Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04/09/2003 . . . MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington 98362 April 9, 2003 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Bob Philpott, Fred Hewins, Fred Norton, Chuck Schramm, Leonard Rasmussen, Linda Nutter Members Excused: Jack Pittis Staff Present: Sue Roberds, Ken Dubuc, Jim Mahlum Public Present: Jim Schouten, Clay Crow, Dennis Yakovich, Brian Gawley, Priscilla Schloss, Earl Medley, Ken Melberg APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Philpott noted a correction to the members listed as present at the March 26, 2003, meeting. Commissioner Hewins moved to approve the March 26, 2003, minutes as corrected. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Schramm and passed 4 - 0 with Commissioners Philpott and Rasmussen abstaining due to absence at the meeting. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 03-05 - MELBERG - 1229 Columbia Street: Requestto allow the development of an accessory residential dwelling unit in the RS-7, Residential Single Family zone. (Continued from March 12, 2003.) Assistant Planner Sue Roberds reviewed the background materials and noted that this item is continued from the March 12,2003, regular meeting due to an irregularity in the public notice procedure. During the re-notice period, one letter was received from a neighboring property owner, Priscilla Schloss. The letter was provided to the Planning Commission with the mailed packet materials. In response to a question, she explained the difference between duplex uses and accessory residential units. Chair Nutter reopened the public hearing. Ken Melberg, 1229 Columbia Street, Port Angeles, WA 98362 was present for questions. He asked why he could not increase the permitted lot coverage through the conditional use permit process and discussed parking concerns with the Commission. At the Chair's request, Planner Roberds responded to Mr. Melberg's inquiry as to why an increase in area for the accessory residential dwelling unit is not permitted, and explained that the applicant's construction plans and existing development ofthe site will maximize the site for any further development. The provision of on-site parking will be tight given the size of the planned garage structure. Mr, Melberg assured the Commission that on~site parking is available within the side setback areas. . . . Plllnning Commission Minutes April 9, 2003 Page 2 Commissioner Hewins reiterated, in a further attempt to clarify Mr. Melberg's concern with regard to his request for a land use variance to allow additional area for the accessory residential unit, that he already in a sense will be allowed a variance of the standard development rights for a typical residential property by being able to establish the second one-half unit and that a further increase in use area cannot be considered. There being no further discussion, Chair Nutter closed the public hearing. Following continued discussion, Commissioner Philpott moved to approve the conditional use permit citing the following conditions, findings, and conclusions in support of the action: Conditions: 1. The applicant shall meet the City's permitting and utility requirements including the provision of four (4) off-street parking spaces - two (2) for the principal residence and two (2) for the accessory residential unit, and shall submit a parking plan prior to issuance of a building permit indicating the provision 0 f the required parking to City standards. 2. The accessory residential unit shall be no larger than 560 square feet in area. Findings: Based on information provided in the Community Development Staff Report for CUP 03-05 dated March 12, 2003, including all information in the public record file, comments and testimony presented during the public hearing, the Planning Commission discussion and deliberation, and the above listed condition of approval, the City of Port Angeles Planning Commission hereby finds that: 1. Ken Melberg submitted Conditional Use Permit application CUP 03-05 for an accessory residential unit on February 14,2003, at 1229 Columbia Street. 2. The site is described as being the west one-half of Lot 16 and the east one-half of Lot 17, Block 6, Puget Sound Cooperative Colony and consists of a single 50' x 140' Townsite lot that is developed with a single family residence. 3. The applicant is proposing to construct a two-story garage unit at the rear ofthe site with the second floor area being an accessory residential unit. The proposed accessory dwelling unit will be developed at the minimum setback and maximum permissible lot coverage for residential dwelling units. 4. The site is zoned RS-7, Residential Single Family. Minimum lot requirements in the RS-7 zone are 7,000 square feet with the ability to add an accessory residential unit by conditional use permit per P AMC 17.1 0.040(A). Such development is subject to the design and dimensional requirements set forth under PAMe 17.10.050 which include minimum setbacks and maximum lot coverage. Residential setbacks required for the subject property include 20~ foot minimum front and rear yard and 7- foot side Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 2003 PlIge3 . . . yard setbacks except for detached garages in the rear one third of the lot which may have 1 O-foot rear yard and 3-foot side yard setbacks. A total maximum lot coverage requirement of30% must be observed by the proposal. 5. The Planning Commission shall consider applications for conditional use permit uses as specified in the applicable Chapter ofthe Zoning Regulations per 17.96.050. The Planning Commission may grant said permits which are consistent and compatible with the pm:pose of the zone in which the use is located, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and not contrary to the public use and interest. The Planning Commission may refuse to issue a conditional use permit if the characteristics of the intended use as related to the specific proposed site are such as would defeat the purpose of these Zoning Regulations by introducing incompatible, detrimental, or hazardous conditions. In each application the Planning Commission may impose whatever restrictions or conditions are considered essential to protect the public health, safety, welfare, and to prevent depreciation of neighboring property. 6. The proposed two-story accessory structure will have a 975 square foot footprint with added gross living area of no more than 560 square feet as the primary single-family residential unit contains 1120 square feet of floor area. Accessory residential units may be no more than 50% the area ofthe primary unit. The proposal would result in lot coverage of30% (1120 & 975). A maximum lot coverage of21 00 square feet or 30% is allowed in the RS-7 zone. 7. Section 17.08.0lOB of the Port Angeles Municipal Code defines "an accessory residential unit as a dwelling unit which: A. is incidental to a detached single family residence, is subordinate in space (i.e., fifty percent or less space than the single family residential use), B. is located on the same zoning lot as the single family residence, and C. is served by separate water and electrical services, in addition to a separate address. 8. Section l7.0S.025(1) of the Port Angeles Municipal Code defines a dwelling unit as "one or more rooms which are arranged, designed or used as living quarters for one family only. Individual bathrooms are not necessarily provided, but complete single kitchen facilities, permanently installed, shall always be included for each dwelling unit. " 9. Section 310.7.1 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code states that an Efficiency Dwelling Unit "...shall have a living room of not less than 220 square feet of superficial floor area. An additional 1 00 square feet of superficial floor area shall be provided for each occupant of such unit in excess of two." lO. PAMC 14.40.060(D) requires 2 off-street parking spaces per residential dwelling unit. A parking plan will be required indicating a total offour (4) off-street parking spaces per the City's Parking Ordinance (P AMC 14.40.060) - two (2) for the primary residential use and two (2) for the accessory residential use - prior to issuance of a . . . Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 2003 Page 4 building permit. The subject property has a two car detached garage with attached carport. A fourth off-street parking space must be provided for the proposed use. 11. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential (LDR). Adjacent designations are LDR. The site is located in the City's East Planning area. 12. The City's Comprehensive Plan was reviewed for consistency with the proposal. Land Use Element Goal A, Policy No.2, Land Use Element Goal C, Policy No.1, Housing Element Goal A, Policy No.6, and Housing Element Goal B, Policy No.6 were found to be most relevant to the proposal. 13. A Determination of Non-Significance was issued for this proposed action on February 11,2003. 14. Reviewing City Departmental comments were considered in the review of this application. The proposed activity will require a valid building permit and the installation of separate water and electrical meters. 15. Notification of the proposed action and conditional use permit application was placed in the Peninsula Daily News on February 21, 2003. Notification was mailed to property owners within 300 feet ofthe subject property on February 18, 2003. One written comment was received during the comment period from a neighbor who expressed concern that the additional dwelling unit would exacerbate parking for the site as the site is being used for multiple rental purposes at present. 16. Prior to the continued public hearing, the applicant submitted a floor plan indicating a 5' overhang and was informed that the 5' overhang would exceed the allowable lot coverage of 30%. Conclusions: Based on the information provided in the Department of Community Development Staff Report for CUP 03-05 dated March 12,2003, including all of the information in the public record file, comments, and testimony presented during the public hearing, the Planning Commission's discussion and deliberation, and the above listed condition of approval and the above listed findings, the City of Port Angeles Planning Commission hereby concludes that: 1. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the intent ofthe Comprehensive Plan, specifically with Land Use Element Goal A, Policy No.2, Goal C, Policy No.1, Housing Element Goal A and Policy No.6, and Housing Element Goal B and Policy No.6. The Comprehensive Plan allows for subordinate and compatible uses within different zones, including residential zones. The Plan specifies that accessory residential units should be allowed in certain zones by conditional use approval in order to provide adequate, affordable housing. . . . Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 2003 Page 5 2. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with development standards for accessory residential units under PAMC 17.08.110(B). As the proposed use complies with definitions and design and performance standards set forth by the Zoning Code, it can be deemed consistent with the Zoning Code, 3. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the requirements for approval of a conditional use permit as specified in PAMC 17.96.050. 4. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the Parking Ordinance, P AMC 14.40.060(D). 5. As conditioned, the proposal will provide an alternate housing opportunity in compliance with established building standards and is therefore in the public interest. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Schramm and passed 6 - O. PUBLIC HEARING MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT - MCA 02-01b - Revised Development Standards ~ City wide: Continued review of a proposal to reduce certain development (street) and utility (septic, sewer, and water) standards in low density areas. Assistant Planner Sue Roberds indicated information in the packet for the Commission's review of proposed low impact development standards which are being considered at the direction ofthe City Council. The proposal specifically would reduce developed street widths and eliminate curbs, gutters, and sidewalks in specific areas. In areas where reduced development standards are allowed, a shoulder with vegetated drainage swales and separated walking paths would be required. Additionally, following significant review of practices and policy, the City's Fire Department has suggested that the distance between fire hydrants and the requirements for sprinkler systems may be amended under certain circumstances in specific areas, The Council is looking for a consensus of opinion from the Planning Commission on the proposed amendments to established development standards. Fire Marshall Ken Dubuc, then reviewed the Fire Department's proposed revised development standards, New single-family residential construction outside of the Department's established four minute response area shall have a fire hydrant within 1000 feet ofthe furthest point of the structure, an increase from the current 425-foot distance. New single-family residential construction in areas outside of the four minute response area situated beyond 1000 feet from a hydrant shall be protected by an approved residential sprinkler system. Commissioner Hewins stated that he didn't have a problem with reducing road widths but he is concerned with the handling of stormwater. He asked how runoff from roadways would be handled with a swale system. Planner Roberds responded that specific development standards for swales will need to be developed and will be developed and placed in the City's development standards and guidelines documents. At this time, those standards have not been completed. She agreed with Commissioner . . . Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 2003 Page 6 Hewins that the actual cost of development shown on the preliminary street diagrams do not include the cost of development of adjacent swales, which will be dependent on soils in the specific areas. Jim Mahlum, Civil Engineer with the City's Public Works and Utilities Department stated that swales would be vegetated to capture pollutants, which is a regular best management practice promoted by the Department of Ecology. Projected street development costs shown on the submitted street profile identify only street development costs and are not intended to reflect the cost of development or maintenance of adjacent vegetated swales. Commissioner Hewins expressed strong concern that the lower standards being proposed do not adequately address stormwaterrunoffissues. He is aware of how swales are intended to function but does not believe that adequate study has been given to the development or maintenance of the swales in the information presented or that vegetated swales will address stormwater issues within the City. Although he understands the need to have developers pay for the extension of sewer to new developments, he is concerned that the City is not willing to find ways to extend services within the City's boundaries to service City properties that are developable. Planner Roberds indicated that the Council has formed a committee that is looking at these types of issues and may decide that such a practice is possible in developing areas but until such a decision is made, current practice is to require development costs to be borne by developers. The Council is interested in economic development and is open to financially sound suggestions. In respon'se to Commissioner Philpott, Planner Roberds stated that the suggestion to allow septic systems in the most outlying areas of the City where connection to an existing sewer would far exceed most people's financial abilities will enable development of many properties that may never developed under the current standards. The development of such properties with septic systems would be an interim situation until sewers are extended to outlying areas when the cost of the sewer utility could be borne by significantly more people, or a solution to such extension is found such as Commissioner Hewins suggested earlier. People who are permitted to install septic systems will be made aware that hookup to a municipal system will be required when such a service becomes available. Commissioner Nutter expressed concern that by allowing septic systems for properties of one acre or more, we will not be meeting density thresholds required by the Growth Management Act. Planner Roberds noted that the only option available at this point is to tell people they can't develop their properties at all where the proposal would permit some opportunity to move forward with the understanding that a septic system is interim. Commissioner Nutter recommended that pathways should be widened to support bicyclists and pedestrians. Engineer Mahlum noted that designated bicycle routes would require 8' pathways as opposed to the standard 41. Commissioner Hewins applauded the Fire Department's efforts in reviewing the Codes and safe practices and making a recommendation to revise established standards with respect to fire sprinklers and fire hydrant spacing. While he agreed that there is a balance between life safety and water damage, he is generally opposed to a requirement for sprinklers due to personal experience. The Commission as a whole congratulated the Fire Department's work and efforts in recommending the changes. Fire Marshall Ketl Dubuc supported fire sprinklers and offered to discuss the pros and cons of the systems in detail at any time with any Commissioner. Chair Nutter opened the public hearing. Clay Crow, 784 Madison Avenue North, Bainbridge Island, WA encouraged the Commission to give serious consideration to recommending adoption of the proposed low impact . . . Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 2003 Page 7 development standards being proposed. He explained concerns that his company experienced while developing a short plat in 2002. Current development proposals will prevent the further development of the 42 acre property owned by the company. From a developer's standpoint, existing development standards are prohibitive in the area of sewer extension, street width, and development requirements. He encouraged a flexible design with less improved surface. Cooperative partnerships with the City for the installation of sewer and water services will allow development to occur in stagnant areas. Dennis Yakovich, Green Crow Properties, 250 Meadow Lark Lane, Sequim, WA 98382, explained in detail the problems experienced in developing a four lot short plat near the City limits in an area where sewer is some 1200' distant. Even though a sewer service line was extended through the 42 acre site to serve the four lot short plat, further development ofthe area is dependent on a sewer study to determine the capacity of the City's system in the area and what upgrades it needs. He believes that for his company to be required to provide such a study is to ask him to provide a study that is the City's responsibility, not the property owner's. He spoke in favor of reduced street development width. Many people will not purchase lots if they are required to install fire sprinklers. People should be able to choose if they wish to install sprinklers. The m 0 r e regulation that drives up the cost of development, the less development will happen, It is not economically feasible for the company to develop the remainder of the 42 acre property with 260 potential residential building sites at this point. He encouraged a favorable recommendation for consideration of low impact development standards. Jim Schouten, 4619 Old Mill Road, a custom home builder and occasional developer, spoke in favor of the low impact development standards being proposed. He has considered the development of a 20-acre property off Old Mill Road which he owns but is concerned that development requirements will make such development cost prohibitive. A reduction in the development standards will continue to maintain the desired quality of life enjoyed by those who reside in outlying areas and properties will be affordable so more people can enjoy the area. It is a win - win situation. He spoke in favor ofthe Fire Department's proposal and agreed that septi c tanks should be permitted under certain conditions for development of single family and short plat lots but not subdivisions. Narrower road widths are a wonderful idea in residential areas as a 20' width is more than enough as long as allowance is made for bicyclists and pedestrians. Proposed standards will maintain a rural character while allowing for development in outlying areas. There being no further comments, Chair Nutter closed the public hearing. Discussion between the Commission members began. Commissioner Hewins agreed with the narrower street widths but was disappointed that design standards were not presented to cover stormwater regulations and concerns. He believes that septic systems may be a problem and suggested that if the City is able to extend services outside the City limits to Wal Mart, the City should work to extend services within the City limits to developable areas. A $1 a month charge to residents for such utility extension within the City could be a method that these types of services could be made affordable. Commissioner Schramm spoke in favor of the Fire Department's proposals which show a willingness to make concessions when public safety will not be jeopardized. He favored a one-half acre lot size for septic tanks rather than a one acre threshold and agreed with a reduction in street standards. Commissioner Norton stated that City residents should ultimately have sewer service but he spoke in favor of septic tanks in appropriate situations when people are made aware that they are not forever. He supported reduced road standards and the Fire Department's proposed reductions but stated that he preferred that fire sprinklers be a choice. (Commissioner Norton left the meeting at this point 9:00 p.m.) . . . Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 2003 PlIge8 Commissioner Philpott agreed with all of the standard reductions and agreed with COnmllssioner Schrannn that a one-half acre minimum seems more appropriate and would still allow for future development options. Commissioner Nutter would like to see some low impact development but thinks the proposal is a bit short sighted. She asked that a more balanced presentation be made in the future for such proposals and was disappointed that there was not more public comment regarding the proposals. She was concerned that some of the standards do not comply with Growth Management Act guidelines. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None. STAFF REPORTS Planner Roberds stated that Director Collins sends his apologies for not being able to be present for the discussion. Mr. Collins was unable to attend having just had reconstructive knee surgery . The Council will be having a special meeting on low impact development standards on April 29,2003. Commission members are invited to attend that discussion. Maps are being prepared to show where the specific areas of the City exist where low impact development will be permitted. Those maps should be available for the Commission's April 23rd meeting. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS Commissioner Schramm asked how the conference center application is doing. Planner Roberds stated that the Shoreline Hearings Board has scheduled a hearing in the Council Chambers for April 28 and 29, 9:30 a.m. It is unknown whether a decision will be issued at the close of the hearing. Commissioner Hewins asked what development is occurring at the southeast comer of Race and First Street. Planner Roberds noted that the building is being developed as a new office building. Commissioner Schramm asked about the development apparent at the northeast comer of 8th and Lincoln Streets. Planner Roberds noted that a redevelopment ofthe site is occurring. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. ~~~~ PREPARED BY: S. Roberds · FORTANGELES WAS H I N G TON, U. s. A. . PLANNING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE ROSTER AND TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET PLEASESIGN IN ~.l Meeting Agenda of: 9 ;2003 , PLEASE NOTE: IF you plan to testify; by signature below; you certify that the testimony given is true and correct under penalty of perjury by the laws of the State of Washington. Signature below DOES NOT REQUIRE au to testi - it only acknowled es our resence. Agenda Item No. v .:w _ s{fJt"..