Brothers seeking Agate Point motel OK disappointed by lack of community dialogue

To the editor:

My name is Chris Fletcher. My brother Jonathan and I are apparently the greedy profit-at-any-cost developers from California that have been batted around on the Yachats Village Residents Facebook group recently. We have just recently become aware of the enormous groundswell of opposition to the Agate Point project that we have presented to the community for consideration for a conditional use permit.

I want to let you know that we have requested a continuance of the Tuesday, Oct. 19 Planning Commission hearing so that we have a chance to disseminate accurate information and address your concerns and fears about our project.

None of us are Facebook members so we have been quite blindsided by the opposition to our plan. It disheartens me that not one disgruntled resident over the course of these past months ever bothered to pick up the phone or write an email to articulate their concerns or complaints, or even ask a single question about the proposed development from us. So, we were completely unaware of these strong negative feelings in the community.

I also wanted to try to set the record straight, because I have found much information and many characterizations in your Facebook chain to be not only inaccurate, but quite offensive to both of us personally.

First, as background, we are not developers, but simply brothers who have grown to love the Yachats area for the same reasons that you enjoy it — beautiful unspoiled coastline, small community with endless charm and good restaurants. In fact, my brother purchased a small cottage in Yachats several years ago with an eye towards retirement in which he can enjoy the bounty and simplicity of the Oregon coast. His family loves it as much as he does, and his son has recently enrolled at Oregon State University.

When my brother found this property for sale, we were very excited about the potential to provide the kind of environment that may be lacking along this coastline — a very high quality enclave of rentals that would attract couples and families that would be drawn to the same amenities, atmosphere and beauty that appealed to us. The property was zoned R-4 which allowed for a variety of uses including hotel/motel.

We fully understood the need for a conditional use permit because the lot was less than an acre and did not have direct access to U.S. Highway 101. We envisioned and then began to plan a collection of rentals that would be low profile, low density and high quality. We hired a development consultant to assist us in this process which was very new to us. Our goal was to reach out to the community and try to get as much feedback as possible in order to avoid the type of reaction that we now find.

We honestly tried to go about this the right way by:

• Reaching out to the city planner to make sure we considered all pertinent planning parameters and restrictions for the site. We met with the city planner to provide preliminary site plans and get valuable feedback. We contacted the Yachats Fire Department for their guidance. We listened and revised our plan several times making sure that we met the city’s requirements for the zoning and only applied for a conditional use permit that already have precedence in the city.
• Reaching out to the neighbors immediately, particularly the condominium project directly behind the project, The Dwellings. We asked for them to be liaison with the neighboring community to help solicit comments or reactions that would help us understand the neighbor’s concerns and improve our plan. We shared several iterations of our site plan. We sent invitations to all owners in the neighboring community to participate with us in a Q & A meeting held at the neighboring motel. Our meeting in mid-July was attended by roughly 15 neighbors. We provided site plans, elevations and specifications for the units. We invited the local architect/builder to answer any questions about their construction and quality. We invited our local marketing/management firm to answer any questions about how the property would be managed and controlled. We were met with questions, but not the hostility that has been expressed in your Facebook group. At that time, we only had one neighbor who followed up with questions, comments or suggestions.
• We were significantly concerned about the wetlands and hired a professional firm to evaluate the property. We really appreciate the wetlands and were drawn to this property partly to enjoy the neighboring wetlands open space with its willows and birds and which are permanently conserved by our neighbors in The Dwellings. We sought guidance on wetlands mitigation to determine what the alternatives were to enhancing high value wetlands in the area. I hope that the community understands the significant difference between the wetlands parcel recently purchased by The Dwellings and the wetlands characteristics of our site. There is only a small portion of our site that would be classified as wetlands and we are working with experienced professionals to find the best ways to mitigate.

Throughout this process we have been as open and transparent as we possibly could. You know how much feedback we have received, either constructive or negative since July? Not one phone call. Not one email. It is apparently easier to lob criticisms from your three-story condominium than it is to engage in real dialogue about what the best kind of project this could be.

I am very disappointed to see where our sense of community has gone when it becomes easier to make assumptions and vilify or demonize rather than seek understanding and consensus. It is more than offensive to read characterizations of myself and my brother from a group of smart individuals who have not bothered to reach out to either understand anything about us or the project. Conjecture, misinformation and outright conspiracy theories have become the norm without any interest in discovering the true facts or seeing both sides of the issue.

This property will be developed one day. We honestly set out to put together a plan that we felt was needed in the community and would be responsible and sensitive to the neighborhood. We worked very hard to create a plan that was well within the requirements of the R-4 zoning:

• All setback requirements have been met;
• Building height allowed is three stories and 30 feet and ours will not exceed one story and 14 feet;
• The lot coverage maximum is 45% and we proposed 26%. (6,342 proposed vs 11,114 allowed)
• Total building square footage allowed is 11,114 square feet and we have proposed 6,342 square feet;
• And, an entrance at the rear of the property was considered a more attractive alternative than a more visible and disruptive entrance off Yachats Road.

I understand that many people are against development of any kind, particularly those that have a beautiful environment that they are reluctant to share. It is easier to reject something outright than it is to respect property rights and do the difficult work of engaging, understanding and building consensus.

What I don’t understand is not wanting to engage to create something that is better. We may not be approved for this development, but I would feel better about it if the community had tried to understand rather than simply reject it.

We have asked for a continuance of the Planning Commission meeting until November. If anyone has any questions or would like to engage in a discussion about this project, we would be more than happy to accommodate, either by Zoom or an in-person meeting in Yachats. Let’s try to communicate rather than simply criticize through a Facebook page. We welcome your input. You can contact us at Pinphoto@earthlink.net

   — Chris Fletcher & Jonathan Fletcher, Newport Beach, Calif.