Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 02/14/1990 AGENDA . PORT ANGELES PLANNING COMMISSION 321 Ea.~ Flf1:h St:reet; Port: Angeles, WIIBhlngt;an 9B362 FEBRUARY 14, 1990 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of January 24, 1990 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS: . 1. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA 90(01)107- CITY OF PORT ANGELES, Francis Street: Request for a permit to allow the development of six (6) all-weather sur- faced parking spaces and access provided with soil erosion and surface runoff control facilities con- structed, in association with the Waterfront Trail use. (This item is continued from the January 24th meet ing. ) 2. APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 89(11)22 HO - ROBINSON, 1126 East Seventh Street: Appeal of de- C1S10n on the operation of a bed and breakfast in an RS-7, Single-Family Residential District. 3. APPEAL OF RETAIL STAND EXTENSION - RTS 89(03)2 - HOPPER, Railroad Avenue: Appeal of the extension decision for a retail stand for the distribution of touriest oriented marketing material and coupons, lo- cated east of the Railroad/Laurel Street intersection, on the north side of the City's right-of-way, in the C8D, Central Business District. 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 90(02}1 - DAVIDSON, 100 Block East 8th Street: Request for a permit to allow a self-service car wash to be located in the CSD-C2, Community Shopping District. V. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC VI. STAFF REPORTS VII. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS . - The Planning Commi~~ion will not ~ommen~e a new he~ing be~ond 10 P.M. Anif item not ~ta~ted p~io~ to that time will automatically be continued to the next 4eguld4 meeting 06 the Commi~~ion, whi~h will be Ma~~h 14, 1990. VIII. ADJOURNMENT . . . PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington February 14, 1990 I CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Cornell. II ROLL CALL Members Present: Jerry Cornell, Ray Gruver, Bob Philpott, Jerry Glass. Members Excused: Larry Leonard. Members Absent: Donna Davison, Jim Hulett. staff Present: Brad Collins, Grant Beck, Gary Kenworthy, Ralph Dyker. III APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Gruver moved to approve the minutes of the January 24, 1990, Planning Commission meeting, with three changes. Mr. Philpott seconded the motion, which carried 3 - 0, with Commissioner Glass abstaining. Mr. Hulett arrived at 7:05 P.M. IV PUBLIC HEARINGS SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA-gO (01) 107 - CITY OF PORT ANGELES: Request for a permit to allow the development of six (6) all-weather surfaced parking spaces and access provided with soil erosion and surface runoff control facilities construction, in association with the Waterfront Trail use. Location: Francis street. (Continued from January 24. 1990.) Chairman Cornell reviewed the status of action on this Shoreline Permit application, stating that the public hearing had been closed and a motion to approve the permit with two conditions had been made at the January 24, 1990, meeting of the Planning commission. The matter had been tabled to the February 14th meeting. The Planning Commission discussed public access to the Victoria street right-of-way and the process for individuals to use City right-Of-way. City Engineer Kenworthy answered questions the Planning Commission had regarding these issues, . . . PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 2 as well as the construction of the access and the amount of right-of-way available along the waterfront. The Planning Commission reviewed a memo from City Attorney Knutson which revised the wording of proposed Condition 2, The Planning Commission had requested this information at its January 24, 1990, meeting. Mr. Hulett moved that Condition No. 2 be amended to read: 2. Issuance of this Shoreline Management Permit for the construction of parking and access improvements from the north end of Francis Street to the Waterfront Trail shall not preclude other uses of Francis street, including private access; provided that any such uses accommodate the Waterfront Trail, and that all applicable permitting and regulatory requirements for such uses are met, Mr. Philpott seconded the motion, which carried 4 - 0, with Mr. Glass abstaining. The question was called for the motion, as amended, to approve the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit with two condi- tions, eleven findings and seven conclusions, as follows: Conditions: 1. That lighting be provided in the parking lot area to be directed away from the residential uses at the site and patrolled to control objectionable evening activity. 2. Issuance of this Shoreline Management Permit for the construction of parking and access improvements from the north end of Francis street to the Waterfront Trail shall not preclude other uses of Francis Street, including private acceSSi provided that any such uses accommodate the Waterfront Trail, and that all applicable permitting and regulatory requirements for such uses are meti Findinqs: 1. The proposed access and trail will provide access to the Waterfront Trail, which is a separate, non-motorized vehicular and pedestrian path linked to other parts of the circulation system in the City, but separated from streets used by motorized vehicles. 2. The Francis street access to the Waterfront Trail provides numerous opportunities to view the Harbor, strai t of Juan de Fuca, Canada, and Mt. Baker. The access provides an unusual recreational environment compared to typical city park and sports fields and can PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 3 4It be used by young and old residents from the entire City. 3. The proposal will provide a public access loop to the Waterfront Trail. 4. The proposal does not convert the shoreline resources into irreversible uses or detrimentally alter the natural conditions of the shoreline and has minimal impact on the shoreline area itself. 5. The proposal is an implementation of the city's adopted Urban Waterfront Trail Plan, which is a bicycle and hiking path that provides public access to the water and links to the rest of the city's circulation system. 6. The proposal provides development and expansion of recreational areas on Port Angeles Harbor. 7. The proposal is an extension of a public beach area in an Urban Environment which occurs in an existing city right-of-way. 4It 8. The access, recreation area, interpretive signage, and parking are improvements that facilitate public access to the shoreline, which reflects a design attention to the importance of environmental quality and natural resources of the existing shoreline area by developing within areas that have already been altered by man. 9. The parking area and access to the Waterfront Trail provides significant recreational opportunities for joggers, walkers, bicyclers, and passive recreational activities, such as sight-seeing, picnicking, beach- combing, nature walks, fishing, birding, and observation of marine commerce in the Harbor. The construction of the parking and access areas will significantly increase the recreational facilities within the city of Port Angeles. 10. The City of Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official has issued the proposal a Determination of Non-significance. 11, The Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, Chapter 15.08 PAMC, requires the Planning commission provide notice and hold a public hearing on shoreline permit applications. Conclusions: A. The proposal is consistent with the Port Angeles Shore- line Master Program, specifically General Regulations C. 2 and C.5; Land Use Elements D.2, D.4, and 0.6; Natural Systems Element E.1.a: and Recreational Use Regulations . . . . PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 4 F.19.a-d. B. The proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Plan. C. The proposal implements the city's adopted Port Angeles Urban Waterfront Trail Plan. D. The proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, specifically Circulation Policies Nos. 7 and 10; Parks & Recreation policy No.3; and Urban Design Policy No.2. E. Public notice and hearing, as required by the Shoreline Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RCW, has been completed by the City of Port Angeles. F. The city's issuance of a Determination of Non- Significance for the proposal is final and fulfills the City's responsibilities under the state Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW. G. This permit for parking in association with the waterfront Trail activity is recognized to be temporary in nature. The motion carried 4 - 0, with Mr. Glass abstaining. APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP-89 (11) 22 ho - ROBINSON: Appeal of decision on the operation of a bed and breakfast in an RS-7, single-Family Residential District. Location: 1126 East Seventh Street. Chairman Cornell reviewed the appeal, indicating that staff had not included a new recommendation beyond those in the original staff report and Administrative Hearings Officer's decision, and opened the public hearing. Mr. Glass stated that he owns a bed and breakfast and would be stepping down for this action, due to possible appearance of fairness problems. Mr. collins, Administrative Hearings Officer, gave background information on the decision. Gene Robinson, 1126 East Seventh street, the applicant, distributed a vicinity map (exhibit 1) and an article from the Peninsula Daily News (exhibit 2) to the Planning Commission. The applicant stated that bed and breakfasts are important to the City of Port Angeles as tourists would rather stay in bed and breakfasts than hotels. Mr. Robinson discussed the traffic along the alley and the fact that the alley narrows to 8 to 10 feet only at his property. The alley would only PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 5 . be used a maximum of three round trips per day, which should not be offensive to the neighbors. Carl Hufford, 1111 East Eighth street, stated that alleys are for the public use, not private businesses, and that the alley is not suitable for a bed and breakfast acti vi ty . Mr. Hufford stated that he was told by the city that the area was zoned single-family residential when he moved in several years ago. Scott Hopper, 1324-D O'Brien Road, stated that he does business in victoria, which supports bed and breakfasts. He has never seen any adverse impact from a bed and breakfast use. John Lacey, 1110 East Seventh Street, stated that because the alley is a dead end, what traffic goes up the alley must come down the same way. This does not impact Mr. Robinson, as he lives at the end of the alley; but does impact Mr. Lacey and others who live near Chambers street, the entrance to this alley. . Mr. Robinson stated that he hired Ralph Stoettler to do a traffic count during a normal week. The results of the count were presented to the Planning Commission orally, which ranged from 8 to 17 trips per day. Ralph Stoettler, 724 South Chambers street, stated that the count was 80% accurate and that the problems the neighbors have been experiencing could have been caused from construction along the alley. The alley is not marked as a dead end. Mr. Lacey again stated that alleys are private and were not donated by the property owners for business uses. He requested that the City of Port Angeles conduct an accurate traffic count. Linda stockman, 716 South Chambers, stated that there should be a dead end sign in the alley and that the Planning Commission should consider approving the bed and breakfast for a trial period, after which if no adverse impacts were identified, the use could be extended. There being no further comment, Chairman Cornell closed the public hearing. Mr. Gruver moved that the decision of the Administrative Hearings Officer be upheld and the Conditional Use Permit be denied, based on the following findings and conclusions: . Findinqs: . . . PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 6 1. The only vehicular access and on-site parking for bed and breakfast clients is via the 7/8 alley, which is only improved in part to a width of 10 feet. 2. Testimony was received that the alley does not adequately serve the needs of current residential uses and that the proposed bed and breakfast will further decrease the level of service provided by the alley. 3. The development standards for bed and breakfasts are defined in Article IV, Chapter 17.18, of the Port Angeles Zoning Code. Conclusions: A. Vehicular access and on-site parking that does not adversely impact the residential use of surrounding properties must be provided for the subject site. B. Traffic and access problems are present for four or more residents who use the 7/8 alley as their primary access. C. The following criteria will not be met for the proposed bed and breakfast: 1. section 17.1B.079(A) and (B) of the Bed and Breakfast Chapter of the City's Zoning Ordinance (#1709, as amended): A. Water, sewer, power, road, police and file, and refuse disposal must be available and adequate for the proposed use. B. The proposal should not cause detrimental effects on the surrounding residential area as a result of changes in the following elements (but not limited to just these elements): traffic, noise, activities occurring on-site, lighting and the ability to provide utility service. 2. section 17.86.040 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Occupations shall comply with the development standards: All Home following * * * * * B. That the Home Occupation does not significantly increase local vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Mr. Hulett seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 7 . Chairman Cornell called a five-minute recess at 8:20 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:29 P.M. Mr. Glass rejoined the Planning Commission. APPEAL OF RETAIL STAND EXTENSION - RTS-B9(03)2 - HOPPER: Appeal of the extension decision for a retail stand for ' the distribution of tourist oriented marketing material and coupons, located east of the Railroad/Laurel Street intersection, on the north side of the City's right-of- way, in the CBD, Central Business District. Location: Railroad Avenue. Chairman Cornell reviewed the appeal process and stated that staff had not made any additional recommendations other than those found in the staff report and the Administrative Hearings Officer's decision, and opened the public hearing. Mr. Collins, Administrative Hearings Officer, stated the Planning Department considered the appeal to be timely, as the appeal period begins from the date that the decision is mailed, which is not documented in this matter. . Scott Hopper, 1324-D O'Brien Road, the applicant, presented background material to the Planning commission regarding the retail stand location and operation and use. Mr. Hopper showed a videotape of the operation (exhibit 1), distributed pictures of the stand in storage and in operation (exhibit 2) and presented a statement from an employee of the firm (exhibit 3). The commission discussed the intent of the Retail Stand Chapter of the Zoning Code which was to promote an exciting mix of uses in the waterfront and Downtown areas. The Commission also discussed the fact that it appears that some businesses are unable to locate retail stands .on the waterfront as there are individuals with retail stand permits who have not operated in the past. Glen Larson, 731 West Fourth street, representing Olympic Van Tours, gave background information on Olympic Van Tours and its quest for a retail stand location in the waterfront area. He expressed concern over the lack of sites available on the waterfront, and that there are only a few retail stands being used during the tourist season. Chairman Cornell closed the public hearing. . The Planning commission further discussed the Retail Stand Chapter of the Zoning Code and that it tends to promote a variety of uses in the same general area, regardless of ownership. If there are sites in the area which are not being used, similar stands may be allowed. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 8 Mr. Philpott moved to uphold the Administration Hearings Officer's decision. The motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Hulett moved to deny the retail stand extension, citing the following findings and conclusions: Findings: 1. The applicant was previously approved two stands at two sites. 2. Use of both sites occurred over the past year with only one stand; the second stand was not constructed. 3. Another operator was turned down for a stand site when space was not available. 4. Stand separation requirements permit only four to six locations along Railroad Avenue. 5. The intent of the Retail Stand Chapter of the Zoning Code is to provide a varied use of the Downtown area by retail stands. 6. Both stands operated by the applicant are similar in nature. Conclusions: A. Priority should not be given to applications for similar uses. B. The proposal does not meet the intent of the Retail stand Chapter of the Zoning Code to provide for a variety of uses. C. The applicant should have the opportunity to choose which of the two existing sites he wishes to keep. Mr. Glass seconded the motion, which carried 3 - 2, with Chairman Cornell and Mr. Gruver voting "NolI. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -CUP-90(02)1 - DAVIDSON: Request for a permit to allow a self-service car wash to be located in the CSD-C2, Community Shopping District. Location: 100 Block East Eighth Street. Chairman Cornell stated that as the applicant had requested an interpretation of the zoning Code as to whether automated car wash facilities would be allowed in the CSD-C2 Zoning District, the Planning Commission should address this issue PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 9 . before the Conditional Use Permit application. The Commission determined that as the Zoning Code makes a distinction between automated car washes and non-automated car washes, and as the CSD-C2 Zoning District specifically does not allow automated car washes, an interpretation was not needed. Chairman Cornell opened the public hearing. Mr. Beck presented the Department Report, recommending approval of the permit application with several conditions. Gary Davidson, 1087 Pierce Road, stated that the automated system would probably use water jets, as opposed to brushes, and answered questions about the proposed conditions and the automated system. He presented a brochure describing the automated car wash system to the Planning Commission (exhibit 1) . Linda Bondy, 701 East Front street, stated that technology related to this car wash facility is new and it would be considered semi-automated. Chairman Cornell closed the public hearing. . The Planning Commission came to a consensus that the City should review the Zoning Code as it relates to self-service car washes in the CSD-C2 Zones. Mr. Glass moved to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit application, subject to the following conditions, and citing the following findings and conclusions: 1. No portion of the facility shall include a self-service, automated car wash use, as proposed in the application. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposal, the applicant shall prepare a landscaping plan designed to ensure that the development is aesthetically compatible with surrounding uses. The plan shall be approved by the Planning Department and implemented by the applicant prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the structure. 4. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposal, the applicant shall obtain a right-of-way use permit from the Department of Public Works. Access shall be restricted to a single entrance from Eighth Street (in only) and a controlled exit at the alley (exit only). Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall comply with Department of Public Works requirements for sanitary and storm sewer hook-up, including providing oil/water and oil/grit separators. . . . . PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 10 Findinqs: 1. The Port Angeles Zoning Code requires that prior to acting on a Conditional Use Permit the Planning commission must hold a duly advertised public hearing. 2. Public notice, as required by the Port Angeles Zoning Code, has been given. 3. The property subject to the permit application is described as Lots 12 and 13, Block 231, Townsite of Port Angeles, and is located within a CSD-C2 Zoning District. 4. The Port Angeles Zoning Code allows "independent, self- service, non-automated car washes" as a conditional use in the CSD-C2 Zoning District. 5. One of the five car wash bays includes a type of self- service, automated car wash system. 6. No reviewing agency has indicated that the use of the property as a self-service, non-automated car wash would be inconsistent with or detrimental to other uses within the vicinity, provided conditions are attached to the approval of the Conditional Use Permit. 7. The Port Angeles Zoning Code states that the Planning Commission shall consider all applications for Conditional Use Permits and may grant said permits for such uses as by these regulations are required to be reviewed and which can be permitted only upon the granting of a Conditional Use Permit. 8. The zoning Code states that the purpose of a Conditional Use Permit shall be to assure that the maximum degree of compatibility between uses shall be attained. 9. Service stations, which include automated car washes by definition, are allowed as a permitted use in the Arterial Commercial Zoning District (ACD). Conclusions: A. The proposed activity, with the exception of the automated portion, can be permitted through the granting of a Conditional Use Permit. B. The proposal, as conditioned, is cons istent with the tests for issuance of Conditional Use Permits as found in Article XI, Section 5, of the Port Angeles Zoning Code. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 11 C. Procedural requirements relating to public notice and public hearing have been accomplished. D. It is the op1n10n of the Planning Commission to investigate the possibility of a Zoning Code Amendment to allow a self-service automated car wash facility in the CSD-C2 Zone. Mr. Hulett seconded the motion. The Planning Commission discussed proposed Condition No.2, relating to the landscaping of the project. Mr. Glass amended the motion to revise Condition No. 2 as follows: 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposal, the applicant shall prepare a landscaping plan designed to ensure that the development is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding uses. The Plan shall be approved by the Planning Department or Planning commission and implemented by the applicant prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the structure. The plan should meet the minimum standards for landscaping, as found in the Arterial Commercial Zoning District. Mr. Hulett concurred with the amendment. The motion carried unanimously. V COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC The Planning Commission reviewed a letter from Mike Libera requesting a Zoning Code amendment to allow day cares as a permitted use in the CSD Zoning Districts. The Commission determined that the Planning Department should periodically present proposed updates of the Zoning Code to the Planning Commission, including any written requests from the public. However, if applicants wish to pursue amendments to the Code without waiting for the periodic updates, they should follow the procedures for a rezone which currently exist. VI STAFF REPORTS Planning staff indicated that the City council had taken action on the DelHur rezone. The Council approved the rezone application, subject to the condition that the applicant obtain a Planned Residential Development for the residential portion of the property. Information regarding contract rezones was distributed to the Planning Commission. staff indicated that the Department of Natural Resources has a pending shoreline permit application, which will be heard at the March 14th meeting of the Planning Commission. The . . . PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1990 Page 12 Department of Natural Resources requested direction as to how lengthy a presentation they should be prepared to make before the Commission. The Planning Commission indicated that the information should be available, if questions are asked, but not necessarily presented to the Commission. VII REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS Chairman Cornell indicated that he felt it would be wise if the Planning Commission revived the practice of sending a representative to all City Council meetings to answer any questions the Council may have on actions taken by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission concurred with the concept and agreed to further discuss the issue at the February 28th meeting. VIII ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:57 P.M. .~ 1 ins, Secretary PLAN.280 . ,oi.,t1 N M \ ~G CITY of PORT ANGELES ATTENDANCE ROSTER TYPE OF ~1EETING DATE OF 11EETING LOCATIrn PLANNING COMMISSION J", --k-l~a.L ~;' "I, / CJ9tJ CITY ADDRESS: NAME: . 1~6 II rtz- Pw I ( .6-;/ J \ .