Citizen Portal
Sign In

Residents voice opposition at Pacific hearing on interim zoning controls

City of Pacific City Council · April 1, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a Jan. 12 public hearing, residents raised questions and opposition to proposed interim zoning controls and an area-wide rezone, asking how 'ground-floor commercial' is defined and whether the changes would affect taxes, school capacity and accessory-dwelling rules.

Community Development Director Carl de Simas presented proposed interim zoning controls and an area-wide rezone during a Jan. 12 Pacific City Council public hearing that drew several residents who said the changes could harm neighborhood character and strain services. Mayor Kave opened the hearing and allowed public comment before closing it at 6:25 p.m.

The most vocal objections came from residents who said the proposal’s scope and definitions were unclear. Dan Teller (208 Portland Court SW) asked about how the proposal defines "ground-floor commercial." Kathy Messer (211 Tacoma Blvd N.) asked whether the zoning change would affect property taxes. Several attendees, including Sarah Thompson (324 Milwaukee Blvd S.), said they opposed rezoning that would encourage mixed-use development, and questioned whether the school district could accommodate potential population increases. Howard Erickson (1106 3rd Ave SW) urged the council to exclude Zone A from the rezone and to consider space for a garage if accessory dwelling units (ADUs) were proposed.

Community Development Director Carl de Simas said a standard garage would be allowed under the current zoning, but that adding ADUs would represent a change from existing regulations. On council consensus the item (AB25-155a / Ordinance 2025-2120) was forwarded for final reading at the Jan. 26, 2026 meeting for further consideration.

The public hearing produced no formal action at the Jan. 12 meeting; the council advanced the ordinance on first-reading procedural consensus and scheduled additional review at the Jan. 26 session. The next meeting will include the staff presentation and any written public comments submitted before the final reading.