Depoe Bay planning commission pauses decision on Highway 101 parking variance request

The Depoe Bay Planning Commission on June 11 paused deliberations and left the record open for additional written testimony on a request by applicant Krista Holmes to permit a mixed retail-and-residential use to rely on on-street parking on U.S. Highway 101 rather than meet the C-1 zone off-street parking requirement. The commission set a continuation for a final decision at its next regular meeting on July 9, 2025.

The proposal (Case File 1-DAR-PC-25) seeks a variance from the city—s zoning code to allow a craft shop on the ground floor and a dwelling above in an existing building that has no land available for on-site parking. Staff reported the building was constructed in 1928, predates the city's zoning adoption, and that the mixed use would require eight off-street spaces under the applicable code; staff noted 10 delineated on-street spaces exist in the highway frontage. The Oregon Department of Transportation provided written comment saying it had no concerns with a new business at that location, according to the staff report.

Why it matters: Commissioners and public speakers tied the request to broader downtown planning issues, including whether the C-1 standards fit the south-of-the-bridge area, how on-street parking along Highway 101 is used and managed, and whether the applicant performed adequate due diligence to find off-site parking within the 500-foot alternative described in the zoning materials.

Staff recommended conditional approval with four conditions that would apply if the commission ultimately grants the variance: (1) the variance would expire if the Athens Craft Store business is discontinued at the site for one year or more; (2) any change in use would require prior review; (3) required parking must be used for customers, patrons, residents and employees and not for storage or truck parking; and (4) the 10 existing highway-frontage spaces are public parking and no signs may be placed to reserve those spaces for a particular business. Commissioners discussed those conditions but did not vote on approval at the June 11 meeting.

Public comment during the hearing was mixed. Supporters said the south side of the bridge has many preexisting, built-to-the-lot-line structures that cannot accommodate off-street parking and argued that allowing businesses to use existing highway frontage parking supports local commerce. One local business owner who spoke in favor said, "We need businesses on the south side of the bridge," and described the highway-front parking as regularly available outside peak midday hours. Joshua Welch of Willow Life's Cafe told commissioners, "I do, definitely agree with approving their variance."

Opponents pressed the commission on whether the applicant had met the variance criteria, particularly the minimum-variance requirement and the claim that no off-site parking within 500 feet was available. Opponent Fran Recht told the commission, "For variances, all criteria need to be met. Not 1, not 2, not 3, but all 4," and urged denial or postponement until the applicant supplied further documentation of outreach to nearby property owners or evidence that potential off-site parking was infeasible.

Applicant Krista Holmes said she and her realtor inspected the 500-foot area and "I have walked the 500 feet around the building" and that she found no advertised properties available for lease or sale to meet the off-site parking option. Holmes also explained that some adjacent land lies within ODOT right-of-way and would not be buildable without further approvals.

Commissioners discussed safety concerns about vehicles backing onto Highway 101, whether the C-1 parking rules were written primarily for north-of-bridge conditions, and the practical difficulty of adding off-street parking on steep, confined lots south of the bridge. The city planner clarified that the 2011 and 2022 codified zoning texts differ in places because a 2022 codification inadvertently included language that had not been adopted; staff advised the commission to refer to the previously adopted language in some sections while the city undertakes a formal recodification.

Procedurally, the commission briefly reopened the public hearing after staff and the applicant provided additional verbal information late in the meeting, then closed the public hearing again and left the written record open for at least seven days to accept supplemental evidence. The commission scheduled the matter to resume deliberations and a final decision at its July 9, 2025 meeting.

The commission took no final action on the variance on June 11; the record remains open and the case will return to the commission on July 9, 2025.