Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/24/2004 o , ~ . ~ORTANGELJaS WAS H I N G TON, U.S. A. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION 321 East Fifth Street March 24, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER Special Meeting Time - 6 p.m. II. ROLL CALL III. APPROV AL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting of March 10, 2004 IV. PUBLIC HEARING: STREET VACATION PETITION - STV 03-05 - DeFRANG. Portion ofWoolcott Street located between East Fourth Street and the 4/5 Alley: v. OTHER BUSINESS: 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Update 2. Parking Ordinance discussion 3. Bylaw Amendment VI. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC VII. STAFF REPORTS VIII. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS . IX. ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMM ISSIQNERS: Fred Hewins (Chair), Len Rasmussen (Vice Chair), Chuck Schramm, Fred Norton, Linda Nutter, Bob Philpott, Dylan Honnold PLANNING STAFF: Brad Collins, Director; Scott 101ms, Associate Planner; Sue Roberds, Assistant Planner. . . . . MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington 98362 March 24, 2004 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Bob Philpott, Fred Norton, Fred Hewins, Chuck Schramm, Dylan Honnold Members Excused: Leonard Rasmussen, Linda Nutter Staff Present: Brad Collins, Scott Johns, Sue Roberds Public Present: Steve Oliver APPROVAL OF :MINUTES Commissioner Philpott moved to approve the minutes ofthe March 10, 2004, meeting with clarification to Condition #1 and Finding #20. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Schramm and passed 5 - O. PUBLIC HEARING: Chair Hewins indicated that those who testify must sign the attendance roster and affirm that their testimony will be truthful to the best of their knowledge. STREET VACATION PETITION - STY 03-05 - DeFRANG. Portion ofWooJcott Street located between East Fourth Street and the 4/5 Alley: As the applicant was not in attendance, Chair Hewins postponed the matter to latter in the meeting, to give staff an opportunity to try to reach the applicant. OTHER BUSINESS: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Update Associate Planner Scott J alms described the Comprehensive Plan update process to the present time and indicated that an early draft of proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments had been included in the Planning Commission's packet for their review and discussion. An item by item discussion of the proposed amendments followed. A question about how the proposed boundary for expansion of the southwestern UGA was derived and a suggestion to extend it west to Laird Road were made. The proposed map change in the west end from MDR to LDR was questioned and the explanation that no medium density development has been proposed in the area and that there was a higher demand for single family residential than medium density residential was the reasoning behind the amendment. Additionally, the proposed creation of the RS-12 zone would be included . . . Planning Commission Minutes March 24, 2004 Page 2 in LDR areas and that would help to create a supply of large lot development potential within the City to off-set the pressure in the County for large lot developable sites. The RS-12 zone is to be created to have a transitional zone located within the City and UGA. Low Density Residential designation would include RS-7, RS-9, and RS-12 zones. Discussion of the Comprehensive Plan Map change for the Rayonier site followed. The consensus on the Planning Commission was to leave the site designated as industrial to nurture a more cooperative relationship with the property owner. By not changing the designation the City would not be limiting future uses, while leaving open the possibility of changing the designation in the future. Questions were asked about what constituted Best Available Science and what that would mean to the City in the future. The definition and resource list was made available to the Planning Commission members and the role of the existing items (the Sheldon Wetland mventory, the Pentec Shoreline Assessment, and the DNR Shoreline Atlas as Best Available Science) were explained. Parking Ordinance discussion Director Collins explained that, at the request of the City Council's Community and Economic Development (CED) Committee, staff has been working with Commission representatives Schramm and Rasmussen in review of an alternative proposal for amendment to provide flexibility to the City's parking regulations. Following the Planning Commission's May, 2002, recommendation to the Council, the CED revised some language and realizes that the proposed revisions are not in concert with the Planning Commission's recommendation. Staff was directed by the CED to try to work with the Planning Commission in an attempt to reach agreement on the issues that the two groups are most divided upon for presentation to the entire Council at its scheduled April 20, 2004, public hearing. Mr. Collins noted that the ability to achieve administrative approval for certain alternative methods in determining required parking was removed from the proposed wording and that ability was returned to the Planning Commission for review and action thus eliminating a major concern expressed by the Planning Commission regarding the need for public review of parking reductions. The three options that remain to someone who wishes a parking method are: 1) comply with Table "A" which identifies a set standard parking; 2) propose a transportation demand management (TDM) study to be approved by the Planning Commission; or 3) apply for a parking variance based on specific reasons. (The main method for determining required parking is based on an analysis ofthe number of employees and customers during the peak hours of operation.) Commissioner Hewins noted that a main concern to him is that logical parking requirements are in place that can readily be monitored without undue stress to a business owner or extra work for staff in monitoring a situation that is created by a business owner and inherited by subsequent property owners who didn't realize there were restrictions or that a reduction in parking had been approved based on certain circumstances. The difference between a TDM and a standard parking variance was discussed as well as methods of evaluation of calculations for required parking. It was generally decided that there is a need for minimum standards to ensure that a certain amount of parking is provided for business uses to be established and to grow. The Commission agreed that it is very important to provide notification not only to neighboring business operators and property owners when a parking reduction is being considered, . . . Planning Commission Minutes March 14. 2004 PlIge3 but also to those property owners where off-site parking is proposed. The issue of how parking credits would be monitored. Would it be necessary to have staff ask for a parking report to ensure that those businesses that receive a parking reduction based on a TDM where bus ridership for employees was expected monitor that usage? It was determined that this would not be productive and how would a failure to meet a TDM be enforced: it was decided that a business would probably not be told to shut down in the event that parking could not be supplied if a TDM failed. The Commission was in agreement that off-site parking up to 1200' is too far away to be plausible. Director Collins offered that this suggestion by the CED was used because it generally represents two full City blocks including street rights-of-way and uses the logic of the City's Downtown area where most parking lots are located at least 1200' from businesses. He agreed that outside of the Downtown, a more restrictive distance would work. Commissioner Hewins noted his longstanding issue that it is important to plan for the future and hope that businesses need to expand and flourish and that without adequate, convenient parking, that surely will not happen. He agreed that within the Downtown PBIA 1200' distance for off-site parking is probably fine, but, outside the PBIA, a shorter distance such as 200' is more likely to be accessible. He still strongly urged that the standard table for minimum parking be used as the backbone and only in specific instances should alternative methods such as a parking variance be used. Minimums have been reduced or removed from the table making it more flexible and addressing issues noted by staff over the past couple of years as being onerous. The Commission generally agreed that with the changes proposed by staff to their earlier recommendation (May 2002) and that the new amended recommendation is acceptable. Bylaw Amendment Commissioner Philpott moved to approve the proposed bylaw changes setting a regular hearing time as 6 p.m. and that specific issues for action at particular meetings be amended such that all meetings are open to regular work items. PUBLIC HEARING: STREET VACATION PETITION - STY 03-05 - DeFRANG. Portion ofWoo1cott Street located between East Fourth Street and the 4/5 Alley: Chair Hewins opened the public hearing. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant would not be available as they are out of town and asked that the item be continued to April 14, 2004. Commissioner Schramm moved to continue the public bearing until the April 14, 2004, regular meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Philpott and passed 5 - O. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None . . . Planning Commission Minutes MlIrch 24, 2004 Page 4 STAFF REPORTS None REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS group. Commissioner Norton continues to meet as a representative of the Port Angeles Forward ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. ~~ Bra Collins, Secretary PREP ARED BY: S. Roberds ;//L- Fred Hewins, ChaiT' J ~ ~ORTANGELES WAS H I N G TON, U. S. A. . PLANNING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE ROSTER AND TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET PLEASESIGN IN Meeting Agenda of: To help us provide an accurate record of those in attendance, please sign in. Your signature acknowledges your presence. If you plan to testify, by your signature below, you certify that the testimony given is true and correct under penalty of perjury by the laws of the State of m h' t S' t b I DOES NOT REQUIRE t t tify as mg on. If?na ure eow you o es 1 . NAME: ADDRESS: Agenda Item No. S+-~L DI'vc.-/ jLo.3, S. ~~ 5.,..e7 =r:14 C;; rf3' c 7- ...;) A J'If.:....4 e ~c:;y / I .