The Beaverton Planning Commission met on February 4, 2026, at an evening session that adjourned at 7:10 PM. The meeting included a public hearing on a conditional use application for extended hours at a Hawaiian Brothers drive-through restaurant, an informational presentation on the Southwest Allen Boulevard Street Plan Update, and adoption of the January 7, 2026 meeting minutes. No public testimony was offered on any agenda item.
Greetings. Now is the time and place for a meeting of the Beaverton Planning Commission. For the record, I will do a roll call to verify which Commission members are participating this evening. Commissioner Holmes. Commissioner McAvoy. Present. Commissioner Mettler. Present. Commissioner Speck. Present. Commissioner Winter. Commissioner Winter is not here. Let the record not show that. He is present today. However, let the record show that Commissioner McCann is excused in absence from the meeting tonight. We are now at Commission Communications. Commission, any communications. Like no communications. We are now at staff communications. Staff, any communications. Good evening, Chair Jana Fox, current planning manager. No communications this evening. Great. Thank you. The first item on the agenda is a public hearing on the application for LU 32025-0674. Hawaiian Brothers extended hours of operation. Case file number CUN 32025-00256. This item was continued from the December 17th, 2025 and January 21st, 2026. Planning Commission. Agendas. Before we move to the substance of the hearing, I will ask the city attorney to cover the prehearing matters. Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. Robin McIntyre, Assistant City Attorney. The applicant has the burden of proving that the applications are consistent with the Beaverton Development Code, comprehensive plan, and any applicable Beaverton Code provision. The criteria that must be addressed in the hearing are development code sections 40.03.1 facilities review 40.15.15.4C. Condition new conditional use. Testimony, arguments, and evidence must be directed toward these approval criteria or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or development code that the speaker believes apply to the application. Failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to allow the planning commission and other interested parties an opportunity to respond may preclude an appeal to the land use board of appeals based on that issue. Anyone who submits written comments or gives oral testimony has standing to appeal this decision. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow the city to respond may preclude an action for damages in circuit court. State and local law require commissioners to make certain disclosures. To these ends, the following questions will be asked. Does any commissioner have a potential or actual conflict of interest? Ex parte contacts or site visits to declare. Chair Adams. No to all three. Commissioner Holmes. No to all. Commissioner McAvoy. No to all.