In a recent Brookings City Council meeting the main topic of discussion was the City of Brookings Urban Renewal Plan. The master plan was intended to identify areas of blight and present a unified idea of what downtown should look like.
Bruce Nishioka, a local attorney, presented a PowerPoint to the council to ask one major question:
“What good is a plan if we don’t follow it?” asked Nishioka.
The presentation, titled ‘Objection to Industrial Storage Units – Constructed in Revitalized Downtown’, brought attention to the shortcomings of the plan as it applies to a recent application for a conditional use permit. The permit would allow for an outside storage unit facility on Hemlock Street to expand to further nearby parcels, combining into one property.
Nishioka begins by pointing out the good the plan has done. A member of the Planning Commission during the plan’s inception, Nishioka was quick to point out that the establishment of the Urban Renewal Area was necessary.
It has allowed the funneling of tax money to urban renewal for projects that have done a lot of good for the area. One example Nishioka referenced was the installation of sidewalks on Hemlock, which he can say with authority has helped, as his business is also on that street.
After sharing some renderings for projects that were never completed, Nishioka points out some of the issues that have come up recently with the Plan, the main issue being with the storage unit facility’s ‘compatibility’ with the surrounding businesses, and the downtown area in general.
The Planning Commission approved the conditional use permits needed for the project on April 2nd, 2024. This was despite Nishioka and others presenting evidence against the granting of the permit. Nishioka appealed the Planning Commission’s decision, bringing it to the City Council.
Nishioka pointed out a pair of clauses from the original Urban Renewal Plan that states the necessary burden of proof for a conditional use permit:
“In any land use decision, the burden of producing substantial evidence to demonstrate compliance with the applicable criteria is upon the applicant. If adequate evidence is not provided, the applicant must be denied.”
As well as,
“The proposed use will have minimal adverse impact upon adjoining properties.”
The argument from Nishioka and multiple other business owners and interested parties is that adequate evidence of the storage units ‘fitting in’ with the other businesses in the area was not provided, and that the expansion of the storage facility would set back the recent growth on Hemlock.
“Conditional use permits are not a favor. The whole idea of zoning is: you have an industrial zone? That makes sense to put storage units in. A commercial zone, which this is, storage units are not accepted in [the plan]… Conditional use permits aren’t just something that are handed out. It’s up to you, the City, to say ‘Does this fit in? Is this going to be the plan?’” said Nishioka to the Council.
The discussions that followed were of compromise. Nishioka stated that the idea would be more palatable if efforts were made to make the business more aesthetically in line with the rest of the area. Councilor Phoebe Pereda seemed to agree on two fronts: that the plan has done a lot of good but has failed to establish proper guidelines in certain areas, and that there may be room for compromise on this issue.
“I too don’t understand why we have a plan in place, if we’re not going to work towards that plan. I can see in some ways it has, but in other ways clear guidelines have never been set,” stated Councilor Pereda, “So while I don’t necessarily have any issue with it being a storage unit, if it could have a cottagey feel and some trees along the sidewalk, to make it an area that visitors and community would like to walk through and enjoy.”
Councilor Andy Martin made a statement supporting the business, citing that as a small business owner himself, he understands the immense amount of red tape that owners must cleave through to build a prosperous business.
Mayor Hodges agreed with that point, and restated his support for land-owner rights, but agrees that the Plan falls short in terms of providing actionable guidelines to hold businesses to.
The Planning Commission maintains that the proper burden of evidence was surpassed when the initial permit application was presented to them, and they reaffirm their decision based on a lack of conditions they could impose on the storage unit facility.
The council voted unanimously to uphold the Planning Commission’s decision, with the intention of adding agenda items to workshop an update to the Brookings Urban Renewal Plan.
Most Popular
Comments / 0