide a benefit to everybody

[28:17] that maybe they pay for the development

[28:20] of a of a and help maintain a parking

[28:22] lot that the public also has the ability

[28:24] to use might be a win for everybody

[28:26] there.

[28:28] >> Yeah.

[28:29] >> Question I would have is if they've

[28:31] already got a conditional use permit to

[28:32] have a business there. Is that correct?

[28:35] How does it differ whether they I mean

[28:37] if you've ever been in there there's not

[28:38] room for much eating maybe

[28:41] five six chairs 10 chairs I don't know

[28:43] but what would be the difference is

[28:46] someone's going there standing up

[28:48] waiting for their coffee and donuts or

[28:49] pastries rather than sitting down

[28:52] because I mean there's still a lot of

[28:54] parking being utilized whether it's

[28:57] designated for it or not.

[29:00] >> Yeah.

[29:01] >> Do you understand what I'm asking?

[29:02] >> Yeah, I understand it. The difference

[29:04] the differences is purely just the

[29:07] wording of our land use code requires

[29:09] off- streetet parking for places based

[29:13] on the number of seats that you're

[29:14] providing. So if I had to guess the the

[29:17] idea there was if there are no seats

[29:19] people are more like coming and going.

[29:22] Therefore maybe they park their car for

[29:24] two, three, five minutes and then they

[29:26] up and go. But if you can sit down, you

[29:28] park for 30 minutes. That has to be the

[29:31] idea behind it.

[29:36] So look forward to that next month.

[29:39] >> Yeah.

[29:42] >> You have anything else that you wanted

[29:43] to discuss?

[29:44] >> Have anything Wayne?

[29:45] >> Oh, good to of the order. I I would like

[29:47] to bring up something and this is a an

[29:50] annual workg group meeting that Bruce

[29:52] Moffett, our NRCS district

[29:55] conservationist, is is having. Uh this

[29:58] is on the 22nd of April at the library

[30:02] here, meeting room 007,

[30:06] uh Asteria Public Library, 4 to 5:30. Uh

[30:10] and the reason I bring it up is that

[30:13] there are there are things happening at

[30:16] the NRCS funding level that he's

[30:18] concerned about. There's some major

[30:20] changes as he points out. He's looking

[30:23] for suggestions

[30:25] that relate to significant changes in

[30:28] how we allocate funding and where we are

[30:30] funding. And that pains to a lot of us,

[30:34] especially me, we have we have

[30:36] consistent funding from NRCS for

[30:39] property improvements and wetlands and

[30:42] riparian zones. So, he would like to get

[30:45] as much input as possible from people

[30:48] interest or people involved. So again,

[30:51] that's the 22nd at the public library, 4

[30:54] to 5:30 in room 007.

[30:58] Thank you.

[31:00] >> Is that um for funding that's affecting

[31:02] the uh soil and water conservation

[31:04] district or

[31:05] >> most likely it affects all the funding

[31:07] and how it's how it's the rule making

[31:10] and how it's allocated and what you have

[31:12] to do to accommodate the funding that's

[31:15] affecting me directly and funding that

[31:18] we've had.

[31:18] >> Okay. Right. Thank you.

[31:23] » Anything else for good of the order?

[31:28] » Um, not really good of the order, but

[31:30] like I said, I told everybody I'm

[31:32] probably going to miss the next two

[31:33] meetings having some medical stuff done,

[31:35] so I will probably not be here for the

[31:37] next two months.

[31:41] Put it on the

[31:43] agenda.

[31:45] >> Okay,

[31:45] >> anybody else?

[31:47] All right, then we can adjourn. Thank

[31:49] you. You

April 14, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting

Agenda

Transcript