HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01/26/1994
.
.
.
AGENDA
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
PLANNING COMMISSION
321 East Fifth Street
Port Angeles, W A 98362
January 26, 1994
7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
m. APPROV AL OF MINUTES: Meeting of January 12, 1994
IV. PUBLIC BEARING:
1.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 93(01)02 - UMBRELLA
COMMUNITY SERVICES. 531 East Fifth Street: Request to allow
a group home in the RS-7, Residential Single- Family District.
(Continued from January 12, 1994.)
2. PROPOSED CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT AND PLAN AND
OTHER POTENTIAL REVISIONS TO THE DRAFT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN'S GOAlS AND POLICIES
V. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
VI. STAFF REPORTS
VII. REPORTS OF BOARD MEMBERS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE: Spokesmen for the proponents and opponents will be given an opportunity to
speak to the request. Information 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 will be 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 Board, not the City Staff representatives present, unless directed to do SO by the Chairman.
Members: Bob Wimers, Chair; Cindy Souders, Vice Chair; Bob Philpott; Orville Campbell; Roger Calts; and Carl
Alexander.
Planning Staff: Brad Collins, Director; Johll Jimerson, Associate Plallner; Sue Roberds, Office Specialist, David
Sawyer, Senior Planner.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Agenda
Page 2
VIT.
REPORTS OF THE COMMISSION
vm. ADJOURNMENT
PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE:
Spokesmen for the proponents and opponents will be given an opportunity to speak to the
request. Information submitted should be factual, relevant and not merely duplication of a
previous presentation. It is helpful if the speaker identifies his/her interest in the issue. 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.
.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMl\1ISSION
Port Angeles, Washington 98362
January 26, 1994
7:00 pm
I.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Winters called the meeting to order at 7:04 pm.
n. ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present:
Bob Philpott, Bob Winters, Linda Nutter~ Carl Alexander,
Cindy Souders, Roger Caus and Orville Campbell.
Commissioners Absent:
None
Brad Collins, David Sawyer, Ken Ridout, Ed Bonollo, and
Officer Terry Gallagher.
. Public Present Mr. and Mrs. Horrocks, Sandy Oliver, Barbara and Joe
Eckert, Susan Feiro~ Jim Hinshaw, Bill Bonk, Jean and Bill Folden, Kathe
Smith, Cathy Hassell, Laurey Hansen-Carl, Bill and Cate Rinehart, Win
Slota, Dorothy Phillips, Bob Cates, Herb and Anne Boyd, Don McInnes,
Tim German, Jim Bunger, Patricia Lorentzen, Sheila Sell, Carl Sell, Dave
Milligan, Barb Nason, Charyl Baumann, Anne Murray, Ken Schermer,
Mr. and Mrs. Warner Balch, Kurtis Lorentzen, Marvin and Vallerie
Jester, Lori Cates, David Waggoner.
Staff Present:
ill. APPROVALOFMThmT~
The Planning Commission reviewed the January 12, 1994, minutes as presented.
Commissioner Philpott pointed out two typos which were corrected. Commissioner
Campbell moved to approve the minutes as modified. Commissioner Nutter seconded the
motion which carried unanimously.
IV.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 94(01)02 - UMBRELLA
COMMUNITY SERVICES. 531 East Fifth Street: Request for a
conditional use permit to allow a group home in an RS- 7, Residential
Single-Family District.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 26, 1994
Page 2 of 13
.
Mr. Collins noted that this public hearing is continued from January 12, 1994, and that
the staff report had been presented at that hearing. He then reviewed the report once
again for those present.
Staff answered questions regarding residential sprinklers, fencing, and proximity to the
Peabody Creek Ravine. Chair Winters then explained the public hearing procedure and
opened the public hearing.
Laurey Hansen Carl, Program Manager of the State's Home Sexual Assault
Program, 217 Towne Road, Sequim, W A, presented a presentation outline to the
Commission. She stated that the project is consistent with planning goals of the City,
will enhance the neighborhood and will provide a needed service that is currently not
available in this community. Fencing and landscaping is planned around the home and
. landscaping is proposed along the ravine to enhance the ravine.
Ms. Carl read a letter from Mr. Borden Farnell, a City resident who had lived next door
to a transition house which was in Port Angeles from 1987 to 1989. The letter stated that
the tenants of the transition house were nearly invisible, the children no different than
other children in the neighborhood, and there were no abusive males around. Her
experience was very favorable as a neighbor.
.
The women and children who would be the tenants of the house will be screened. Those
who have a potential to have an abuser seek them out are placed in another community.
There have not been, to her knowledge, any abusers who bother neighbors in the
situations that now exist. On-site services provide the women and children with
information about how to change their lives. The type of people that will be found in
this home are already our neighbors; there is domestic violence in every neighborhood
that goes unchecked in many cases. These people have come forward and are asking for
assistance for a change in their lives. Ms. Carl stated that they are very willing to have
a neighborhood program to address any concerns that might arise if desired. The tenants
will be good neighbors who are looking for a better life for their children and themselves.
Officer Terry Gallagher, Patrol Sargeant, City of Port Angeles, stated that he is
representing the Police Department to answer questions the Commission and citizenry
may have. The Police Department does not have a JXlsition on safehomes; however, it
is the opinion of the Police Department that safehomes do not constitute a crime hazard.
Warner Balch, 533 East Fifth Street, asked Officer Gallagher if safehomes are discreet
or unknown by the public.
.
Officer Gallagher answered that safehomes are very discreet. No criminal activity has
been directly tracked to a safehome. In the past nine plus years of his employment with
the City's Police Department, no calls from a safehome have been recorded. From the
Police Department's point of view, a safehoffie greatly reduces domestic related service
calls because the family is split up and therefore the violence is reduced.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26, 1994
PAGE 3 OF 13
.
Maurice Jester, 517 East Sixth Street, had no problem with a safehome. He is
concerned about screening of the site and that there will be no staff or supervisors on-site.
The safehome is adjacent to a ravine and is darkly lit. Being a past abuser, he said
abusers look for their families. He asked how the neighbors will be protected.
Win Slota, 516 East Sixth Street, stated her concern because the ravine is adjacent to
the site and is a good hiding place for prowlers. Why can't the City leave the house
where it is now, adjacent to City Hall. What other locations are being considered?
.
Sandy Oliver, Serenity House Executive Director, 1022 S. "e" Street, has worked
with Umbrella Community Services in the past as shelter providers. During 1987-1989
when Umbrella maintained its transition house, the environment of the home and
neighborhood was very much in keeping with a community neighborhood environment
that you would find in any neighborhood. Emergency shelter is not the answer for a
continuum of care in this community. It is only a bandaide. Transitional housing is a
key to the City's ability to allow people to come out of emergency situations and fmd
long term stability. Transitional housing for victims of domestic abuse is much needed
in this community. She stressed that in transitional housing situations, even more so than
in emergency situations, clients have an obligation to take responsibility and
accountability to make some changes. Social service agencies work together to offer
classes and living skill changes to allow clients to work become self sufficient. She
strongly urged that the community and the Planning Commission support this use so that
we can all continue learning to be good neighbors and providing for those in need.
Barbara Nason, 94 Bumpy Road, is a board member of the North Olympic Combined
Services which are two boards that have merged and control Umbrella Community
Services and North Olympic Drug and Alcohol Center. These agencies have always tried
to answer neighborhood questions and be responsible in their actions. The women and
children will need a lot of support to gather the courage and strength to remove
themselves and their children from violent situations. She testified from personal
experience that these safehomes are desperately needed and without them many more
women and families will end up as news headlines. She asked for the community's
support in this effort.
Kathy Smith, 607 East Fourth Street, stated that concerns over lighting are valid, and
there's a chance the City will help in lighting the area because especially with the ravine,
it is very dark in the area. She would like to see the neighborhood and community
support this use as it will make a statement that Port Angeles cares about its citizens. We
need a place for women and children to go. This is a chance for the neighborhood to say
yes to something that is right.
.
Bill Rinehart, 536 East Fourth Street, is in the construction management field. Parking
on the rear one-half of the lot will not be possible due to the required setback from the
ravine. There has not been a site plan designed to allow a good view of the project site.
What funding dollars have been committed toward the project? It would be unfortunate
if funding is not available to complete the project and upkeep is not sufficient. Upgrade
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26, 1994
PAGE 4 OF 13
.
to a house this size will be very expensive. The traffic will be coming from the alley at
this site and an additional twelve persons at this site is more of a commercial use than a
residential use. He felt the use should be looked at the same as if a commercial use were
to be located here. Someone needs to be in charge. There needs to be supervision. He
felt that possibly enough planning has not been put to this proposal.
Warner Balch, 533 East Fifth Street, adjoins this property. At a neighborhood
meeting~ Umbrella Community Services had not been able to satisfactorily respond to
questions from the neighborhood, such as the length of time the clients would be in the
home, where the occupants would come from, local or from out of town. He does not
support the use at this location. He is hesitant that this use would not fit into the
neighborhood. Will property values be affected? Fifteen realtors and appraisers have
told him that such a use next door will most likely affect a sale. Fencing is an issue with
Mr. Balch. He would prefer a short stay rather than a long stay if he had a choice, but
he is against the use.
Mr. Balch answered Commissioner Alexander that a neighborhood watch committee
would very likely be formed for this use if approved.
.
Maurice Jester, 517 East Sixth Street, having been in this type of system, can say
there is a need for safehomes. This area is a fill. He asked how a residence could be
placed on this fill. The property belongs to the City. He does not want to be forced to
sell his property because of a disruptive use next door. Who is paying for this use? He
likes the fact that his children can play in the ravine. This is just not the appropriate
location.
In response to a question from Commissioner Winters, Mr. Jester answered that a good
location would be one that is more easily accessed by police and fire. The location is one
that has constant prowling situations already. The site should be more adequately lit.
He would not object to such a use next door to him if the site was more appropriate.
Dorothy Phillips, 610 East Fourth Street, said that she was an abused person and she
appreciates the fear of violence~ but she does not want it in her neighborhood. There are
a lot of children and older people in the neighborhood and Fifth Street, and the potential
of violence concerns her. In response to Commissioner Winters, she said that she was
concerned over the potential for violence with this safehome in the area. Fifth Street is
a busy area already. She shares the concerns of her neighbors. She does not want it in
her neighborhood. She had friends to stay with when she needed a haven.
.
VaUerie Jester, 517 East Sixth Street, said that she was moved each day when she was
in need of a safehome situation. The ravine location is very unsecure. The ravine
provides a hiding place for prowlers. Foster home situations are more secure. She is
nervous that her children play in the ravine, and to add a potential for fathers and
husbands prowling around looking for their families is not something she wants in her
neighborhood. Such a use should be in a well lit, well contained location.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26. 1994
PAGE 5 OF 13
.
David W aggoDer, 525 East Sixth Street, said that he has experienced a good deal of
vandalism and prowling near his residence from the ravine. He felt that if neighbors
could have more of a say in the planning for the site and if safety issues are addressed,
the project would be more acceptable to the neighborhood. A neighborhood review was
requested.
Mr. Waggoner answered questions from Commissioners Campbell and Winters regarding
where prowling is a problem and the need for a neighborhood review of the site use.
Warner Balch, 533 East Fifth Street, asked that the meeting be continued until some
of the concerns by the neighbors could be addressed and to enable the proponent to have
a chance to work with the neighbors to address the concerns.
.
Laurey Hansen Carl, 2755 Towne Rd., Sequim, responded to comments that issues
relevant to the remodeUmove of the residential structure have been and are being
addressed with the City's Building Department. Funding is in place with grants, from
service agencies and from First Federal Savings and Loan. Some of the development
issues, such as soils analysis have not been done due to the unknown status of the
conditional use permit. There will be accountability for residents' actions. The project
has been in the works for a long period of time. Costs for relocation will amount to
approximately $ 1 00, ()(X) , including a lighting and fencing system. A neighborhood
meeting was held, which she attended to answer questions. An offer was made at that
meeting to fence the ravine and provide lighting. It would seem, given the testimony,
that there is a good deal of prowling in the ravine. It is possible that a use at that site
would eliminate a lot of that prowling. The women and children who will be served by
this home are already in our neighborhoods, this is not a new use being introduced into
Port Angeles neighborhoods. A study done in Seattle indicated that safehomes are
actually safer in neighborhoods where the residents of the neighborhood are aware of the
use, so everyone is aware if something unusual is going on. In all of Umbrella's history,
since 1979, an abuser has never shown up at a safehome location. Domestic violence
thrives in isolation. Umbrella Services is willing to have a neighborhood advisory
service.
.
Ms. Carl responded to Commissioners questions that when a crises call is received, the
potential danger is evaluated, if the clients are in danger in this community, the clients
will be placed in another community. Motels and private homes are also used. Clients
in this safehome must be willing to do their own part in being safe and making changes
in their lives. They will be responsible for contracts wherein they agree to actively seek
other housing and work on financial dependence. A security system will be installed and
a play area for the children will be provided and fenced with access only from the house.
The typical age of the children is under six years old. The maximum number of
occupants will be twelve people. Occupants in these safehome situations are typically
quiet and reclusive. Coming from abusive situations they do not wish to stand out. She
stated that in general neighborhoods, neighbors cannot place restrictions on their
neighbors, but in this situation, the use will be very restricted and will meet the
neighborhood concerns. A lighting system on the house will assure that the house and
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26, 1994
PAGE 6 OF 13
.
the grounds will be well lit at night. The occupants safety is the ultimate concern. Due
to time constraints built into grant requirements, it is imperative that this permit process
not be held up. Seventy percent of the neighbors she and her staff spoke to in the
immediate neighborhood stated approval for the use, but for reasons of their own, those
people didn't attend the public hearing.
Bill Rinehart, 536 East Fourth Street, restated his concerns that the site development
details did not seem to be worked out completely at this point, and until that time, final
approval should not be given. He requested that the item be tabled until all the issues
could be addressed.
Brad Collins noted that the fencing that is proposed is for the safety of the children,
keeping them from wandering into the ravine, not to keep people out. The fencing would
probably be chainlink. There will be engineering issues that must be addressed prior to
construction. No specific site plan will be required because the use is considered
residential and is in a residential zoning district.
There being no further public testimony, Chair Winters closed the public hearing.
.
Brad Collins stated that the City has looked at a number of different sites for this house.
No other scenario has succeeded. One of the requirements for the donation of the house
is that is will be accomplished within a year. Leaving the house on its present site is not
an option. The house is so large that it is nearly impossible to move very far from its
present site.
A ten minute recess was called for. The Commission reconvened following the recess.
Discussion as to the required and the available parking took place. Mr. Collins answered
that three spaces would be required for the residential use with one additional space for
a staff person, therefore, four spaces would be required; however, the Commission can
require additional parking if it is determined the required parking is inadequate. Fencing
was discussed and it was determined that the maximum fence height of six feet would be
observed.
Commissioner Alexander moved to approve the requested conditional use permit
with the following conditions, and citing the following fmdings and conclusions:
Conditions:
1. The Fire Department shall inspect the building to ensure it complies with
state and local nre codes. If more than ten persons reside at the facility, then
a residential sprinkler system and fire alarm are required to be installed.
.
2.
Prior to moving the house to the site, the applicant shall comply with the
requirements of the Environmentally Sensitive Areas Protection Ordinance
(Chapter 15.20 PAMC).
.
.
.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26, 1994
PAGE 7 OF 13
3.
A minimum of four parking spaces shall be provided on site. The parking
requirement shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission after one year of
operation of the facility to address any problems or concerns which may
arise.
4. There shaU be buffering and fencing on the top of the bank to protect the
children living in the complex.
5. The conditions of this permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission
after two years of operation of the facility to address any problems or
concerns which may arise. '
6. On-site security lighting will be provided which is directed away from
adjacent residents.
Findines:
1. The request is to allow a group home to provide temporary shelter for up to
twelve women and children that are victims of domestic violence. At the
present time tbere is no facility of this type witbin the community.
2.
The property is zoned Single Family Residential (RS-7). The Comprehensive
Plan identifies the site as urban residential.
3. The site consists of two townsite lots for a total area of 14,000.
4. The Rose Crumb house will be relocated from Fifth and Peabody Streets to
the site.
5. There is no sidewalk, curb and gutter along the site. The applicant has
agreed to enter into an L.I.D. non-protest agreement for improvement to
Fifth Street.
6. Peabody Creek ravine west of the site is an environmentally sensitive area.
7. Staff supervision at the site will be limited to daily visits and for occasional
workshops.
8. Several Comprehensive Plan Policies have been identified as being most
relevant to the proposal including Goals Nos. 3-5; Residential Policy No.5;
Social Policy No.4; Open Space Policies Nos. 2-4; Social Objectives Nos. 2
& 3; and Land Use Objectives Nos. 1, 2, 4 & 5.
9.
Several lots to the west and south are not developed because of the presence
of the Peabody Creek ravine.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26, 1994
PAGE 8 OF 13
.
10. The applicant has indicated a wiUingness to involve residents of the
neighborhood in operation of the facility through formation of a
Neighborhood Advisory Committee.
Conclusions:
A. As conditioned, the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding
residential uses and with the intent of the RS-7 zone.
B. As conditioned, the Conditional Use Permit is in the public use and interest
and is not detrimental with the public welfare.
c. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
policies listed in Finding No.8 above.
.
Commissioner Souders seconded the motion, and added a friendly amendment
(Condition No. 6) dealing with lighting. Commissioner Alexander accepted the
friendly amendment to his motion. Commissioner Nutter suggested a friendly
amendment, which Chair Winters expanded upon, that a security system be installed if
available with direct connection to the City Police Department. Commissioner Alexander
stated that because the City's 911 emergency response works so well, and given the
proximity to City Hall, this would possibly be an unnecessary, added expense.
Commissioners Nutter and Winters withdrew the amendment.
Commissioner Nutter expressed doubt that four parking spaces would be sufficient for the
number of residents at the home. She suggested that an amendment to five parking
spaces be made. Commissioner Philpott offered wording to require five spaces.
Commissioner Alexander did not accept this friendly amendment.
In speaking to his motion, Commissioner Alexander stated that the concerns raised by the
neighbors are not specific to this single location/neighborhood. Most of the time
concerns voiced prove to be unfounded although they are sincere. The applicant,
neighborhood, and City administrators can assure that the use does not impose a negative
situation that cannot be mitigated. The facility is badly needed in this community. He
spoke from personal experience that people in these situations will not make moves to
better their lives because they have no place to turn. Chair Winters added that it is
human to fear the unknown. During his tenure on the Commission, he has realized that
at times it is the entire City of Port Angeles that should be considered as one
neighborhood. The overall public benefit is paramount. Commissioner Souders added
that she experienced a group home in her neighborhood. At first, the neighborhood was
very wary but as time wore on, the fear subsided to the point where some of those who
opposed the home ended up supporting it. Citizens and neighbors are the support system
and therefore part of the success of the group home.
.
The question was called for, and the amended motion passed unanimously.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26, 1994
PAGE 9 OF 13
.
PROPOSED CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT AND ornER
POTENTIAL REVISIONS TO mE DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES:
.
David Sawyer provided a brief staff report stating that because there is anothef public
hearing scheduled for February 2, 1994, staff will present a more complete report at that
time. He added that in the spring of 1993, the City Council and Planning Commission
conducted a series of public hearings on the (original) Draft Goals and Policies for the
Comprehensive Plan. Planning had begun nearly two years previous to that time. The
City's Growth Management Advisory Committee (GMAC) had prepared a
recommendation for Council's and the Commission's consideration minus the capital
facilities element, which is a requirement of the Growth Management Act. The Council
appointed a Capital Facilities Committee to prepare a Capital Facilities Plan and directed
the GMAC to prepare the Element. For the past several months those two committees
have been working on those items. Once those items were completed, the GMAC then
turned back to the original goals and policies to determine if any revisions to the land use
map, the policies, or the various different elements that would be needed in light of the
Capital Facilities Element goals and policies and the Capital Facilities Plan and its
financing plan. The goals and policies have been revised and along with the Capital
Facilities Plan and the Capital Facilities Element are under discussion at this time. The
complete version of the Comprehensive Plan, including the text, tables, maps, objectives,
and other materials will be brought together with these goals and policies and presented
for the February 2, 1994, public hearing.
Margaret Crawford, 2619 South Racet representing the City's Growth Management
Advisory Committee (GMAC), gave a brief presentation. The major concepts she
stressed fOf review are how the GMAC dealt with concurrency and levels of service. The
goal is to maintain the current levels of service. Another change that can be noted in the
Capital Facilities Element is a clear direction to the various departments in charge of
providing the various services and facilities that come under the Element and for which
there is some concurrency requirement that they develop their own comprehensive service
and facilities plans. There is a policy that defines what needs to be in those plans. She
felt that the plan is weak in the area of inventorying current facilities and services
available in the City. A major addition to the plan is the open space section of the land
use element. A Committee issue was if there is a difference and whether there needs to
be a difference in regulations regarding open space versus recreational space: is
recreational space a subcategory of open space or its own category. She noted that
several members of the Committee were in attendance for comments or questions.
.
Mr. Sawyer indicated the existing Land Use Map and the Critical Areas Map which were
available as exhibits on the wall. The Land Use Map is a bubble concept. That providesMthe ability for flexibility in boundary designations. The Urban Growth Area (UGA) has
not been identified in the Comprehensive Plan. That is a process that is still ongoing.
The City is currently participating with the County in the development of the Port
Angeles Regional Comprehensive Plan which addresses land use issues. The
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26, 1994
PAGE 10 OF 13
.
Comprehensive Plan which is presented for review deals only with the existing City
limits.
Commissioner Alexander pointed out that annexation policies are not covered in the
revised plan. They were covered in the original Comprehensive Plan. He suggested that
the Planning Commission should deal with that omission. Chair Winters opened the
public hearing. .
AUan Horrocks, 2410 South Lincoln Street, commented on the Commercial Goals and
Policies, specifically Goal D. He requested a point of clarification in that most areas
shown on the proposed land use map are clearly defined by either natural boundaries or
man made boundaries, Le., streets or alleys. One area that is not bounded in either of
those two methods is the area located between Chase and Laurel Streets, on Oreas. In
this area, a diagonal line crosses an area differently than in any other area of the City,
with no apparent reason.
.
Mr. Sawyer explained that Lauridsen Boulevard does not run true east/west, like most
of the other streets in the City. The grid pattern is not as uniform at this location. The
GMAC tried to address where existing commercial zoning is located in that area but not
encourage new commercial zoning along what was to be identified as an alternate
crosstown route. Considering the scale of the map being dealt with and the bubble
concept of nondistinct lines, the line drawn is to be parallel with Lauridsen Boulevard but
not matching up with distinct diagonals. The land use designation could follow street
rights-of-way in the area between Chase and Laurel south of Lauridsen Boulevard.
Mrs. Crawford responded that lines will be somewhat indefinite. The intent of the
GMAC was to maintain the existing commercial zone but not to enlarge it.
Commissioner Alexander, a member of the GMAC, concurred with the discussion.
Mr. Horrocks asked that the map be revised to clarify existing commercial zoning
designations in the area and to not indicate by the bubble concept any extension of that
area.
Larry Leonard, 1030 Olympus, expressed concern with school concurrency. He
explained that as a member of the real estate community, the Association of Realtors is
not against schools, and is in fact in favor of the bond and levy issue. The concern is
that concurrency appears to be a method to finance schools. If a bond issue is not
passed, development will be stopped. Private landowners will be punished and restricted
then from the use of their properties. Mr. Leonard discussed the standards noted for
school concurrency.
.
Mr. Sawyer pointed out that Policy No. II, which deals with school concurrency, allows
that "The concurrency requirement for school facilities shall not go into effect until the
City and the Port Angeles School District enter into a concurrency agreement, and a
similar school concurrency requirement has been adopted by the County and is in effect. II
He further explained that there are tier steps that have to be complied with prior to any
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26, 1994
PAGE 11 OF 13
.
of those agreements can be made, and checks and balances along the way prior to
concurrency happening. Mr. Collins further explained the steps which have to be
complied with prior to concurrency with schools.
Mr. Leonard read from a document entitled "Summary 1993, Draft School Concurrency
Policy", which is going to the City Council to be added to the joint County-Wide
Planning Policy. Mr. Sawyer explained that the document was sponsored by County
staff. The material was presented to the Growth Management Steering Committee
(GMSC) which was the body that originated the County-Wide Planning Policy. The City
Council has received the information and has set a public hearing for February 15, 1994,
to consider the amendment.
Mr. Leonard added that the Growth Management Act does not require school
concurrency.
.
Jim Bunger, 620 South Liberty Street, as a member of the Peninsula Regional State
Transportation Policy Board, and a member of the trucking community, wished to give
a presentation with reference to east/west truck traffic movement across the City. Page
19, Policy Nos. 2 and 3, refer to an east/west route. The goal is to increase regional
mobility of goods, services, passengers and increase the regional attraction while at the
same time enhancing the commercial corridor. The present urban corridor is overused
in peak seasons. There is no emergency alternative route. There is a need to determine
the amount of traffic that could be diverted from the Downtown. He made reference to
a Heart of the Hills Parkway which would be constructed south and parallel to Highway
101 as an artery for moving traffic. Such a parkway would divert traffic at Morse Creek
south of the City. Mr. Bunger explained the detailsin planning and funding such a route.
Ken Schermer, 738 West Sixth Street, indicated that the Growth Management Advisory
Committee had been unable to identify an alternate crosstown route. This parkway
proposal could replace any previously suggested alternate crosstown route. There has
been strong input requesting an alternative route for heavy trucks, and there is an extreme
need to have east/west access to the present (Tumwater)Truck Route.
.
Tim German, 2025 West Twelfth Street, wished to acknowledge the effort that had
been put toward development of this draft plan. It is not a requirement to have
concurrency with schools. In the worst case scenario, the City could be forced to cease
issuing building permits. Control of how the schools are administered is not in the City's
hands, but something that is out of the Council's hands could force cessation of
development in the City. It's not necessary to have concurrency with schools. If the
City Council feels a need to cease building, an ordinance can be adopted to accomplish
that moratorium. He questioned how the minimum requirements for students were
developed. He felt that the requirements reflected the highest standards available, but
that might not truly reflect a standard need. He suggested the level of service for fire
response of four minutes may need to be amended to be five minutes, as a large area of
west Port Angeles is outside of that response time.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26, 1994
PAGE 12 OF 13
.
AnD Murray, 306 Lopez, wished to address the philosophical issue concerning the
designation of areas for commercial purposes with the idea of possibly creating more than
one type of commercial area. She is a proponent of mixed use development, the location
of small businesses in residential neighborhoods, as long as those small business uses
would be those which would be needed on a daily basis by surrounding communities.
She did not approve of large businesses with large parking lots and bright lights. She
suggested development regulations to encourage these types of uses and limit their size.
The west side of Port Angeles is sadly lacking in commercial services.
Al Horrocks, 2410 South Lincoln Street, briefly addressed the goals (Page 19) for
traffic circulation patterns. The idea of a truck traffic route along Lauridsen Boulevard
over White's Creek passed two schools is very poorly thought out. It may be that truck
traffic has to femain in the Downtown, given the topography and development patterns
of this area.
.
Mr. Sawyer responded that the response time required by the Fife Department/medical
response teams is directly tied into life support requirements. The land use map only
shows one commercial type of designation. The purpose of that is to provide flexibility
for zoning purposes. One of the requirements in the Capital Facilities Element is for the
Comprehensive Facilities and Service Plans. A street plan is being developed, dealing
with circulation patterns and improvements, and a transportation comprehensive service
and facility plan, which will deal with air, marine and public transit issues. Mr. Collins
added that thefe is an excellent discussion of the alternatives for transportation routes
across the City in the Environmental Impact Statement which can be checked out from
the Library or from the Planning Department.
Cindy Souders noted that she is Chairman of the County's Land Use Watershed
Committee and would not be able to attend the special February 2, 1994 meeting. Bob
Philpott noted he would be out of town for the February 2, meeting as well.
Commissioner Campbell added that he is also on the County's Land Use Watershed
Committee, so will not be at the February 2, meeting. Commissioner CampbeU moved
to continue the public hearing to February 2, 1994, 7 pm, City Council Chambers,
and that if a third meeting is needed, one will be scheduled, for February 16, 1994.
Commissioner Catts seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
V. COMl\fiJNICATIONS FROM mE PUBLIC
None.
VI. STAFF REPORTS
None.
.
Vll. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS
Commissioner Alexander reported that the County Capital Facilities Committee was
.
.
.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 26. 1994
PAGE 13 OF 13
proceeding. The County's approach is very open in the discussion. He also asked staff
to investigate the procedure for Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority permits with
regard to other permits issued by the City prior to the February 9 meeting.
Commissioner Philpott asked that the bylaws be revised once again. Mr. Collins
suggested that perhaps following election of a new Chair, in the long-range work
schedule proposal for 1994, the bylaws could be looked at once again. The proposed
amendment should be presented in writing for discussion.
Chair Winters requested that the City Attorney be present for the SEPA appeal scheduled
for February 9. Mr. Collins stated that he had asked the City Attorney to be present.
Vill. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 11 :55 pm.
~~
Brad Collins, Secretary
~\0~
Bob Winters, Chair
PREPARED BY: Sue Roberds
.
PLEASE SIGN IN
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
Planning Commission Attendance Roster
Meeting Date: a.
.
.
.
..-.--., ..
"N~~::.
PLEASE SIGN IN
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
Planning Commission Attendance Roster
Meeting Date: t. 6 c.;7 (-
/ I
:.' .....::ADDRESS:..
,(A
GJ G
Z st-i"