Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/13/1991 . . . AGENDA PORT ANGELES PLANNING COMMISSION City Council Chambers 321 East Fifth Street Port Angeles, W A 98362 March 13, 1991 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER ll. ROLL CALL ill. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of February 23, 1991 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. PROPOSED PARKlNG ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: Proposed revision to Parking Ordinance No. 1588, as amended, requested by the Downtown Parking Business Improvement Area. (Applicant requests continuation until March 27, 1991.) 2. SEPA APPEAL - CHILDERS: Appeal of a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) made in association with a proposal for a day care center in the RS-7, Residential Single-Family District. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 91(02)02 - CHILDERS. Northeast corner of Eunice/Georeiana Streets: Request to allow a day care center in the RS-7, Residential Single-Family District. (Continued from February 13, 1991.) All correspondence pertaining to a hearing item received by the Planning Depanment at least one day prior to the scheduW hearing will be provided to Commission members before the hearing. Planning Commission: Larry Leonard, Chair; Ray Grover, Vice-Chair; Bill Anabel; Roger Catts; Cindy Souders; lim Hulett; Bob Philpott, Planning Staff: Brad Collins, Planning Director; Sue Roberds, Planning Office Specialist, John Jimerson, Associate Planner. . . . Planning Commission Agenda Page 2 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 91(03)04 - WGHRY. 1137 Highway 101 West: Request to allow gasoline islands in association with the remodel of a convenience store in the CSD-C 1 District. 5. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT - ZCA 91(03)1- POLARIS ENGINEERING. RMF District: Request to amend the RMF, Residential Multi-Family, District of the City's Zoning Ordinance, No, 1709, as amended, to conditionally allow professional offices, 6. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT - ZCA 91(03)2 - SADLER. CSD-C District: Request to amend the CSD-C Community Shopping, District to allow small . appliance repair uses. V. COMMUNlCA nONS FROM THE PUBLIC VI. STAFF REPORTS VB. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS Vill. 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 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 Commission Port Angeles, Washington 98362 March 13, 1991 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Gruver called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Members Present: Jim Hulett, Larry Leonard, Bob Philpott, Cindy Souders, Bill Anabel, Ray Gruver Members Excused: Roger Catts Staff Present: Brad Collins, John Jimerson, Bruce Becker III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Philpott moved to approve the February 27, 1991, Minutes as submitted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anabel, which passed unanimously. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS: PROPOSED PARKING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: Proposed revision to Parkinq Ordinance No. 1588. as amended. requested by the Downtown parkinq Business Improvement Area. Mr. Philpott moved to continue the hearing on this proposal to the April 10, 1991, meeting of the Commission, in the city Council Chambers, at the applicant's request. Larry Leonard seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. SEPA APPEAL - CHILDERS: Non-Significance (DNS) proposal for a day care Single-FamilY District. Appeal of a Determination of made in association with a center in the RS-7. Residential - '--Chairman-Gruver.excused~himself"during discussion and action for both the SEPA Appeal proceeding and the Childers Conditional Use Permit consideration. Vice Chairman Cindy Souders assumed the Chair and opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M. Mr. 'Collins, the Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official, was sworn in by Vice Chairman Souders. Mr. Collins referenced the staff report prepared in response to the SEPA Appeal, noting . Planning commission Minutes March 13, 1991 Page 2 . there were several potential impacts but the critical issues were noise and traffic. He stated that in his judgment, the noise and traffic increases would be significant but not significantly adverse. Since making this initial determination, no additional information has been brought forth which would lead him to reverse the determination of non-significance. He explained that the Commission had three options in the matter: (1) to uphold the Determination of Non-Significance (ONS); (2) modification of the DNSj or (3) to overturn the DNS and require an environmental impact statement (EIS) be prepared. . commissioner Hulett asked what the average daily traffic levels were in the area. Mr. Collins responded that there were no specific traffic counts in this neighborhood, but that in making the initial determination, he had relied on the city Engineer's and Public Works Department's expertise. He pointed out that given the zoning of the property, the alternative land use for the site could be three residences, and that those three residences could generate up to thirty tr ips per day, compared to the one hundred thirty to one hundred seventy trips per day which could be generated by the day care use. In his judgment he believed the street capacity could handle the additional traffic without affecting the Level Of Service. He believed that the Level Of Service is currently at "A" and that the proposal would not drop the Level Of Service below a level of "C". commissioner Hulett asked if the Level Of Service is based on average daily traffic counts (ADTs). Mr. Collins answered "no", and explained some of the factors and standards involved in making a determination of Level Of Service. He noted that he made no calculations of what the Level Of Service is for this particular project. commissioner Leonard asked if the Determination was made on his experience. Mr. Collins responded "yes". Mr. Leonard further asked if the Public Works Department commented on the Level Of Service, and asked if they foresaw any problem. Mr. Collins answered that the Department had not commented but that if there was a potential problem, a traffic study would have been required of the applicant. . Vice Chairman Souders swore in Gary Colley, 1303 O'Brien Road, .- -- -attorney""for"'the...three'''appellants. "'He stated that he did not believe there were any errors in procedures with the DNS, but he was more concerned with the facts. He added that the main concern is with the traffic, noise and safety hazards in the area. He referenced the Planning Department staff report which noted that there would be an increase in traffic and that there is a potential for traffic associated hazards. Mr. Colley explained that the site has limited access for automobiles, noting that roadways dead end to the north, and Planning commission Minutes March 13, 1991 . Page 3 the only exi t would be by making a U-turn on Eunice or Georgiana Streets. Nothing in the report addressed mitigation of potential hazards. He stated that noise would be a significant factor with this neighborhood, pointing out that the neighborhood is isolated and that the staff report failed to provide adequate information on the noise impact. He questioned how the noise impact can be quantif ied. This residential neighborhood will be disturbed by this proposal; therefore, noise impacts need to be studied further. He also expressed concern with potential economic impacts, which may not be significant but should be considered in the review. He understood that it is not an element to be considered in making the threshold determination. commissioner Philpott asked if the appellants are requesting a full environmental impact statement (EIS) be prepared. Mr. Colley responded "yes", and that it would be appropriate to focus the EIS review on traffic and noise, if possible. commissioner Leonard asked if the traffic hazard is more at this site than at other sites. Mr. colley responded that he believes it is because of the limited access for automobiles. . vice-Chairman Souders swore in Peggy Hayward, who read a written statement from her husband, Daniel Hayward, appellant. The statement noted that the average age of residents in the neighborhood is fifty-five; the proposal would result in an increased demand in the already stressed school bus system; the neighborhood is quiet and other properties would be better suited for the proposed day care center. He was concerned with the impact of the day care center on the existing bed and breakfast in the area and would result in a deterioration of the neighborhood. Glenndia Witherow, 318 North Eunice, was sworn in. Mrs. Witherow expressed concern that the additional noise and traffic would adversely impact her bed and breakfast. She pointed out that a quiet neighborhood is a key element in maintaining a successful bed and breakfast business. Gary Childers, speaking for the applicant, was sworn in. Mr. Childers said that he believed staff had adequately dealt with the proposal and pointed out that the speed of traffic will be - - -"-sl:ow;-'thereby"m"inimizing the hazards "and 'noise.' Alternative land uses for the now vacant site would have impacts too, noting that single-family homes could cause up to thirty trips per day, and that the residential users create noise. . commissioner Leonard questioned if the applicant has received any complaints resulting from the operation of the applicant IS other two day care centers which are located adjacent to, and in, residential areas. Mr. Childers responded "no". Planning Commission Minutes March 13, 1991 . Page 4 Commissioner Leonard asked if there had been complaints concerning traffic. Mr. Childers answered "non, that traffic is generally not a problem as trips are scattered over time and automobiles are traveling at a moderate speed as they deliver and pick up their children. Had there been any automobile related accidents at the other two day care centers. Mr. Childers responded "no". Jane Childers, applicant, was sworn in by Vice Chairman Souders. Mrs. Childers provided traffic counts for a one week period at her Bo Baggin's Day Center, which is licensed for seventy children. On a Monday there were 101 trips; Tuesday, 110; Wednesday, 108i Thursday, 116; and Friday, 97. She noted that there are five school busses which stop at the intersection already, and she did not believe noise would be a significant problem. . commissioner Philpott asked if Bo Baggin's Day Care Center is licensed for seventy children. The applicant responded "72". Mr. Philpott asked how many children would be on the playground at anyone time. Mrs. Childers answered that it varies. Each child is required to be in the playground three times a day, and the staffing will dictate how many are in the area at one time. She noted that at the Bo Baggin's Center, there are twenty children in the playground area at a time, but it can reach from 30 to 50. Vice Chairman Souders asked what times of day most traffic trips are made. Mrs. Childers responded that 4 P.M. to 5 P.M. are peak hours with relatively few trips generated in the earlier morning hours. Commissioner Leonard asked how many children is the Olympic Day Care Center licensed for. Mrs. Childers answered tt42". She read a letter into the record from Dorothy Gribble, a neighbor on Georgiana Street, indicating the use is not a bother to her. Ie Mr. Collins provided rebuttal to testimony given by the appellants and their representatives noting that there is no significant disagreement between staff and Mr. colley's comments. -He stated that the question is, will the proposal resul t in a probable significant adverse impact. Another - ---importa"nt-question- is," what ti'lggers-~the' need "for additional analysis. Mr. Collins explained the difference between mitigating measures for the purposes of SEPA versus conditions of approval for a conditional use permit to make the uses more compatible with the neighborhood. He stated that it is not a normal procedure to prepare noise and traffic studies in every environmental review. The normal procedure is to use expert judgment. He pointed out that day care centers are not considered a normal commercial use any more than they are . Planning Commission Minutes March 13, 1991 Page 5 considered a normal residential use, citing the fact that the only zoning district in the City that allows day cares as permitted uses is the CSD-C2 District. other districts require conditional use permits for day care centers. Commissioner Leonard asked if the Planning commission upheld the appeal requiring an EIS to be prepared, what would be the effect of that action? Mr. Collins responded that an EIS would result in the preparation of a traff ic study, which would be the main focus of the EIS. He believed that a study of the noise impacts would indicate that there would not be a significant adverse impact. It would be difficult to measure the change in noise resulting from the children. Gary Colley said that he disagreed that mitigation and conditions of approval are different, stating that the fact that there were conditions of approval is an admission that there would be adverse impacts. How do you quanitify whether something is adverse or not? The impacts are adverse to this neighborhood and believed that traffic and noise studies are warranted. . Commissioner Leonard asked how an EIS would help quantify what is an acceptable level of noise? Mr. colley answered that the city's Noise Ordinance is a document which provides objective standards. Vice Chairman Souders asked if an EIS should be prepared because there are conditions attached to a permit? Mr. Colley responded that the conditions can be read as an admission that there are adverse impacts. commissioner Philpott asked what would be involved in preparation of a traffic and noise study. Mr. Collins answered that the DNS would have to be withdrawn, with a request from the Planning Commission for additional information regarding traffic and noise. The applicant would be required to provide that information and present it to staff. If mitigation or a Determination of Significance (DS) is warranted, the Planning commission would then determine that an EIS be prepared. Mr. Collins stated that the Planning Commission must make the determination whether mitigation measures or a DS is warranted. Commissioner Philpott asked if the Commission could recommend additional mitigation measures. Mr. Collins responded "yes". . Gary Childers stated that if additional information is required, it would be an added expense to the applicant. vice chairman Souders closed the public hearing at 8:20 P.M. Planning Commission Minutes March 13, 1991 . Page 6 Commissioner Hulett stated that a noise study would be difficult to prepare noting the difficulties in measuring the impact of noise created by the children over the ambient noise level. commissioner Leonard moved to uphold the DNS. The motion was seconded by Commissioner HUlett, followinq clarification that concurrence with the DNS is not the same as approval for the condi tional use permit for the day care center. Motion carried unanimOUSly. The Commission took a break at 8:25 P.M. Meeting reconvened at 8:35 P.M. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 91(02)02 CBILDERS# Northeast corner of Eunice/Georqiana streets: Request to allow a day care center in the RS-7. Residential Sinqle-Family District. (Continued from Februarv 13. 1991. ) . Vice Chairman Souders noted that the public hearing on this item was closed at the February 13, 1991, meeting, and that no further public testimony would be taken. commissioner Hulett questioned whether the condition that the use permit be reviewed following one-year is appropriate. Commissioner Leonard added that the only condition that would be evaluated would be Condition A, which limits the hours of operation. Mr. Collins answered that the Planning Commission is not required by the Zoning Ordinance to add the one-year review condition. Mr. Hulett questioned the appropriateness in placing a building designed solely for business in a residential location, not on an arterial roadway. He felt that perhaps better standards are needed for determin _ locations of businesses in residential areas. Commissioner Anabel indicated that the proposal is a considerable commercial enterprise in a residential area. He did not feel it is compatible with other residential uses. . -Mr.-Leonard-stated'he 'believes day' cares in general are compatible. He would rather have day cares located in residential areas than on commercial streets. Noise is not a signif icant problem. He asked whether the state distinguishes between mini day cares and other day cares. Jane Childers answered that there are three classifications: (1) home day cares which serve one to six children; (2) mini day care centers which serve seven to twelve children; and (3) standard day care center which serves thirteen or more children. She . Planning commission Minutes March 13, 1991 Page 7 stated that mini and mid sized centers which serve twelve to thirty children are not financially feasible. commissioner Philpott asked what other conditional uses are allowed in the RS-7, Residential single-Family District. Mr. Collins read from the Zoning Ordinance those conditional uses which are allowed in the RS-7 District. Mr. Anabel stated that this neighborhood is unique because of its quiet nature with relatively little traffic. The noise would be significant for the neighborhood. commissioner Leonard moved to approve the conditional use permit, citing the conditions, findings and conclusions stated in the staff report. Commissioner Philpott seconded the motion. . Mr. Leonard asked how Condition No.1, regarding the hours of oper.ation could be enforced. Mr. Collins responded that there is a standard procedure whereby once a complaint is received, staff would contact the owner and inform them of the violation. If there are subsequent complaints, or it is observed that the violation is continuing, action would be taken which could result in revocation of the permit. Mr. Philpott noted that the applicant has a good record with the operation of her other two day care centers. Commissioner Hulett said it would be difficult to blend the commercial structure in with the existing residential uses in the area. He questioned whether conditions could be created which would ensure compatibility. He added that the conditional use permit would expand commercial uses in the area~ng that there are existing office commercial uses to the of the site. Mr. Philpott said the site is within two hundred feet of the commercial (ACD) district located along Front street. Mr. Anabel noted that the proposed use is not in the ACD District. commissioner Souders asked how detrimental to the neighborhood. the center's size and number .'-compati'bl'e .- the day care would be Jim Hulett responded that of children would not be . Bob Philpott asked if there were other actions other than the conditional use permit to achieve the same end. Mr. Collins answered that the only other alternative would be a rezone, but added that staff would consider such a request a spot rezone, and something to be avoided. Planning Commission Minutes March 13, 1991 . Page 8 The question was called for and the motion failed 3 - 2, with B9b Phrlpu~l-and Larry Leonard voting in favor of the motion. ~~~-'Io~ Commissioner Hulett moved to continue consideration of the ite~ to Karch 27, 1991, and directed staff to prepare findings and conclusions to support denial of the conditional use permit. commissioner Anabel seconded the motion, which passed 4-1, with Mr. Leonard voting against the motion. Mr. Gruver resumed the Chair. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 91(03) 04 - LOGHRY. 1137 Hiqhwav 101 West: Request to allow qasoline islands in association with the remodel of a convenience store in the CSD-C1 District. Chairman Gruver noted the memorandum from staff indicating the permit was not required, and the application had been withdrawn. The Commission accepted the withdrawal. . ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ZCA 91 (03) 1 POLARIS ENGINEERING. RMF District: Reauest to amend the RMF. Residential Multi-Familv. District of the City's Zoning Ordinance. No. 1709. as amended. to conditionally allow professional offices. Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing at 9:30 P.M. John Jimerson reviewed the Department Report. stephen zenovic, 111 West Third street, (check) explained that it was their intent to limit the conditional use to professional offices and explained that there is a need for professional offices to be located in the general vicinity of the County Courthouse and City Hall. He did not feel a rezone to OC, Office Commercial, would be appropriate, as there have been several recent rezones to OC, which may constitute spot zoning. There is a shortage of available office space for professional users. Apartments could generate as much, if not more, traffic than professional office users. . -Larry-Leonard ~'asked "if' the ._"C" .street +extension . would be a possible location for professional offices. Mr. Zenovic responded that he didn't think that area would be appropriate for the proposed use. . David Stalheim, a City resident, stated he believed a conditional use permit is an inappropriate means to achieve the objective. It would be more appropriate to rezone property to office commercial. The intent of the mUlti-family . . . Planning Commission Minutes March 13, 1991 Page 9 district is to allow for multi-family uses. He expressed concern over the commercial impacts on historic and residential districts. There is a need for multi-family housing and the proposal may further limit the amount of land available for such development. The applicant, stephen zenovic, said that the OC, Office Commercial District, is a more intense use and rezone to that district designation may have more impacts than allowing professional offices as a conditionally permitted use. There being no further testmony, Chairman Gruver closed the pUblic hearing 10 P.M. Commissioner Hulett stated that rezoning would be the more appropriate method of allowing for the use, and he was concerned over the spot zoning issue. cindy Souders moved to oontinue the item to March 27, 1991, and to direct staff to prepare findings and conclusions in support of denial of the request. Larry Leonard seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT - ICA 91(03)2 - SADLER. CSD-C District: Request to amend the CSD-C Community Shoppinq. District to allow small appliance repair uses. Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing at 10:08 P.M. John Jimerson reviewed the Department Report. The applicant, John Sadler, 2010 South Oak street, had nothing further to add to the Department's report. There beingA ~blic testimony, Chairman Gruver closed the public hearlng at 10:12 P.M. Commissioner Philpott moved to support the staff recommendation to recommend approval of the proposed amendment citing the following findings and oonolusions: Findings: -1.' -The-st:ated-purpose-of-the~CSD"'C1~and'C2 Districts is to allow businesses which provide goods and services required daily by the surrounding residential uses. 2 . The CSD-C1 and C2 Districts specifically allow shoe repair shops. Planning Commission Minutes March 13, 1991 . Page 10 3. The permitted uses in the ACD and CBD Districts include a more general category for repair shops, which lists shoe and appliance repair as specific examples. Conclusions: A. The proposed use is similar to and compatible with uses contained in the CSD-C1 and C2 Districts. B. Rather than list every conceivable type of repair shop oriented to residential needs, it is more appropriate to generally list repair shops, under which different types of household-oriented repair shops may fit. C. The proposed amendment is not only appropriate for the CSD-C2 District as requested, but for the CSD-C1 District as well. D. The proposed amendment is consistent wi th the Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies. E. The proposed amendment is consistent with the intent of the CSD-C1 and C2 zoning Districts. . F. The proposed amendment is in the public use and interest. The motion was seconded by Jim Hulett and carried unanimously. V. COMMUNICATIONS FROK THE PUBLIC None. VI. STAFF REPORTS Brad Collins informed the Commission that he would not be in town for the March 27, 1991, meeting. There will be a state planning conference in Wenatchee, May 29-31, 1991, dealing with the Growth Management Act. He also pointed out that May 16-17 a seminar on model subdivision regulations will be held in Seattle. He encouraged those who are able to attend those meetings to let the Department know. The Planning Department is preparing a housekeeping ordinance to be presented to the Commission for its consideration at the March 27, 1991, --meeting." . .__4. - -- . . Cindy Souders gave an update on the neighborhood public meetings being conducted as part of the Growth Management Act. She stated that the feedback has been good and that there had been a number of significant issues discussed including multi- family, transportation, environment and the Downtown. Jim Hulett reported that there are parking lot lights at 118 Planning commission Minutes March 13, 1991 . Page 11 East Eighth street glaring into the street which may be a traffic hazard. He also pointed out that eastbound on Eighth Street/Eunice, there is a significant bump in the road. Near Birney's Restaurant, a green pickup and trailer loaded with debris is parked on the roadway which has been there for some time. A truck and large boat are parked in the public right- of-way between 8th/9th and "I" and ilK" Streets. Ray Gruver noted that the American planning Association (APA) is requesting nominations for outstanding efforts for planning in the community. There is an APA position statement in the Planning Northwest magazine on the Growth Management Act. He pointed out that any questions of staff and the audience must be made while the pUblic hearing is in progress. Once the public hearing is closed, it becomes more difficult to ask questions without the questions being direct, and allowing for rebuttal from the public. He also noted that items on the evening's agenda such as the zoning code amendment for the multi-family district is a reflection of staff's efforts to try to find alternative solutions to the needs of the community. He appreciated the help staff is providing to the community. . Bob Philpott noted that findings and conclusions in support of and for denial of a proposal have been given to the Planning Commission in the past in order to speed up the process in the event the Commission's decision differs J from staff's recommendation. Mr. Collins responded that it' his preference to provide findings and conclusions only for the staff's recommendation, unless otherwise directed by the Commission. Larry Leonard stated that a recent Attorney General's determination makes it illegal to hold a secret vote by a public board. Mr. Leonard moved to unanimously elect cindy Souders as Vice Chairman for the 1991-92 term. The motion was seconded by Jim Hulett ana passed unanim s Chairman VIII. ADJOURNHEHT The meeting adjourned at 11 P.M. --~.~ Brad Collins, Secretary . JJ:sr . PLEASE SIGN IN CITY OF PORT ANGELES Attendance Roster Type of Meeting ~~ ~mmiss~n Date '-~ , / /99/ Location 321 E. 5th Street - City all Name Address I ~ -'"( ~~~ r 3 uJ c/ gr'.~..... It,( , !;;..wi- ~ Od, ~ , ~ c (' ~ J...) \ , /t/e !jog-' G~ c,-:Lg' ?J-9 30 /5 . i6 1 '0 'SCA..--"VV p~ __ )t) I j r; f.I'r-D I. :; 0 9' ~c-f S~ u..u..u- 7 d-- ::LG ~c~~ r4U4 ~~~ /t:J7- ~~ 3/r/'/ ~ .-- mQ.l1 ~~ .~~~l:ll~~~ iP~ ~ ~1,"A- .. 711tW-e t~ ~' ~~Q~;:~vr ~ . . . PLEASE SIGN IN CITY OF PORT ANGELES Attendance Roster Type of Meeting Planning Commission Date Location 321 E. 5th Street - City Hall Name Address ~~O"-IC- &li~ W<<-~~I~ lU l? ~ l,\l v-d s,,-l. Sk l D P A I 2..0 S" W, stf? :;; jy'~ to J'I- l ( ( ( { r ~ / S~~ A( ~ ~J.\&:.. f~