[0:00] Please stand for the flag salute.

[0:05] » I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the

[0:10] republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[0:17] justice for all.

[0:22] » All right. Could we please have the roll call?

[0:25] Gary Kunowsky. >> Here.

[0:27] » Robertson. >> Here.

[0:29] » Rochelle. >> Here.

[0:31] » Baxter. >> Here.

[0:32] » Fountain. Malloy.

[0:36] Miller. >> Here.

[0:38] » Thompson. >> Here.

[0:39] » And Bulmer.

[0:43] Thank you. All right, we've got minutes on the agenda from July 15th, but we're

[0:47] going to go ahead and um not cover those tonight. They're going to be corrected

[0:52] and we'll do that at a later date. Um so, this portion of the agenda is

[0:57] reserved for any members of the public who would like to address the planning

[1:01] commission on any topic that is not related to any items on the agenda.

[1:06] If you'd like to If you'd like to address the planning

[1:09] commission, please come forward, sign in, and state your name before your

[1:12] comments. All right, seeing none, we'll move on to

[1:16] the public hearing portion of the meeting.

[1:19] Um there's one public hearing on the agenda tonight. Before we begin the

[1:23] public hearing portion of tonight's meeting, I would like to briefly explain

[1:27] the process. Staff will present a staff report

[1:31] summarizing the application and applicable approval criteria.

[1:35] Commissioners may ask staff questions following the presentation.

[1:39] The applicant will then have an opportunity to present testimony

[1:43] regarding the application. And after the applicant's testimony, members of the

[1:47] public will be invited to provide testimony. We'll first take testimony in

[1:52] favor of the application followed by testimony in opposition.

[1:56] Following public testimony, the applicant will be given an opportunity

[2:00] to provide their rebuttal. Once all testimony's been received, the public

[2:04] hearing will be closed. After the hearing is closed, the discussion will

[2:08] be limited to the planning commission and staff, and the commission will

[2:11] deliberate and make a decision based upon the applicable approval criteria

[2:16] and evidence in the record. If anyone wishes to testify this

[2:20] evening, please complete a sign-in sheet and state your name and address for the

[2:24] record before providing testimony. At this time, I'll ask city attorney to

[2:29] review the public hearing procedures. >> Thank you. Tonight's hearing will be

[2:33] pursuant to the quasi-judicial procedure set out in 197.797.

[2:37] At the start of the hearing, each commission member will be asked to

[2:39] disclose any ex parte communications, conflict of interest, or bias.

[2:43] The applicable substantive criteria for this hearing will be addressed in the

[2:46] staff report. Testimony may be in oral or written form, but must be directed

[2:49] towards the criteria, the comprehensive plan, or the city's land use

[2:53] regulations. Any issue raised must be accompanied by statements and evidence

[2:56] sufficient enough to allow the commission and parties an opportunity to

[2:59] respond. Please note the failure to raise an issue, including constitutional

[3:02] issue, by the close of the hearing will prevent any appeal to the land use board

[3:05] of appeals. With that, you can ask for any conflict of interest, bias, or ex

[3:09] parte contact. >> All right. We'll open the public hearing

[3:13] planning file AR-26-07

[3:17] and S-26-04.

[3:21] Is there any conflict of interest, ex parte communication, or bias to report?

[3:27] » I'll go ahead and disclose that the uh property on the west side of 12th

[3:31] Street, across the street from the subject property,

[3:34] uh I am a trustee for the ownership of that property, but it has

[3:39] nothing to do with my decision.

[3:44] » All right. Anyone else?

[3:48] Okay. I'll go ahead and turn it over to staff for the staff report.

[3:54] » Good evening, um blank chair and commissioners.

[3:57] Tonight's public hearing is for two related land use applications. As I

[4:01] review the proposal, I will explain how the applicable approval criteria,

[4:06] evidence in record, and findings work together to support the commissioners'

[4:09] decisions. Because this is a quasi-judicial land

[4:13] use matter, the commissioners' role is to determine whether the proposal

[4:16] satisfies the applicable criteria in the Lebanon Development Code.

[4:21] This decision is not based on whether the proposed development is generally

[4:24] liked or disliked. It's whether a different or whether a different design

[4:28] might be preferred. It must be based on the approval criteria and the evidence

[4:32] in record. The applicant is responsible for

[4:35] demonstrating compliance. The record includes the application materials,

[4:39] plans, staff report, and agency comments, written comments,

[4:43] and if we had received any testimony. The staff report and draft order provide

[4:48] recommendations for commissioners' consideration.

[4:51] These two applications will be considered together because they

[4:54] represent two parts of the same development proposal.

[4:58] The first is an administrative review. Under the development code, the

[5:02] administrative review process reviews town homes or row house projects within

[5:07] with 19 units or fewer in a residential mixed density zone.

[5:12] This application addresses the proposed use and site development for four town

[5:16] homes. The second is a tentative subdivision.

[5:20] The application pro pro um

[5:23] proposes dividing approximately 0.46 acres into four individual tax lots. It

[5:28] also establishes the framework for access, utilities, drainage, and the

[5:33] final plat. The distinction between the two

[5:36] application is important. The administrative review authorizes

[5:40] [snorts] the proposed townhouse development, but as does not create the

[5:44] four legal lots. The tentative subdivision establishes the proposed lot

[5:49] lay- layout and land division requirements with the legal lots created

[5:53] through an approval and recording of a final plat.

[5:57] However, the subdivision alone does not authorize the townhouse development

[6:01] shown on the plans. Both approvals are therefore necessary and each on its own

[6:05] has its own approval criteria and findings.

[6:11] Public notice for the hearing was issued on July 23rd, 2026

[6:17] in accordance with the development code and no written public comments were

[6:20] received before tonight's hearing. For the administrative review, the

[6:24] principal criteria allowed the address the allowed use and development

[6:28] standards and for the subdivision the criteria addresses the lot dimensions.

[6:33] All the criteria have been identified as met with conditions and the remaining

[6:37] items can be addressed through proposed conditions.

[6:41] The site is approximately 0.46 acres. It's currently undeveloped and is

[6:45] located east of 1685 South 12th Street. It's identified as tax lot um and map

[6:53] 12S 2W 15BC, tax lot 2401 and it is zoned residential mixed density.

[7:00] Access is provided from South 12 through an existing 30-ft wide private access

[7:06] and utility easement. Public water and sanitary sewer

[7:10] facilities are available to serve the property.

[7:13] These existing conditions are important to the subdivision review. The zoning

[7:17] establishes the allowed use and the applicable development standard. The

[7:21] size and configuration of the property determine whether four compliant lots

[7:25] can be created. The existing easement and availability

[7:29] of public utility supports the findings related to access and public facilities.

[7:35] The surrounding area is primarily residential and includes a range of

[7:38] housing types permitted within the RM zone. The record does not identify any

[7:43] map hazard areas, overlays, um any special special area plans, or

[7:48] previously approved developments that would prevent development on this

[7:51] property. These site conditions provide the

[7:54] foundation for review for proposed lot layout and the townhome development

[7:58] shown on the following slides.

[8:03] The tentative subdivision would divide the property into four residential lots.

[8:07] The net area ranges from approximately 25 um 121 to 4,374

[8:13] square foot with lot widths ranging from approximately 36 to 61 feet.

[8:19] The residential mixed zone requires a minimum lot area of 2,500 square foot

[8:24] and a minimum width of 20 for townhomes, and all four lots meet or exceed these

[8:28] standards.

[8:31] Access will be provided through an existing 30-foot wide access and utility

[8:35] easement from South 12. The plan shows 24-foot wide shared private private

[8:40] driveway. Each dwelling would have

[8:43] also have two off-street parking spaces located outside the shared travel area.

[8:49] At this stage, the commission is is determining whether the proposal

[8:53] proposed layout can comply with the development code. The access criteria

[8:57] are identified as met with conditions because the access easement and a

[9:02] maintenance agreement for the shared improvements must be completed before

[9:04] the final plat.

[9:09] The proposed The proposal includes four attached townhomes or row rowhouse

[9:13] dwellings. This types of development is allowed in the RM zone through an

[9:17] administrative review process. The criteria required for the

[9:21] development to comply with the use and dimension standards of the zone. The

[9:25] proposed lots meet with the minimum area and width requirements as discussed on

[9:29] the previous slides, and the final building permits also must demonstrate

[9:33] compliance with the setbacks, lot coverage, building heights, garage

[9:36] opening standards before permits are issued. For that reason, this criteria

[9:40] is identified as met with conditions. The proposal provides two off-street

[9:45] parkings for each dwelling for the total of eight. Those spaces will remain

[9:49] unused usable and cannot obstruct the private shared driveway.

[9:52] The remaining criteria addressing landscaping, screening, lighting, sites,

[9:56] and other features will be addressed through our engineering design standard

[10:00] reviews.

[10:03] Each existing public water and sanitary sewer facilities are available to serve

[10:08] the development. Each lot will have independent water

[10:11] service and sanitary sewer laterals. Final locations, connections, um will be

[10:16] handled through our city's permit process.

[10:19] The proposed stormwater system will discharge east through the private

[10:22] off-site drainage route to the existing system in Strawberry Lane.

[10:27] Before final plat approval, the applicant must obtain and record the

[10:29] necessary drainage easements and secure any required approval for connecting to

[10:33] the receiving system.

[10:40] The Lebanon Fire Department also reviewed the proposal and final plans

[10:43] must comply with the fire code um and any other applicable fire life safety.

[10:48] In summary, the proposed use is allowed in the RM zone and the four lots meet

[10:52] the dimension standards, access, parking, and public facilities.

[10:58] The remaining engineering and fire requirements can be addressed through

[11:01] proposed conditions. The draft order contains the criteria by criteria

[11:06] findings based on those findings and the material that agency comments staff

[11:09] recommends approval of both the administrative review and the tentative

[11:13] subdivision. And that concludes my presentation and

[11:16] I'm available for questions. >> All right. Thank you, commissioners. Do

[11:21] you have any questions for staff before we open the public hearing?

[11:27] » I have one question just cuz I can't figure it out on the map.

[11:31] Which lot is the flag attached to? Is it the back one? Like lot

[11:37] four?

[11:44] And if you guys can't answer that, I'm sure Mr. Van

[11:47] » be I'm assuming it's lot four, but that might be a

[11:50] The property lines aren't dictate obvious on that.

[11:56] » I have a similar larger lot

[12:02] Um the larger lot lot four. The extension of the driveway and the

[12:07] access road, is that buildable space at the end there?

[12:13] » It would depend on setbacks and their orientation, but there'll be required

[12:17] setbacks of the property lines depending on where those property lines are.

[12:20] » But does that belong to the larger lot? >> It looks like it.

[12:23] » like >> Like yeah.

[12:24] » I was just curious. Thanks.

[12:29] » All right. If there are no further questions, I'll open up the public

[12:33] hearing and welcome the applicant to come forward and provide testimony.

[12:41] » [clears throat] >> Good evening.

[12:43] Chairperson, commissioners, staff, legal counsel.

[12:49] » [laughter] >> My name is Brian Vendetta, 63 East Ash

[12:52] Street, Lebanon, Oregon. Um

[12:56] Shannon did such did such a fine job of summarizing the proposal. I think if I

[13:01] were to tell you what I was prepared to tell

[13:05] you, I'd duplicate everything she said. So, with that, I think I'll jump right

[13:08] in and ask answer Mr. Kennedy's question. The lot four is

[13:13] the owner of the flag, and then there's a 30-ft easement that extends across the

[13:19] entire flag portion all the way to the east property line. And that easement

[13:23] [clears throat] extension along with the existing 20-ft PUE that's over the sewer

[13:27] line that's existing would render that small portion at the end of the private

[13:31] lane non-buildable just because it's encumbered with with easements.

[13:36] Um maybe go a little further than I need

[13:40] to, but we strategically made that lot larger because my client's pursuing

[13:44] buying the property to the east. Um so he would

[13:49] then continue the extension and create more lots

[13:53] in that property as well. Um

[13:57] with that said we've read through, understand all of

[14:00] the conditions as proposed, and we accept them as written

[14:04] and would ask that you would approve the subdivision and administrative review

[14:09] for the townhomes this evening. And I'd be more than happy to answer any

[14:13] questions.

[14:18] » All right. Thank you.

[14:21] » All right. Thank you.

[14:26] » The hearing's now open for members of the public to speak in favor of the

[14:29] application.

[14:34] Um we don't have anybody online, I'm assuming.

[14:37] So, seeing none, I will open up the members for members of the public to

[14:42] speak in opposition of the application. Seeing none.

[14:47] Um the applicant uh does not need to provide a rebuttal.

[14:54] Um okay. So, seeing no further comments or questions from the applicant for the

[14:59] applicant, I'll now close the public hearing.

[15:02] All further discussion will be limited to the planning commission and staff.

[15:09] So, based on the testimony and staff report, do we

[15:13] how do we feel about the criteria? >> I think they've been met.

[15:22] » All right. Would anyone like to make a motion? Oh,

[15:26] » I think Rosemary I just what you said were looking at buying more property to

[15:30] the east. I assume the east is at the end of the street and

[15:35] I just want to make sure in my mind that if we

[15:40] approve something like this are we locking ourselves into

[15:46] some further development that may not

[15:52] I assume we're not. >> No.

[15:54] » We are not. >> No.

[15:56] » We have code to to restrict access per how many dwelling units and so they will

[16:01] have to meet that criteria in our code. And it will be its own application to

[16:06] come back to us depending on the level that they provide.

[16:12] All right. Any other questions, comments?

[16:16] Would anyone like to make a motion?

[16:22] » I move that the Planning Commission approve applications for AR-26-07

[16:27] and S-26-04 and adopt the draft order as presented

[16:33] by staff. >> All right. Do we have a second?

[16:36] » I'll second. >> All right. All those in favor?

[16:40] » Say I. >> I.

[16:41] » I. >> All those opposed?

[16:44] All right. Motion passes. Thank you.

[16:50] All right. We'll move on to commission business and comments if there are any.

[16:59] No. Okay.

[17:02] Um in September there will be no Planning Commission meeting and the next

[17:06] regular scheduled meeting is for October 21st.

[17:10] So this meeting is now adjourned at 6:17 p.m.

Lebanon Oregon Planning Commission Meeting 08/19/2026

Transcript