Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 02/15/1995 . AGENDA CITY OF PORT ANGELES PLANNING COMMISSION 321 East Fifth Street Port Angeles, W A 98362 February 15, 1995 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL . m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of February 8, 1995 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Zonin& Code includin2 Forest Lands Zone V. COMMUNICA TIONS FROM THE PUBLIC VI. STAFF REPORTS VB. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS Vill. ADJOURNMENT . All correspondence penaining to a hearing item received by the Planning Departmem at least one day prior to the scheduled hearing will be provided to Commission members before the hearing. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION: Orville Campbell, Chair, Cindy Soudetll, Bob Wintetll, Bob Philpott, Bob King, Tim Gennan, and Linda Nutlcr. STAFF: Brad Collins, Director, Sue Roberds Office Specialist, and David Sawyer, Senior Planner. . . . MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington 98362 February 15, 1995 7:00 p.m. Special Meeting ROLL CALL Members Present: Orville Campbell, Bob King, Linda Nutter, Bob Winters, Tim German, Cindy Souders, Bob Philpott Staff Present: Brad Collins, Sue Roberds Public Present: None APPROV AL OF l\flNUTES No minutes were presented for approval. PUBLIC HEARINGS AMENDMENT TO ZONING CODE INCLUDING NEW FOREST LANDS ZONE and Title 17 of the PORT ANGELES MUNICIPAL CODE: Review of the City's current zoning regulations for compliance with the current Comprehensive Plan. (Continued from January 25, 1995.) Chair Campbell opened discussion on the continued public hearing item. Following a brief interchange with staff, Chair Campbell opened the public hearing. There being no one present, the hearing was closed. Commissioner German expressed concern in the wording of Section 17.03.020 regarding required compliance between the Zoning Map and the Comprehensive Plan Map. He provided examples of situations where a property owner might not understand the ramifications of the Comprehensive Plan's designation for his property until perhaps requesting a right he felt was permitted under the Zoning Map designation only to find that since the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map don't match he may not be permitted to do something allowed under the zoning regulations. The wording of Section 17.03.020 is not clear and should be rewritten. He expressed some concern as to the manner in which properties were designated in the Comprehensive Plan and did not feel that all property owners in areas that are affected are aware that their properties can be rezoned without their notification. Planning Director Collins provided further explanation of the wording of Section 17.03.020 on the question of whether the proposed wording says what it was intended to say. Mr, Collins noted that the wording was revised by the City Attorney and did not feel that it would be wise to amend the wording without consultation with the City Planning Commission Feb114ary 15, 1995 Page 2 . Attorney on this matter. The wording is to provide direction in the event there should be a conflict between the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Map. Lengthy discussion occurred between the staff and Commission members concerning the possible outcome in situations where property is zoned in a manner not consistent with the new Comprehensive Plan Map. Planning Director Collins reminded the Commission members that the issue of accord between the two documents has been discussed in great detail over the past several months as the City has tried to bring it's regulations into compliance with the State's Growth Management Act. The January 1st deadline for compliance with the new Comprehensive Plan has passed and at this time the Comprehensive Plan Map designations prevail over the Zoning Map designations in the event of a conflict between the two documents. Commissioner German asked if it would be possible to change the Comprehensive Plan Map to match the Zoning Map for now and work on bringing the two into compliance at a later time. . Director Collins indicated such a move would set the City back as the new Comprehensive Plan Map is part of a document and work that has been on-going now for more than four years by many citizens who donated their time and energies into the formulation and adoption of the current document. The current Plan and Map were not decisions reached lightly but were the result of many neighborhood meetings, a City-wide survey, and countless meetings and public hearings where the Commission, citizen groups, and staff tried diligently to inform the public of the importance of being informed and the need to be involved. It is a fact that most people don't get involved until it's too late, but the City has tried its best to bring citizen involvement into the adoption of its Comprehensive Plan and Map from the very beginning and to step backward now would be a waste of that tremendous effort. Commissioner German stated that the general public doesn't know the importance of Comprehensive Plan and zoning concurrency. He held to the objection that to change the designation of property even in an areawide rezone process without notification of each and every property owner prior to that action is unacceptable, Director Collins noted that although State law does not view areawide rezones in the same manner for notification procedures as it does for case by case rezones, staff attempted to do a mailing to property owners within three hundred feet of the sites under discussion for change in order to be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Methods to accomplish more thorough notification for areawide rezone cases were discussed. It was determined that the budget for such a notification effort would be great and even new methods would not be totally foolproof. Mr. Collins assured the Commission that staff is open to suggestions as far as the budget would allow, but there will always be the one person who for some reason did not get notified. . Commissioner Souders moved to recommend approval of the staff's proposed wording in Section 17.23.020. Commission Nutter seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Planning Commis$ion February 15,1995 Page 3 . The Commission then began a detailed discussion on the interpretation of how large a shopping center should be before a conditional use permit is required for the use. Commissioner Souders did not see the need to conditionally approve only shopping centers as well as list them as permitted uses in zones they are encouraged. Director Collins provided background as to why it is a good idea to use conditional use permits for very large shopping centers. As past Planning Director of the City of Tukwila which houses the largest shopping center in Washington, he indicated the City of Tukwila manages its larger shopping centers by conditional use permit due to the variety of uses and resulting activities that are associated with large shopping centers, although in larger cities a threshold of 300,000 square feet would not be out of line. Given the size and nature of the Port Angeles community, he suggested a threshold between 65,000 - 150,000 square feet for conditionally permitting shopping centers. . Commissioner Philpott favored a recommendation to set a threshold size for a shopping center by conditional use permit in zones where they are otherwise permitted at 100,000 square feet of building floor area. It was generally agreed that although a site size may far exceed 100,000 square feet for parking and other amenities, the main issue would be with the building. Commissioner Philpott moved to recommend the threshold size for permitted or conditionally permitted shopping centers in Section 17.23.040(A)(14), 17.23.160(K), 17.24.041(A)(6), and 17.24.160(G) be set at 100,000 square feet of building floor area rather than 63,000 square feet of land area. Commissioner Winters seconded the motion which passed 6 - 1, with Commissioner Souders' negative vote due to her position that shopping centers should not be the only use to be required to have conditional use permits if they are already permitted in a zone. At this point discussion turned to the proposed new Forest Lands Zone. Director Collins noted that Commissioners Souders and King had been representatives in attendance at the Growth Management Advisory Committee's (GMAC) meetings at which the Forest Lands Zone proposal was discussed and recommended. He explained that the new designation deals with properties that are not intended for development in a typical urban manner. The Forest Lands Zone would be more compatible with timber farming and harvesting situations than would the City's Public Buildings and Parks Zone (PBP) which is the closest designation currently in place to deal with such situations. It allows more flexibility for the property owner in the few instances where property is intended for timber farming/harvesting instead of clearing for conversion to urban uses. Commissioner Souders moved to recommend adoption of the revised Zoning Ordinance (text dated January 25, 1995) with the changes directed during the meetings of January 25, and February 15, 1995, including the Forest Lands Zone as proposed by staff, citing the following findings and conclusions: . Findings: 1, The Growth Management Act of 1990 required that the City of Port Angeles adopt a Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations consistent with the Act . . . Planning Commission F~bruary 15, 1995 Pag~ 4 and its goals. 2. Over four years ago the City of Port Angeles formed a citizens' Growth Management Advisory Committee to recommend a Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations based on community involvement with early and continuous public participation in the planning process. 3. The Growth Management Advisory Committee has met weekly for many of the months during this long planning process, and the City has held numerous public meetings and public hearings on each step in this process. 4. On June 28, 1994, the City of Port Angeles adopted a Comprehensive Plan in compliance with the Act and the legislative deadline of July 1, 1994. 5. The City was granted a six month extension of the legislative deadline for adoption of Development Regulations to January 1, 1995. 6. The Development Regulations including the Zoning Code and Map must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. 7. All properties throughout the City were reviewed for land use designation differences between the adopted Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map. 8. All differences between the Comp Plan and Zoning land use designations were considered by the Growth Management Advisory Committee and the Planning Department staff, and areawide zoning reclassifications were recommended by the GMAC to the Planning Commission and the City Council for resolution of these differences. 9. All Comprehensive Plan goals, policies, and objectives were considered by the GMAC in making recommended changes to the Zoning Regulations. 10. Notices for Zoning Code Amendments, including a new Forest Lands Zone, and Mapping Rezones were given per the City and State legal requirements for area- wide zoning amendments and reclassifications. 11. Notices of the area-wide zoning reclassifications and amendments were mailed to 132 different property owners of 180 properties affected by reclassifications and to 5 citizens requesting notification of changes in the Zoning Regulations. 12. Zoning classifications that permit the same uses or uses of less intensity than Comprehensive Plan land use designations are considered by the City to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 13. The Environmental Impact Statement on the Comprehensive Plan was adopted for the proposed changes in the Zoning Code Regulations. . . . Planning Ccmmission February 15,1995 Page 5 14. The State Forest Practices Act preempts City zoning and other land use regulations in cases where commercial timber production is the long term proposed use of the land. The Forest Practices Act does not recognize the same critical areas that the City's Critical Area Ordinances do. Conclusions: 1. The Zoning Code Amendments and Reclassifications are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Use Map designations. 2. The Zoning Regulation changes do not intentionally create nonconforming uses. 3. The Zoning Regulation changes do not intentionally diminish the existing development rights for undeveloped properties, except where environmentally sensitive areas are identified. 4. The Zoning Regulation changes intentionally recognize existing and planned uses in those areas of the City where the uses do not conform to the existing zoning and Comprehensive Plan. 5. The Forest Lands Zone permits coordination between the State Forest Practices Act and the City Comprehensive Plan and its development regulations. 6. The Zoning Regulation changes are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, 7. The Zoning Regulation changes are in the public use and interest. 8. The Zoning Regulation changes reflect changes in circumstances that have occurred since the 1976 Comprehensive Plan was first adopted and has now been replaced with the 1994 Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Winters seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Director Collins commended the Commission for its long hard hours working on this amendment process and the work of the Growth Management Advisory Committee and noted that this item will be under consideration at a public hearing by the City Council at its February 21, 1995, meeting. COMl\1UNICA TIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None. STAFF REPORTS Director Collins informed the Planning Commission that in the matter of the dead-locked recommendation concerning the Serenity House rezone application following the meeting of February 8. 1995, the City Attorney indicated that it would be appropriate to send the . . . Planning Commission Febrnary 15, 1995 Page 6 matter to the City Council in its dead-locked state and that it would not be appropriate for Commissioners, who stepped down due to Appearance of Fairness, to act on this matter since a quorum was present. It was noted that election of officers for the new terms of office would be held at the February 22, 1995, meeting. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS Commissioner Winters asked if the City is aware of the Sparks vs Chelan case where the Appeals Court decided that the requirement of a dedication of property must be the result of direct impact from on-site development. He noted that it is a good object lesson for tight findings and conclusions in these types of actions. ADJOURNMENT The meeting stood adjourned at 9: 10 p. m. UtJC!;ffL ~~ Bra Collins, Secretary Orville Campbell, Chair