Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05/08/1991 '. I. II. ill. IV. . 1. AGENDA PORT ANGELES PLANNING COMMISSION City Council Chambers 321 East Fifth Street Port Angeles, W A 98362 May 8, 1991 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of April 24, 1991 PUBLIC HEARINGS: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA 91(05)114 - PORT OF PORT ANGELES. Ediz Hook Boat Launch: Request for a permit to allow resurfacing of an existing boat launch ramp. 2. . CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 91(05)06 - TIlUNDERBIRD BOA mOUSE. Ediz Hook: Request for a permit to allow overnight RV camping in the M-2, Heavy Industrial District. (Applicant is requesting withdrawal of this application at this time,) 3. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA 91(05)115 - DAISHOWA AMERICA. Marine Drive at Ediz Hook: Request for a permit to allow the construction of a l45-car parking area in the M-2, Heavy Industrial District. 4. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA 91(05)116 - DAISHOW A AMERICA. Marine Drive at Ediz Hook: Request for a permit to allow improvements to be made to a shipping dock; replacement of paper machine No. 3 drive; roll handling upgrade; and firewater pipeline relocation in the M-2, Heavy Industrial District, on the City's waterfront. '. '. '. .' Planning Commission Agenda Page 2 5. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA 91(05)117 - AUSTIN. 400 Block Railroad A venue Extended: Request to construct a cyclone fence and rockery wall on private property in the LI, Light Industrial District on the City's waterfront. 6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST - CUP 91(05107 - WESTERN INNS. 140 Del Guzzi Drive: Request to allow a motel in the ACD, Arterial Commercial District. The property is currently located in the ACD District, but this zoning designation is subject to litigation. The request is contingent upon the outcome of the litigation. VI. COMMUNICA TIONS FROM THE PUBLIC VD. STAFF REPORTS vrn. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS IX. 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 Chainnan. All correspondence pertaining to a hearing item received by the Planning Department at least one day prior to the scheduled hearing will be provided to Commission members before the hearing, Planning Commission: Ray Grover, Chair; Cindy Souders, Vice-chair; Jim Hulett; Roger Cotts; 1.011')' Leonard; Bill Anabel; Bob Philpott. Planning Staff: Brad Collins, Planning Direclor; Sue Roberds, Planning Office Specialist, John Jimerson. Associate Planner. David Sawyer, Senior Planner . . , PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington May 8, 1991 I CALL TO ORDER Chairman Gruver called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. II ROLL CALL Members Present: Roger Catts, Bob Philpott, Bill Anabel, Larry Leonard, cindy Souders, Ray Gruver, Jim Hulett (arrived at approximately 7:10 P.M.) Staff Present: Brad Collins / John Jimerson, Bruce Becker. III APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms. Souders moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of April 24, 1991, with one modification; changing the word on page 3 from IIfinal" to finalized. Mr. Catts seconded the motion, which carried 6 - O. Mr. Hulett arrived at the meeting. IV PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP-91 (05) 06 - THUNDERBIRD BOATHOUSE, Ediz Hook: Request for a permit to allow overnight RV camping in the M-2, Heavy Industrial District. (Applicant is requesting withdrawal of this application at this time.) Mr. Leonard moved to accept the applicant's withdrawal of the application. Mr. Philpott seconded the motion, which carried 7 - O. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA-91(05) 114 - PORT OF PORT ANGELES / Ediz Hook Boat Launch: Request for a permit to allow resurfacing of an existing boat launch . _. _~~..............,,"" ramp".. Mr. Jimerson reviewed the Department Report. Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M. Ken Sweeney, Port of Port Angeles, stated the project is a continuation of a series of improvements to the facility, noting that a year ago a new float was constructed. He stated that the improvements were partially funded by an Interagency Grant. Because there were a series of low tides in the middle of June during which the proposed work can be performed, he . . . PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 2 asked that the Planning Commission provide an expeditious approval of this Shoreline Permit. Mr. Leonard asked if the grant allows the Port to charge user fees for the boat ramp. Mr. Sweeney responded yes, if the fees are used for reasonable maintenance of the facility. Mr. Catts suggested pre-cast slabs be used, rather than cast in place concrete to prevent leaching into the water. There being no further public testimony, Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing at 7:20 P.M. Mr. Leonard moved to recommend approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, citing the following findings and conclusions: FINDINGS: 1. The proposal maintains physical access to the shoreline in an Urban Environment, using an existing facility on the northern edge of Ediz Hook. 2. No public resource agency has stated that the proposal would degrade the existing condition of marine resources in the area of the existing boat launch. 3. The subject property is identified as Heavy Industrial (M-2) by the Port Angeles zoning Code. This zoning district allows boat havens and marinas as a permitted use. 4. The location of the proposal does not conflict with the future location of the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail and is identified as an area of public access by the unadopted Harbor Resource Management Plan. 5. The Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, Chapter 15.08 PAMC, requires that the Planning Commission provide notice and hold a public hearing on shoreline permit applications. 6. The Port of Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official has issued the proposal a Determination of Non-Significance, which has been reviewed by the city of Port Angeles. . ........ - ".'!'I' - .. . t" + 7. The SUbject property has been used as a boat launch for 26 years. 8. The City of Port Angeles provides approximately 200 vehicle and boat trailer parking spaces on the northern edge of Ediz Hook. . PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 3 CONCLUSIONS: A. The proposal is consistent with the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, Comprehensive Plan, and Zoning Code. B. The proposal is consistent with the Waterfront Trail Plan and the Harbor Resource Management Plan. c. Public notice and hearing, as required by the Shoreline Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RCW, has been done by the City of Port Angeles. D. The Port's issuance of a categorical exemption for the proposal is final and fulfills the city's responsibili- ties under the state Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C Rew. The motion was seconded by Mr. Philpott and carried unanimously. . SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA-91 (05}115 - DAISHOWA AMERICA, Marine Drive at Ediz Hook: Request for a permit to allow the construction of a 145-car parking area in the M-2. Heavy Industrial District. Mr. Jimerson reviewed the Department Report. Mr. ColI ins added that the Department of Public Works was under the impression that the parking lot would be a temporary lot for contractors when they reviewed the proposal and made their comments. Planning staff was working under the impression that the parking lot would be a permanent parking lot. He suggested the Planning Commission evaluate the permanence or temporary nature of the parking lot further, as different standards for construction of the parking lot would apply. Mr. Leonard asked if an oil/water separator could work on a gravel parking lot. Mr. Collins responded that Public Works expects the surface would become impervious as the gravel compacts and that water would flow into a collection center. Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M. 'f .......Dea,n_~e.e!i,.~.speaking ._for......the,~p.pl,icant)' dspokeof.a desire to segregate contractor's parking with employees' parking / noting there were several benefits in doing so, including preserving other parking areas for Daishowa employees' use and in the case of a labor dispute, providing a separate entrance for the temporary contractor employees. He noted there has been a lack of parking on the site, which has caused problems of congestion and inadequate parking for employees. He stated the parking lot would be constructed by placing a foot of gravel on the site and compacting it. There would be a single strand of chain mounted on poles surrounding the parking lot. . PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 4 He did not believe a detailed drainage plan or oil separator is necessary. He added that the parking lot would drain away from the Harbor. Mr. Collins responded to questions from the Commission that a site drainage plan is necessary, but that specific improve- ments which will be required can be worked out between Public Works and the applicant. At this point, Director of Public Works Pittis was brought into the meeting. He explained how an oil/water separator would work and stated he believes the appropriate process is to let the Daishowa engineers design the parking lot and Public Works would review it to see if it meets their criteria. He added that Public Works staff is presently working on a clearing, grading and storm drainage ordinance which will provide up-front criteria with which future plans will have to comply for approval. At this time there are no specific requirements for details which the applicants are required to submit. . Ed Brown, 1724 West 13th Streett stated the public had access to the beach to the east, whether official or unofficial, he was not sure. He would like to see provisions for public access, and he understood the beach was owned by the Port. Mr. Collins responded to questions from the Commission that there is a beach at that location and access may be provided from the Waterfront Trail. Details are being worked out between the Parks Department and Daishowa. Mr. Brown stated he was aware there was some contaminated soils in the area and air-borne dust as a result of the parking lot would spread hazardous waste. Mr. Reed responded that contamination was located to the northwest and southeast of the parking lot, but to his knowledge there is no contamination on-site, and if there was, it would not be stirred up by automobile traffic. Some of the contamination in the vicinity has been cleaned up. The parking lot development would not prohibit access to the beach. There being no further public testimony, Chairman Gruver _nQI9S.ed. the~'p1,lblic_ hearing ..atn.8.:.05~.P_M.,. . After a brief discussion on the potential impacts of air-borne dust and the difficulty of monitoring those impacts, Mr. Leonard moved to recommend approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, subject to one condition, and citing the following findings and conclusions: CONDITION: Submit parking lot plan to the Department of Public Works. . PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 5 FINDINGS: 1. The proposal is for construction of a 1.4 acre, 145-car parking lot, enclosed in with a 4-foot high chain, as contained in the one-sheet plan titled "parking Lot and Access Road" dated received March 13/ 1991. 2. The proposed parking lot is intended to be a temporary facility to provide parking for contractors involved with construction, repair, and other projects at the Daishowa Mill. 3. The subject property is identified as Heavy Industrial (M-2) by the Port Angeles Zoning Code. 4. The parking lot location does not conflict with the future location of the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail. 5. The Shore 1 ine Management Program encourages, but does not require, parking facilities to be located away from the waterfront in industrial areas. 6. The Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, Chapter 15.08 PAMC, requires that the Planning Commission provide notice and conduct a public hearing on shoreline permit applications. . 7. The city of Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official has issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the proposal. CONCLUSIONS: A. The proposal is consistent with the policies and regula- tions of the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program. B. The proposal is consistent with the policies and regula- tions of the Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. C. The proposal is consistent with the Waterfront Trail Plan. D. The proposal will not be detrimental to the shorelines. _ .-~-...- ~ ........ .-. _ ~ ...-to ,..,.. .. -,,' 'e'"" '" The motion was seconded by Mr. 'Catts and passed 5 - 2, with Messrs Hulett and Gruver voting "No". . Mr. Hulett stated he believed a one-year review of the impacts should be required. Chairman Gruver stated he believed an impervious surface should be required. . PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 6 SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA-91 (05) 116 - DAISHOWA AMERICA, Marine Drive at Ediz Hook: Request for a permit to allow improvements to be made to a shipping dock; replacement of paper machine No. 3 drive; roll handling upgrade: and fire water pipeline relocation in the M-2, Heavv Industrial District. on the citv's waterfront. Mr. Jimerson reviewed the Department Report. Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing. Dean Reed of Daishowa America reviewed the proposal, stating that the work represents a continuation of upgrades to the site and that the work was relatively minor. He reviewed the need to improve the truck loading dock, the purpose for the paper machine drive, for the roll handling facility, and the fire water line. He noted that he had submitted details of the plan for the project to the Lower Elwha Tribal Council and the point-No-point Treaty Council and is keeping them abreast of the work occurring. He stated there will be a certified archeologist on-site during excavation. There being no further public testimony, Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing. . Mr. Hulett moved to recommend approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, citing the following findings and conclusions: FINDINGS: 1. The proposal consists of: (a) modification at the shipping dock facilities; (b) an addition to the paper machine building to house an electrical paper drive: (c) an addition to the paper machine building to act as a roll handling facility: and (d) replacement of 320 feet of underground fire line. 2. The proposed modifications would not extend the mill operations beyond the existing heavy industrial use area into an area not currently used for heavy industry. 3. The Public Works Department has determined the proposal is exempt from the Flood Plain Management Ordinance. . ..__ _ _ _~ ... ,.,..._ ,..,..~, .... _. .. ~ _-10 .. ~._ ,,..._ _~.,","",,,, ~_~. '",- .~' ,... - "j'...... +. 'of ", 4. The subject property is identified as Heavy Industrial (M-2) by the Port Angeles Zoning Code. 5. The location of the proposal does not conflict with the future location of the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail. . 6. The Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, Chapter 15.08 PAMC, requires that the Planning commission provide notice and conduct a public hearing on shoreline permit applications. PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 7 '. The City of Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official has issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the proposal. 8. Proposed modifications (a), (b) and (c) in Finding No. 1 are subject to other City approvals, including but not necessarily limited to building permits. 7. CONCLUSIONS: A. The proposal is consistent with the Port Angeles Shore- line Master Program, specifically General Regulations C.1, C.2, C.3, C.4: Land Use Element D.1.a. and 0.2: and Natural Systems Elements E.2 and E.7.b. B. The proposal is consistent with the policies and regula- tions of the Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. C. The proposal will not be detrimental to the shorelines. D. The proposal is consistent with the Waterfront Trail Plan. . The motion was seconded by Mr. Anabel and carried unanimously. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT - SMA-91 (05) 117 - AUSTIN, 400 Block Railroad Avenue Extended: Request to construct a cyclone fence and rockery wall on private property in the LI. Light Industrial District on the City's waterfront. Mr. Jimerson reviewed the Department Report. Mr. Collins added that the City Attorney would like the wetlands survey as prepared by John Heal to be filed with the County Auditor's Office. Mr. Leonard asked how access to the site would be provided to allow construction of the fence and wall. Mr. Collins responded that access would be difficult and a right- of-way use permit would be required. Access could be provided along Victoria Street right-of-way, the Waterfront Trail, and through the Red Lion parking lot. Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing. .Jack,Glaubert stated he ,has no ,specific future development plans at this time for the site and he is concerned with the requirement that he cannot construct the wall without develop- ment plans. The existing piles are in poor shape and do not provide adequate support for the sloughing hillside. The length of the rock wall in total is approximately 350 feet. . Mr. Catts questioned how the fence would keep people out. He was not sure that a fence would be a particular deterrent. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 8 Mr. Leonard asked if the bulkhead will be provided in addition to the siltation fence. Mr. Glaubert responded it would replace the siltation fence. He also noted that the area used to serve as a site for homes, which were demolished in the 1960's. Ms. Souders asked why vegetation cannot be used to stabilize the hillside. Mr. Glaubert responded that he has planted the hillside with clover; it is growing, but is not growing very well at this time. The consequences of not putting the rock wall in would result in hillside material sloughing into the wetlands. -- ."--.- Ed Brown / 1724 West Thirteenth. J stated he was concerned with the aesthetic values of the site. The fence and wall would not be in the public interest at this location. The wetlands have significant educational and recreational value; also as wildlife habitat, and they filter storm water runoff. This is a very public area, in that it is highly visible from the Waterfront Trail. The rock wall is a degrading feature and would prevent growth of vegetation on the site. slough- ing of materials is a natural process and he sees no reason why materials should not be allowed to slough. He stated that willows and other native vegetation would provide a better form of erosion control. He suggested the property could be donated to the City and the property owner could receive a tax benefit for such a donation. There being no further testimony, Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing. Chairman Gruver asked Jerry Austin about the historical use of the property, namely the statement that it had in fact been used as a residential site at one time. Mr. Austin responded that he had purchased the property in 1964. There were two residences on site. One house was subsequently removed bit by bit and the materials taken off-site to another location, and a second house was destroyed by the Fire Department in 1964. .. oil ...... ~'O. The Planning commission recessed at 9:50 P.M. d ;r,ec~:mVeJ;'l~9 .at...10 :.00, P.M.... .... _. The meeting After discussion about the value of the rock wall and fence as a deterrent to trespassing and eros ion prevention, Mr. Philpott moved to recommend approval of the Substantial Development Permit subject to the following conditions and citing the fOllowing findings and conclusions: . . . PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 9 CONDITIONS: A. Submit grading and drainage plan showing all proposed grading. Earthwork shall be I imi ted to what is necessary to install fences and rock wall. B. The proposed fence along the Peabody Street right-of-way may be constructed per modified fence plan (Exhibit "A"). No fence footings or rock walls may be located in any wetland area as delineated on the surveyed drawing signed by John Heal. C. Obtain right-of-way use permit for placing a gate in the Vine Street right-of-way and for any work in the Peabody Street right-of-way. D. obtain a building permit for a rock wall over 4 feet in height. E. The top of the east-west chain link fence shall not be higher than the top of the water pipeline. F. File survey plot plan designating wetland area, per John Heal's study, with the County Auditor's Office. G. A hydraulics permit must be obtained from the Department of Fisheries, if required by the Department of Fisheries. FINDINGS: 1. The proposal is to install a 6-foot high cyclone fence and a rock wall ranging in height from 3 feet to 9 feet five inches. 2. The property contains a wetland covering .38 acres, as designated by Bionomics, Inc. 3. The property contains approximately 16,500 square-feet of land not designated wetlands by Bionomics, Inc. 4. The proposal will not result in any new use of the site, nor does it prepare the site for a particular use. . __,,_.. . 5...., . 'l;he._~pu:r::pose.." of the,".~f,encinglxock " ,,WaJ.I . .is .to keep unauthorized persons off the property and to prevent erosion from the hillside. 6. The site abuts the City's Waterfront Trail, providing it with an aesthetically pleasing wetland, which also serves as wildlife habitat. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 10 CONCLUSIONS: A. The proposal is consistent with the policies and regula- tions of the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, the Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan, and the Port Angeles Zoning Code. B. Submittal of a grading plan to the City prior to doing any site work will ensure the existing site, including wetlands, will not be significantly disturbed. Mr. Catts asked the applicant if the elevations on the plot plan show the existing ground elevations and the elevations to the top of the piles. Mr. Glaubert responded in the affirmative. Mr. Anabel seconded the motion, which carried 6 - 1/ with Ms. Souders voting "No", stating that the erosion which has occurred on the site is the result of man-made actions and that vegetation would be a better solution than a rock wall for erosion control. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST - CUP-91(05)06 - WESTERN INNS, 140 DelGuzzi Drive: Request to allow a motel in the ACD, Arterial Commercial District. The property is currently located in the ACD District, but this zoning designation is subject to litigation. The request is contingent upon the outcome of the litiqation. Mr. Jimerson reviewed the Department Report. Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing. Michael Simon presented the proposed site plans and explained the location of the wetlands in relationship to the golf course and the proposed motel, noting that the wetlands would be separated from the development by grassy swales. There being no further public testimony, Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing. Mr. Anabel moved to approve the Conditional Use Permit, subject to the following conditions and citing the following findings and conclusions: CONDITIONS: A. This permit shall not become effective until the date the RMF zoning becomes effective. B. This permit shall become null and void if the zoning does not revert to RMF. . PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 11 FINDINGS: 1. A building permit for construction of a Western Inns Motel has been issued by the City for property located south of DelGuzzi Drive, zoned ACD. The motel is a permitted use in the ACD. 2. There is pending litigation challenging the validity of the property's zoning. A potential outcome of the litigation is a reversion of the zoning to RMF, which allows motels with a Conditional Use Permit. 3. The design of the motel does not meet the front and rear yard setbacks or the maximum lot coverage of the RMF District. 4. The general character of the vicinity is non-residential, with a golf course to the south, Safeway Plaza west, and Super 8 Motel north. The Ennis Creek Estates residential project has been approved for development to the east, with the nearest residential structure to be approxi- mately 500 feet away. There would be a small parcel, approximately .8 acre, zoned RMF adjacent to the east of the site. . 5. The general street circulation plan for the area provides direct access to the site from Highway 101, and travel through residentially zoned property is not required. 6. A variance for the proj ect has been approved by the Board of Adjustment on May 6, 1991. CONCLUSIONS: A. The proposed motel is compatible with the surrounding land uses and will not adversely impact residential properties. B. The proposed Conditional Use Permit is in the public use and interest and is not detrimental to the public welfare. C. The proposed Conditional Use Permit is consistent with . ~ ._..,. _,the._P.ort,...Ang,el.es_~Zoning_Code,.and ~Comp;r;ehensive Plan. D. The proposal will not generate traffic in residential areas. Mr. Hulett seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. . V COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION May 8, 1991 Page 12 VI STAFF REPORTS None. VII REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS Mr. Philpott stated there is a need to review restrictive zoning laws which place stumbling blocks to economic development in the community, citing the height limit of the ACD District of 30 feet as an example. After some discussion, the Commission decided it would be appropriate to review the height limit restriction with the housekeeping items which are scheduled for November, 1991. VIII ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mr. 0 the meeting. The motion was second carried unanimously. The meeting wa a rd moved to adjourn Mr. Anabel and u ned at 11:30 P.M. .~ I ins, Secretary JJ:LM PLAN. 462 . PLEASE SIGN IN CITY OF PORT ANGELES Attendance Roster PII, '?A. /2 'ls-O ~:f Ad rc k J~A. e J~4"J . . .