Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01/08/1992 . AGENDA PORT ANGELES PLANNING COMMISSION City Council Chambers 321 East Fifth Street Port Angeles, W A 98362 January 8, 1992 7:00 P.M. I. II. ill. . IV. 1. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of December 11, 1991 PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED CLEARING AND GRADING ORDINANCE: City-wide. (Continued from December 11, 1991.) 2. REZONE REQUEST - REZ 91(11)05 - CITY OF PORT ANGELES. Between Peabody and Chase and 5th and 7th Streets: Proposed rezone of approximately 9.3 acres from RMF, Residential Multi-Family, to OC, Office Commercial. (Continued from December 11, 1991.) 3. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT - ZCA 91(12)08 - CLALLAM COUNTY. LI. Lipt Industrial District: Request for amendment to Zoning Ordinance No. 1709, as amended, which would allow public detention facilities to be permitted uses in the Light Industrial District. (Continued from December 11, 1991.) 4. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA 92(01)125 - ITT RA YONIER. 700 North Ennis Street: Request for a pennit to allow the remediation of contaminated soils from an area within the Mill site located near Ennis Creek. . All correspondence penaining to a hearing item received by the Planning Depanment at least one day prior to the scheduled hearing will be provided to Commission members before the hearing. Planning Commission: Ray Gruver, Chair; Cindy Souders, Vice-Cbair; Jim Hulett; Roger Catts; Larry Leonsrd; Bob Philpott; Bill Anabel. Planning Staff: Brad Collins, Planning Director; Sue Roberds, Planning Office Specialist; John Jimerson, ASlIociate Planner; David Sawyer, Senior Planner. . . . Planning Commission Agenda Page 2 5. REZONE REOUEST - REZ 92(01)01 - OLYMPIC MEMORIAL HOSPITAL. 1029 Caroline Street: Request to rezone property from RS-7, Residential Single- Family, to PBP, Public Buildings and Parks. V. COMMUNlCA TIONS FROM THE PUBLIC VI. STAFF REPORTS VII. REPORTS OF COl\fMISSION MEMBERS Vill. ADJOURNMENT HAPPY NEW YEAR !! PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE: Spokesmen for the proponents and opponents will be given an opportunity to speak to the request. Infonnation submitted should be factual, relevant and not merely duplication of a previous presentation. A reasonable time (10 minutes) shall be allowed the spokesman; others shall be limited to short supporting remarks (5 minutes). Other interested parties will be allowed to comment briefly (5 minutes each) or make inquiries. The Chairman may allow additional public testimony if the issue warrants it. Brief rebuttal (5 minutes) for proponents and opponents heard separately and consecutively with presentation limited to their spokesman. Rebuttal shall be limited to factual statements pertaining to previous testimony. Comments should be directed to the Planning Commission, not the City Staff representatives present, unless directed to do so by the Chairman. All correspondence penaining to a hearing item received by the Planning Department at least one day prior to the scheduled hearing will be provided to Commission members before the hearing. P1annill8 Commission: Ray Gruver, Chair; Cindy Souders, Vice-Chair; Jim Hulett; Roger Cans; Larry Leonard; Bob Philpott; Bill Anabel. Planning Staff: Brad Collins, Planning Director; Sue Roberds, Planning Office Specialist; John Jimerson, Associate Planner; David Sawyer, Senior Planner. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington January 8, 1992 I CALL TO ORDER Chairman Gruver called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. II ROLL CALL Members Present: Bill Anabel, cindy Souders, Bob Philpott, Ray Gruver, Jim Hulett, Larry Leonard. Members Excused: Roger Catts. staff Present: Brad Collins, John Jimerson, Becker, Gary Kenworthy. Bruce III APPROVAL OF MINUTES commissioner Philpott moved to approve the minutes of the December II, 1991, as submitted. The motion was seconded by commissioner Hulett and passed 5 - 0, with commissioner Anabel abstaining. IV PUBLIC HEARINGS PROPOSED CLEARING AND GRADING ORDINANCE - City-Wide. (Continued from December II, 1991.) Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M. Fran Burch, 1036 East First street, representing the Board of Realtors, stated her main concerns are the impacts the Ordinance would have on affordable housing and private property rights. A surveyor has told her it would cost an applicant $1,500 to comply with the requirements of Section 6.A. The requirement for accurate site information for 200 feet around a property is impossible to comply with. It is illegal for surveyors to enter private property without the owner's permission. She cited twelve counties in the state which do not have their own clearing and grading ordinances yet. Six of those use Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code; four have no regulations; one regulates clearing and grading as part of their land development ordinance; and one addresses clearing and grading with their Comprehensive Plan. Art Dunker, 2114 West sixth street, representing North Olympic Peninsula Homebuilders Association, presented the permit fees for what it cost to build an 1,100 square-foot rambler in Bellevue. The total development fees in that City exceed $10,000. He is concerned with rising costs of government PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1992 Page 2 . regulations for single-family homes and recommends that all single-family homes be exempt from the Ordinance. Chairman Gruver asked Mr. Dunker if he thought several houses being constructed at the same time as one proj ect should obtain a clearing and grading permit. Mr. Dunker responded he assumed that such a development would come under PRD or other discretionary approval, under which those concerns could be addressed. commissioner Hulett asked Mr. Dunker and Mr. Collins if SB 2929 created new impact fees for new developments. Mr. Collins responded that the Growth Management Act does allow for revenues to be collected from new development through impact fees. Ray Grice, 515 West Seventh street, stated he is concerned wi th the cost involved to build a new home. The new Ordinance would adversely affect the affordability of housing in Port Angeles. . Mary Craver, 3002 Maple Street, stated the Ordinance is ambiguous; it is not clear what would be required of an applicant for a development project. She stated she is concerned with the discretion afforded to the City Engineer by the Ordinance. There being no further public testimony, Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing at 7:30 P.M. Commissioner Leonard asked staff if the Ordinance would have eliminated flooding problems on "C" Street. city Engineer Kenworthy responded it would have helped. The Ordinance's primary emphasis is not storm water control; rather it focuses on clearing and grading and problems those activities may cause, such as erosion. commissioner Philpott asked why the city initiated this Ordinance. What would occur if the City did not adopt the Ordinance? Mr. Collins explained that the city council identified creation of this Ordinance as a goal two years ago in response to several specific problems which were occurring on a regular basis. He clarified that most cities the size of Port Angeles and larger, unlike counties referred to by Ms. Burch, do have clearing and grading ordinances. Port Angeles' development review process tends to be more simple and more affordable than other cities'. . Commissioner Leonard stated that this permit, when combined with the wetland permit, could prevent construction of housing that has a low margin of profit. Mr. Collins responded that most houses are not builtin wetland areas and would not require a wetland permit. PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1992 Page 3 . Commissioner Leonard reviewed eight problems which City staff has stated could have been avoided if this Ordinance had been in place. In his opinion, this Ordinance would have helped in only three or four of those cases. Discussion ensued as to the problem of relying on the state Environmental Policy Act for regulating clearing and grading activities. Mr. Collins noted that the City would not have the right to comment on projects in which they do not have jurisdiction. For example, when White t s Creek Ravine was filled in the City had no permitting process for that activity, and therefore was not an agency with jurisdiction. Commissioner Hulett suggested the Planning Commission consider a two-pronged system in the clearing and grading ordinance, which differentiates between speculative clearing and grading and work done in conjunction with a building permit. He suggested that when a building permit is involved, concerns relating to clearing and grading activities could be addressed on-site by a building inspector. . Chairman Gruver stated that ordinances are often designed to reduce the long-term cost to the general publ ic at the expense of those involved in the development. The proposed Ordinance is a good ordinance; however, we need to look at the thresh- olds, focusing on single-family homes. Commissioner Leonard offered an alternative approach, suggest- ing an ordinance be prepared which does not require permits, but states what individuals can and cannot do, and provides fines for violation of the ordinance. commissioner Souders stated that she would like to come to a resolution on this Ordinance at this meeting, but would be willing to consider continuing it only if at the next meeting it is the only item on the agenda. Commissioner Leonard moved to continue the item to January 15, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, and that no new public testimony to be considered. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Anabel and carried unanimously. REZONE REQUEST - REZ-91(11)05 - CITY OF PORT ANGELES, Between Peabody and Chase and Fifth and Seventh Streets: Proposed rezone of approximately 9.3 acres from RMF, Residential Multi-Family, to OC, Office Commercial. (Continued from December II, 1991.) . Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing at 8:15 P.M. There being no public testimony, Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing at 8:16 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1992 Page 4 . Commissioner Anabel moved to continue the item to February 12, 1992. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hulett and carried unanimously. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT - ZCA-91(12)08 - CLALLAM COUNTY, LI, Light Industrial District: Request for amendment to Zoning Ordinance No. 1709, as amended, which would allow public detention facilities to be permitted uses in the Light Industrial District. (Continued from December 11, 1991. ) Mr. Jimerson reviewed the Department Report. Mr. Collins presented an overhead displaying the existing zoning in the vicinity of the Airport and explained why the Planning Depart- ment believes the PBP Zoning designation is a preferable alternative. Such a rezone would have fewer problems for the future of the site. Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing at 8:20 P.M. . Pete Peterson, Director of Juvenile services for Clallam County, explained some of the operations of the Juvenile Detention Facility. The Facility acts as a 24-hour holding facil i ty. The average length of stay for individuals is eight days. The site employs thirty working staff. He charac- terized the facility as a jail, and noise should be mitigated by the construction and design of the building. Jim Rumpeltes, County Administrator, said the facility can be characterized as more of an office complex: it contains admin- istrative offices and a court. He stated it is the county's desire that the use be permitted outright in the Light Indus- trial Zone District. Commissioner Leonard asked what the County's objection to the PBP zoning would be. Mr. Rumpeltes stated that timing is the main concern. They want to begin construction of the project this summer and do not want to have any rezone issues delaying that construction. Grant Beck, Clallam County Senior Planner, stated that the Port District owns the property, the County leases it, and it would be difficult to obtain the Port's consent to rezone the property. The proposed use is compatible with the Light Industrial District. It is not unlike an office building, which would be permitted. It is his understanding that the City's rationale for making it a conditional use is to protect the juvenile facility from other uses. The project is not residential development. . Mr. Collins responded that the Port District does not have to agree to the rezone. The City can and has approved rezones without the written consent of property owners. The intent of staff's recommendation for a conditional use is not.to protect the detention facility from other industrial uses but is to . PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1992 Page 5 protect the industrial uses from a sleeping activity. For example, expansion of an airport in close proximity to a sleeping activity may be hampered due to potential adverse environmental impacts Dn the residents of the sleeping facility. He noted that timing for a rezone approval is not substantially different than for a Conditional Use Permit. He believed a rezone could be accomplished in a timely manner to allow construction this summer. There being no further public testimony Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing at 8:55 P.M. Following discussion, Commissioner Souders moved to amend the Light Industrial Zone District to add public detention facili- ties as a permitted use. The motion was seconded by Commis- sioner Anabel. The motion failed by a vote of 3 - 3, with Chairman Gruver and Commissioners Leonard and Hulett voting UNo" . Commissioner Hulett moved to recommend the City Council adopt a zoning Code Amendment of the Light Industrial Zone District to add Conditional Use Permit "J", which reads: "Public juvenile detention facilities, where: 1. The average daily noise levels (ldn) do not exceed 45 decibels for interior sleeping quarters: and . 2. The existing and potential industrial uses will not adversely impact the detention center. citing the following findings and conclusions: FINDINGS: 1. The stated purpose of the Light Industrial Zone District is to "preserve land for industrial uses in a planned, park-like setting[ in close proximity to airports and highways". 2. The bulk of LI-zoned land is located around the Airport[ with smaller clusters of LI-zoned land located at Boule- vard and lie" Streets[ in the vicinity of Tumwater and Valley streets, and the Downtown Waterfront. 3. The proposed use will be allowed only if it would not be adversely impacted by noise and other nuisances or hazards which may occur in industrial areas. CONCLUSIONS: A. The potential for land use conflict is minimized by the limitations placed on the conditional use. . B. The Zoning Code Amendment is in the public use and interest. PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1992 Page 6 . The amendment is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. D. The amendment is consistent with the intent of the LI Zoning District. C. E. Residential uses are not normally considered to be compatible with industrial uses. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Leonard and carried unanimously. The Planning Commission took a break at 9:10 P.M. and reconvened at 9:25 P.M. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT SMA-92 (Ol) 125 ITT RAYONIER, 700 North Ennis Street: Request for a permit to allow the remediation of contaminated soils from an area within the Mill site located near Ennis Creek. . Mr. Jimerson reviewed the Department Report. Mr. Collins added that at last night's City Council meeting, the City Attorney advised that a generalized' condition requiring compliance with an ordinance adopted subsequent to date of application should not be made. If the Planning Commission or City Council wishes to include particular requirements of the critical areas ordinances, they should be specific in that language. Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing at 9:35 P.M. Brian Jones, ITT Rayonier, explained several aspects of the project, including why it is being done: how the oil absorbent booms work: and location of the sheet pile. Commissioner Philpott asked if the source of oil is from finishing room equipment. Mr. Jones stated that most of the oil has been there for a long time, dating back to the '30s and '40s. He is able to make this conclusion based on the PCB content of the oils. He stated it is their intent to re-use the oil, if it is clean enough. However, if it is not, they will dispose of it properly. They are currently recovering anywhere between two tablespoons to a pint per day. '. There being no further public testimony, Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing at 9:50 P.M. Commissioner Hulett asked if applying the Critical Areas Ordinances would cover any issues not covered by other permits which ITT is required to obtain from the State. Mr. Collins responded that the Critical Areas Ordinances have a number of significant requirements. Whether or not they are needed in this case, we do not know, as we are just in the initial stages of implementing the Ordinances. The applicant has addressed the City's and Fisheries' concerns and the project ) PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1992 Page 7 . will be good for the environment, as it is cleaning up an existing problem. He does not believe the City would be derelict if they did not require compliance with the critical Areas Ordinances as a condition of this Shoreline Permit. commissioner Souders stated she is concerned with the condition requ~r~ng compliance with the critical Areas Ordinances, feeling it is too vague. She suggested that requirements of the Ordinances be specifically listed for this project. Following discussion, commissioner Anabel moved to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council, subject to the following conditions and citing the following findings and conclusions: CONDITIONS: A. Upon discovery of evidence of possible archaeological significance, the applicant shall notify the Planning Department and shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor the excavation work. B. No portion of the Creek channel between the top of the rip rap on the west to the top of the eastern bank shall be disturbed in any manner, except for the continued maintenance of the existing oil absorbent booms. . FINDINGS: 1. The approval is for removal of hydraulic oil from ground and surface water under and near the finishing room. 2. All physical alterations to the site will occur west of the west bank rock rip rap. Improvements include installation of 200 feet of 16' high sheet piling parallel to Ennis Creek, a 3-foot wide trench west of the sheet piling, several extraction sumps, monitoring and collection wells, and a SOO-gallon collection tank. 3. Sheet piling will be installed using equipment situated on an asphalt pad on the east side of Ennis Creek. 4. The Mill is on the site of the original Puget Sound Cooperative Colony and Klallam Village, which is located on the Washington State Register of Historic Places. 5. The Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, Comprehensive Plan, and Zoning Ordinance, have been reviewed with respect to this proposal. . 6. The applicant has applied for a hydraulics permit from the Department of Fisheries. PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1992 Page 8 . 7. The application was submitted on November 22, 1991, which was prior to the effective dates of the City's Critical Areas Protection ordinances. The proposed project is located within close proximity to Ennis Creek and is an environmentally sensitive area. CONCLUSIONS: A. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, specifically General Regulations C.1 and C.4; Land Use Element D.6; Natural system Element E.7.b, E.IO.a and d; and Use Activity F.18.a-c. B. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the policies and regulations of the Port Angeles Compre- hensive Plan and Zoning Code. C. As conditioned, the proposal will not be detrimental to the shoreline. . The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hulett and passed 5 - 1 , with commissioner Souders voting nNo" . She was not comfortable that the State's review of the work will prevent environmental damage. She would have liked to have a better understanding of the scope of review conducted by the Wash- ington Department of Ecology and State Wildlife Department. REZONE REQUEST REZ-92(01)01 OLYMPIC MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 1029 Caroline street: Request to rezone property from RS-7, Residential Single-Family, to PBP, Public Buildings and Parks. Mr. Jimerson reviewed the Department Report. Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing at 10:15 P.M. . Donna Davison, 939 Caroline Street, representing Olympic Memorial Hospital, explained there is room on the site for five (5) parking spaces, which would accommodate for the increased number of required spaces resulting from this project. Regarding the Hospital's main expansion, she stated that the additional six (6) parking spaces required will be provided in the rear of the Hospital. In addi tioD, the Hospital owns two off-site parking lots, one 115 feet away from the Hospital, and the other 125 feet. These lots provide a total of 48 spaces and are used by Hospital staff to relieve the demand for parking at the Hospital. The Hospital has been invol ved in long-range planning. The need for the Kidney Center was identified as early as 1986. She noted the communi ty is growing and there is an increased demand for Hospital services. This rezone creates an opportunity to maintain and preserve views from the bluffs. The rezone is in the public interest, as they are a public Hospital meeting a public need. PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1992 Page 9 . Commissioner Hulett asked why the Kidney Center was not included in the Hospital expansion. Ms. Davison responded there were several factors considered. The house provides an excellent view of the strait, which is ideal for kidney patients who have to sit in the facility for several hours at a time. Construction codes are different for in-patient and out-patient facilities. Because this facility would be strictly an out-patient facility, it would be subject to less restrictive codes. Debbie Kelly, 939 Caroline street, is the nursing manager of the Hospital's Kidney Center. She presented graphs demon- strating the increasing demand for kidney treatment facilities in Port Angeles. There has been a 15% increase in the annual demand. She explained the service they provide and the need for expansion. :,)a...qqe.r . . Kathleen [no l~st name] stated she has been a d1alys1s patient for 15 years. She explained the difficulties involved in receiving treatments, including the hardships created by the lack of availability of facilities nearby. . Sally Fossum, 1304 Regent Street, stated she has been a dialysis patient for five years. She also explained the difficulties she has encountered in receiving treatment, especially with the lack of facilities in Clallam County. She has to drive to Seattle for much of her treatment. Jack McCarter, 1035 COlumbia, stated he owns and lives in the house next door to the site. He is in full support of the rezone. He stated that he has discussed the proposal with other neighbors and is acting as a spokesman for them: they are also in support of the rezone. Evelyn McCarter, 1035 COlumbia, stated the Hospital has been a wonderful neighbor. There is plenty of parking. She noted that during construction, Hospital employees have been parking on Columbia street and they have been very courteous and good neighbors. Shirley Kinyon, 633 Georgiana street, is a volunteer at the Kidney Center. She emphasized that the service is needed in this community. There is a shortage of spaces available for kidney treatment. Donna Davison stated the State of Washington allocates only a certain number of dialysis stations. Olympic Memorial Hospital must act on the stations they have been allocated or they could lose the opportunity. She reiterated that parking can be accommodated on-site. . There being no further public testimony, Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing at 10:50 P.M. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1992 Page 10 Commissioner Leonard moved to forward a favorable recommenda- tion to the City Council to rezone the property from RS-7 to PBP, citing the following findings and conclusions: FINDINGS: 1. The proposal is to rezone the site from RS-7 to PBP to allow expansion of the Hospital to site a new Kidney Center. 2. Public testimony demonstrated a need for the service. Demand for the service has increased annually by 15%. 3. Social Policies Nos. 2 and 4 of the Port Angeles Compre- hensive Plan state the need for providing services for members of the community as the community and the demand for services increase. 4. Comprehensive Plan Commercial Policy No. 16 states that "specialized and City-wide oriented medical and dental operations should be as functionally near the Hospital as possible" . 5. The proposed rezone is adj acent to the existing Hospital. 6. The property is owned by a public entity. 7. The state of Washington allocates dialysis stations on a limited basis. Testimony has indicated that the Hospital could lose their allocation for these new stations. CONCLUSIONS: A. The rezone is in the public interest. It would serve the increasing demand for health care facilities in the area. B. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Goals, POlicies, and Objectives, specifically Commercial Policies Nos. 2, 6, and 16, Social Policies Nos. 2 and 4, and Land Use Objectives Nos. 1 and 2. C. There has been a change in circumstances. The community served by the Hospital has grown and demand for kidney treatment is increasing by 15% per year. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Souders and carried unanimously. The Planning Commission took a break at 11: 00 P.M. and reconvened at 11:05 P.M. V COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None. {"e., "".-;0 ,- -. PLANNING COMMISSION January 8, 1992 Page 11 VI STAFF REPORTS Mr. Collins noted that there is a workshop in Tacoma on urban design and its relationship to growth management to be held on January 17th, and stated it would be possible for one Planning Commissioner to attend. Anyone interested should let him know by Thursday, January 9th. Mr. Collins also distributed an article addressing why urban design should be a part of the growth management process. planning Commission agendas will continue to be full. The planning commission should start to think about setting a long-range agenda calendar for the next year. VII REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS Commissioner Philpott suggested the City should consider changing the parking ordinance to allow parking within 150 feet of a site, such as the Hospital, to be counted toward meeting the parking requirements. Mr. Collins said that issue could be addressed at the March long-range Planning Commission meeting, when the City conducts its review of the Hospital vicinity. Commissioner Hulett said perhaps there could be an incentive crea ted to encourage more involvement on community boards with compensation structured to reward an individual for serving a full term and to increase that reward for completion of two terms. VIII ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Commissioner Anabel moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Leonard and carried unanimously. The meeting was ad' ned at 11:15 P.M. Br . ~ lins, Secretary PLAN. 539 JJ PLEASE SIGN IN CITY OF PORT ANGELES Attendance Roster Type of Meeting Planning Commission Dale &i jt~"~ f~ -& g]O~ Location 3 1 E th t~t - ty v Name Address /2'':> ~ l/17-I S~, PA It)(., tv Id (',0- l r-")""'l_ A- (11/ c"L.l~D J\ . , '- y \ /1/~;'t t- / ~ 11- f?A-/ P A. 1:1; /1; !J 1/- , TL // J ~~ IlPk2/~ ~/ ~ c. ~ . .'"h~ 11~~ ~ ~ -- ~( .~ ~ <L-' ~O(Lf' g\-, \ L)ocdS (Je{ (~0 (1 ) Jett6~ NCU4 t1 O<)<)Q. tt- I ~/?- .:5 -P.;; ?~ S'f)4i- 5Ef)- '-L , I Ii I I J J l( ~ ~