HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/28/1995
.
.
.
HEARING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR THOSE NEEDING ASSISTANCE.
-
~t.A NNlllG
AGENDA
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
PLANNING C011MISSION
321 East Fifth Street
Port Angeles, W A 98362
June 28, 1995
7:00 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of June 14,1995
IV.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. CONDmONAL USE PERMIT. CUP 95(04)08 - YMCA. 302 South
Francis Street: Request to allow the addition of a weight room to the existing YMCA
facility, located in the RS-7, Residential Single Family District. (This item is continued
from the June 14, 1995, Planning Commission meeting.)
2. EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 92(04)04 - BUDGET
RENT.A-CAR. Northeast comer of Front and Oak Streets: Request for
continuation of an independent parking lot in the CBD, Central Business District.
3. REVISION TO CITY'S SUBDMSION (Short and Lon2) REGULATIONS IN
COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: City wide: (Continued
from June 14, 1995.)
4. FINAL PLAT - SEAMOUNT ESTATES V. Eighth and Evans Streets: Approval
of a final plat creating seven residential lots in the RS-7, Residential Single Family
District. (Continued from June 14, 1995.)
PLANNmG COMMISSION: linda NutIer,Chair, Tim German (Vice), Orville Campbell, Cindy Soudm, Bob W"mters, Bob Philpott, Bob King.
STAFF: Brad CoIIim, Director, Sue Rob<;rd.s Office Specialist, And David Sawyer, Senior Planner.
.
.
.
5.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 95(06)10 - CLALLAM COUNTY
HOSTELRIES. 1132 Hazel Street: Request to allow an addition to a permitted
group home use in the RS-7, Residential Single Family District. (Continued from
June 14, 1995.)
v. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
VI. STAFF REPORTS
VII. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS
vrn. ADJOURNMENT
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.
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 (S 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 (S 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. Conunents should be directed to the Board, not the City Staff representatives present, unless
directed to do so by the Chainnan.
.
.
.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
Port Angeles, Washington 98362
June 28, 1995
7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Orville Campbell, Linda Nutter, Bob Philpott, Bob
Winters and Tim German
Members Excused:
Cindy Souders and Bob King
Staff Present:
David Sawyer, Sue Roberds and Mack Campbell
Public Present:
Marcia Isenberger, Gary Gleason, Susan Taylor,
Herbert Pauly, Jessica Schreiber, Joe and Maxine
Michalczik, Nancy McHenry, Ardis McWilliams,
Robert Lillis, Jinny McCartney, Nancy Campbell,
Della Floyd, Tony Kapetan
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Philpott offered a correction to condition No. 13 of the preliminary
approval for Evergreen Subdivision to read as follows: "A neighborhood play area
shall be provided and maintained for public use or shall be dedicated to the City of
Port Angeles." The Commission concurred with the correction. Commissioner
Philpott moved to accept the minutes as corrected. Commissioner Campbell
seconded the motion, which passed 4-0 with Commissioner German abstaining.
CONDmONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 94(04)08 - YMCA. 302 South
Francis Street: Request to allow the addition of a weight room to the existing
YMCA facility, located in the RS-7, Residential Single Family District. (This item
is continued from the May 10, ] 995, Planning Commission meeting.)
Senior Planner David Sawyer presented the Planning Department's report recommending
approval of the conditional use permit. Chair Nutter opened the public hearing.
Marcia Isenberger, Interim Executive Director of the YMCA, 302 South Francis
Street, reviewed the historical contribution the YMCA has made to the Port Angeles
community. The existing weight room facility is used by a variety of people and groups
from toddlers, disabled youth and seniors. The Y is working with the City1s Parks and
Recreation Department for shared parking at Erickson Playfield, located directly across
Francis Street from the Y facility. The City has noted that approximately twenty six
spaces can be allotted to the Y for their use. The Y is considering paving of those spaces.
She stated concern with the conditions imposed on the 1984 conditional use permit
requiring landscaping west of the Y building.
.
Joe Michalczil4 520 West Third Street, serves on the Y Board and explained that a
fence was built on the west side of the building in lieu of landscaping. If that is not
acceptable, landscaping will also be placed, but it was thought that the fence would
provide the intended buffer. He apologized for the lack of communication in compliance
with the original permit conditions. Verbal approval was given by the City's Parks and
Recreation Director to enter into a parking arrangement for Erickson Playfield a few
months ago. The Y now has that approval in writing. The proposal expands the current
weight room area by one third. No new machines are planned in the area.
Planner Sawyer read a Jetter from Nancy Shiedermayer, Olympic Iron Club~ which was
received late in the day, in opposition to approval of the conditional use pennit as
requested. Mrs. Shiedermayer suggested that a quasi public entity such as the YMCA
should be not encouraged to compete with public enterprise and the YMCA's expansion
efforts may result in those private enterprises being unable to continue operation.
Marcia Isenberger responded to Mrs. Shiedermayer's written comment by saying that the
YMCA strives to be good stewards of the community and when users of the weight room
find that their programs are not intensive enough for more typical weight lifting needs the
Y reciprocates with the Olympic Iron Club or other private organizations by referrals to
those facilities. Ms. Isenberger responded to Commissioner Campbell that the YMCA has
had a weight room since 1952 and the upgraded current facility since 1988.
.
Joe Michalczik noted that the Y is for families and provides different activities for
different age groups. The Y is non profit and doesn't close its doors to anyone regardless
of the ability to pay.
There being no further testimony, Chair Nutter closed the public hearing.
The Commission discussed the amount of parking provided and needed by the YMCA for
this expansion and the Y's other uses as well as the landscaping required and the
conditions of previous conditional use permit approval that may not as yet have been
complied with by the Y. Following discussion with staff clarifying the recommended
landscaping requirements and noting that the dissenting individual1s request for denial has
some merit with regard to private competition for users, but that a weight facility at the Y
has been in existence since the 1950's and the facility will probably always appear to be in
competition with some private business, Commissioner Campbell moved to approve
the conditional use permit as requested with the following conditions:
Conditions:
1.
Plantings to be approved by the Planning Director and the City Engineer shall be
made and maintained in the planting strip along East Third Street adjacent to the
property.
.
2. Three additional parking spaces shall be provided, and the YMCA shall reach
agreement with the City to share the Erickson Playfield parking lot before final
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes. June 28, 1995
Page 3
building permit approval and occupancy of the expanded weight room.
and citing the following findings and conclusions:
Findings:
I. The request is to permit expansion of an existing weight room in the YMCA
facility located at 302 S. Francis Street as proposed in Attachment A
2. A conditional use permit was approved for the existing use in 1984 (CUP
84(10)16) subject to the conditions and based on the findings listed below:
Conditions
1. That the yards adjacent to Francis and East Third Streets be landscaped
with lawn or other ground cover and shrubs next to the buildings, and a
fivefoot wide landscape buffer with mixed ornamental trees and shrobs,
having a mature height of not less than six feet, be planted along the west
property line;
2.
That fivefoot wide sight-obscuring planting strips containing shrubs with
a mature height of five feet be installed along the east and west sides of
the off-street parking lot.
Findings
A. The YMCA facility is functionally related to the existing play field and
park in this vicinity.
B. The new addition will be more compatible with surrounding residential
uses.
C. The landscape buffering will reduce the visual and land use impacts on
adjacent residences.
3. A parking variance from 61 required parking spaces to 40 spaces was granted in
1984 with the following conditions and citing the following findings:
Conditions:
1. That the parking lot be designed to discourage use of the 3/4 alley and
encourage use of Francis Street and East Fourth Streets.
2.
That the Yi\1CA pursues an agreement with the City to use the Erickson
Playfield parking lot.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes -June 28. 1995
Page <I
Findings:
A. The new parking lot will reduct traffic impacts currently generated by the
YMCA.
B. The landscape buffering in the parking lot will reduce the visual and land
use impacts on adjacent residences.
4. The YMCA does not have a shared parking agreement with the City to use the
Erickson Playfield parking lot.
5. In 1995, Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 95(03)03 was approved subject to the
following conditions, and citing the following findings and conclusions:
Condition:
1. There shall be no organized activities in the outdoor play area beyond 11
p.m.
Findings:
1.
The request is to permit expansion of the existing YMCA facility located at
302 S. Francis Street as proposed in Attachment A.
2. A conditional use permit was approvedfor the existing use in 1984 (CUP
84(10)16) subject to the conditions and based on the findings listed below:
Conditions:
1. That the yards adjacent to Francis and East Third Streets be
landscaped with lawn or other ground cover and shrubs next to the
buildings, and a five-foot wide landscape buffer with mixed
ornamental trees and shntbs, having a mature height of not less
than six feet, be planted along the west property line;
2. That five100t wide sight-obscuring planting strips containing
shntbs with a mature height of five feet be installed along the east
and west sides of the off-street parking lot.
Findings:
A.
The YMCA facility is functionally related to the existing play field
and park in this vicinity.
B. The new addition will be more compatible with surrounding
residential uses.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28. 1995
Page 5
c.
The landscape buffering will reduce the visual and land use
impacts on adjacent residences.
3. The subject property is zoned RS-7. Land uses adjacent to the subject site
are as follows:
To the north:
To the south:
To the east:
ClaUam County Veterans Center,'
single family residences and the site's parking lot;
single family residences and Erickson Play field and
parking area; and
single family residences.
To the west:
4. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site as Low Density Residential.
Comprehensive Plan policies which have been identified as being most
relevant to the proposal are contained in the staff report.
5. The proposed expansion is for the development of an outdoor play area
for the purpose of day care services.
6.
The proposed play area will reduce the existing landscaped yard area
along Francis Street to a 20' by 20' vision triangle area adjacent to
Francis Street and Third Street and two aproximately 2' by 15' planters
along Francis Street.
7. The site and the surrounding area's Comprehensive Plan land use
designations have not changed since the original approval.
8. The site and the surrounding area's zoning designations have not changed
since the original approval.
9. The site and the surrounding area's existing land uses have not changed
since the original approval.
10. A Determination olNon-Significance was issuedfor the project on
January 13; 1995.
11. The fenced play area provides an opportunity to better control
unauthorized outdoor activity.
Conclusions:
A.
The proposed expansion must be conditioned to be compatible with the
adjacent law density residential uses. .
B. The proposed expansion is in conflict with Condition # 1 of the original
Conditional Use Permit [CUP 84(10)16J.
.
Planning Commission Minutes -June 28,1995
Page 6
c.
Based on the evidence submitted, there are circumstances that justify
reducing the previously approved conditions of approval for this use.
D. As conditioned, the play area meets a portion of the community-wide need
for youth and adult recreational opportunities.
E. As conditioned, the conditional use permit takes into account the close
proximity of the residence located on the east side of Francis Street and
attempts to adequately mitigate any negative impacts from those
residences.
6. In 1995, Variance No. V AR 95(03)03 was approved citing the following findings
and conclusions:
2.
.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Findings:
1. The request is to reduce the required north side yard setback from 13 feet
to one foot and to increase the allowable lot coverage from 36 percent to
38 percent in order to allow expansion of the existing weight room facility.
The property is designated as Low Density Residential in the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
The property is zoned RS-7 (Residential, Single Family).
The proposed use is a conditionally permitted use in the RS-7 zone.
A 13 foot street side yard setback is required in the RS-7 zone.
The maximum allowable lot coverage ~n the RS-7 zone is 30 percent.
The proposed expansion of the existing facility increases the Jot coverage
to 38% of the subject Jot.
8. The City approved CUP 84(10)16 which established Francis Street as the
subject property's front lot line.
9. The subject property is approximately 43,000 square feet in size with a
width of approximately 280 feet and a depth of approximately 108 feet.
10. The majority of other RS-7 properties in the vicinity are standard 50' wide
and 140' deep Townsite Jots.
.
11.
The property adjacent to the north and a portion of the property to the
east of the subject property are non-residential uses.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes. June 28, J 995
Page 7
12.
Most of the other RS-7 properties in the vicinity are surrounded by
residential uses.
13. There are several other RS-7 properties in the vicinity with structures
encroaching into the required side yard setback.
14. There are afew other RS-7 properties in the vicinity that have lot
coverage greater than the allowable 30%.
15. No agency reviewing the application identified any potential adverse
impact to the public health, safety, and welfare attributable to the
issuance of the variance.
16. All decisions and orders of the Board shall be final and conclusive,
unless, within ten days from the date of action, the original applicant or
an adverse party makes application to the Superior Court of the County
for a writ of certiorari, a writ of prohibition, or a writ of mandamus.
17. The site is bisected by the 3/4 Street alley.
18.
In 1988, there was an adverse possession judgement against the subject
site which resulted in the loss of approximately 1,120 square feet.
Conclusions:
A. Based on the staff report analysis, public review and comment, the Board
of Adjustment's discussion and deliberation, and the findings listed above,
the approwil of the proposed variance would not be a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in
the vicinity and zone in which the property on behalf of which the
application was filed is located.
B. Based on the staff report analysis, public review and comment, the Board
of Adjustment's discussion and deliberation, and the findings listed above,
there is no special circumstance associated with the property which
deprives the property owners of rights and privileges permitted to other
properties in the vicinity and zone in which it is located.
c.
Based on the staff report analysis, public review and comment, the Board
of Adjustment's discussion and deliberation, and the findings listed above,
the proposed variance would not he materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and
zone in which the subject property is situated.
7. The subject property is zoned RS-7. Land uses adjacent to the subject site are as
follows:
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28. 1995
Page 8
To the north:
To the south:
To the east:
To the west:
Clallam County Veteran's Center;
Single family residences and the site's parking lot;
Single family residences and Erickson Playfie1d and parking area;
Single family residences.
8. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site as Low Density Residential.
Comprehensive Pan policies which have been identified as being most relevant to
the proposal are Land Use Goal B, and Policy C.1, and Goal I, and Utilities and
Public Services Policies B.3, BA, and C.6.
9. The proposed addition will reduce the existing landscaped yard area along East
Third Street to one foot adjacent to East Third Street.
10. The site and the surrounding area's Comprehensive Plan land use designations have
not changed since the original approval.
11. The site and the surrounding area's zoning designations have not changed since the
original approval.
12. The site and the surrounding area's existing land uses have not changed since the
original approval.
13.
A Determination of Non Significance (DNS) was issued for the project on
February 16, ]995. No appeal was received.
Conclusions:
A The proposed expansion can be conditioned to be compatible with the adjacent
low density residential uses by plantings in the strip between the sidewalk and East
Third Street and by the addition of three new parking spaces.
B. While the proposed expansion is in conflict with Condition No.1 of the original
Conditional Use Permit [CUP84(I0) 16], testimony and circumstances justify
reducing the previous conditions of approval for this use.
C. The CUP approval is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the intent of the
RS.7 Zone.
D. The CUP is in the public use and interest because it provides needed community
services.
Commissioner Philpott seconded the motion, which passed 5-0.
EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ~ CUP 92(04)04 -
BUDGET RENT A CAR. Northeast COTner of the Front/Oak Street intersection:
Request for extension of a permit to allow the continuation of an independent
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28, 1995
Page 9
EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 92(04)04 -
BUDGET RENT A CAR. Northeast corner of the Front/Oak Street intersection:
Request for extension of a permit to allow the continuation of an independent
parking lot in the CaD, Central Business District.
Planning Office Specialist Sue Roberds reviewed the Planning Department's report
recommending the use be approved for extension for an additional one year period and
responded to questions regarding the history of the use. Chair Nutter opened the public
hearing.
Jim Heckman, 111 East Front Street, stated that often other parking in the area is
adequate. The additional lot is used only when other lots are full. An attendant is only on
duty during those times when other Budget Rent A Car lots are full. Vehicles are then
directed to the additional lot and an attendant assists in parking. Otherwise, parking is on
an honor basis for the subject lot.
There being no further testimony, Chair Nutter closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Campbell moved to approve of the extension request with the
following conditions:
Conditions:
1. The extension shall be for a one year period, until May, 1996.
2. A parking lot attendant shall be on-duty during those times when vehicles are
being parked.
Findings:
1. The Central Business District zone allows for independent parking lots as a
conditional use.
2. The use of the property as a parking lot is non consumptive of the limited land in
the Central Business District and can be converted to a higher use.
3. There are other independent parking lots in the vicinity.
4. The Victoria ferries generate the need for long-term off-street parking in the
Downtown area.
s.
The City's Parking Ordinance requires that parking lots providing required parking
shall be paved with concrete, asphalt or other hard surface paving. The Ordinance
does not contain standards for parking lots not intended to provide required
parking.
.
Pkrnning Commission Minutes
June 28, J 99S
Page 2
requiring landscaping west of the Y building.
Joe Michalczik, 520 West Third Street, serves on the Y Board and explained that a
fence was built on the west side of the building in lieu oflandscaping. If that is not
acceptable, landscaping will also be placed, but it was thought that the fence would
provide the intended buffer. He apologized for the lack of communication in compliance
with the original permit conditions. Verbal approval was given by the City's Parks and
Recreation Director to enter into a parking arrangement for Erickson Playfield a few
months ago. The Y now has that approval in writing. The proposal expands the current
weight room area by one third. No new machines are planned in the area.
Planner Sawyer read a letter from Nancy Shiedermayer, Olympic Iron Club, which was
received late in the day, in opposition to approval of the conditional use permit as
requested. Mrs. Shiedermayer suggested that a quasi public entity such as the YMCA
should be not encouraged to compete with public enterprise and the YMCA's expansion
efforts may result in those private enterprises being unable to continue operation.
.
Marcia Isenberger responded to Mrs. Shiedermayer's written comment by saying that the
YMCA strives to be good stewards of the community and when users of the weight room
find that their programs are not intensive enough for mOTe typical weight lifting needs the
Y reciprocates with the Olympic Iron Club or other private organizations by referrals to
those facilities. Ms. Isenberger responded to Commissioner Campbell that the YMCA has
had a weight room since 1952 and the upgraded current facility since 1988.
Joe Michalczik noted that the Y is for families and provides different activities for
different age groups. The Y is non profit and doesn't close its doors to anyone regardless
of the ability to pay.
There being no further testimony, Chair Nutter closed the public hearing.
The Commission discussed the amount of parking provided and needed by the YMCA for
this expansion and the Y's other uses as well as the landscaping required and the
conditions of previous conditional use permit approval that may not as yet have been
complied with by the Y. Following discussion with staff clarifying the recommended
landscaping requirements and noting that the dissenting individual's fequest fOf denial has
some merit with regard to private competition for users, but that a weight facility at the Y
has been in existence since the 1950's and the facility will probably always appear to be in
competition with some private business, Commissioner Philpott moved to approve the
conditional use permit as requested with the following conditions:
Conditions:
.
1.
Plantings to be approved by the Planning Director and the City Engineer shall be
made and maintained in the planting strip along East Third Street adjacent to the
property.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28. 1995
Page 3
2.
Three additional parking spaces shall be provided, and the YMCA shall reach
agreement with the. City to share the Erickson Playfield parking lot before final
building permit approval and occupancy of the expanded weight room.
and citing the following findings and conclusions:
Findings:
I. The request is to permit expansion of an existing weight room in the YMCA
facility located at 302 S. Francis Street as proposed in Attachment A
2. A conditional use permit was approved for the existing use in 1984 (CUP
84(10)16) subject to the conditions and based on the findings listed below:
Conditions
1. That the yards adjacent to Francis and East Third Streets be landscaped
with lawn or other ground cover and shrubs next to the buildings, and a
five-foot wide landscape buffer with mixed ornamental trees and shrn bs,
having a mature height of not less than six feet, be planted along the west
property line;
2.
That five-foot wide sight-obscuring planting strips containing shrubs with
a mature height of five feet be installed along the east and west sides of
the off-street parking lot.
Findings
A. The YMCA facility is functionally related to the existing play field and
park in this vicinity.
B. The new addition will be more compatible with surrounding residential
uses.
C. The landscape buffering will reduce the visual and land use impacts on
adjacent residences.
3. A parking variance from 61 required parking spaces to 40 spaces was granted in
1984 with the following conditions and citing the following findings:
Conditions:
1.
That the parking lot be designed to discourage use o/the 3/4 alley and
encourage use of Francis Street and East Fourth Streets.
2. That the YMCA pursues an agreement with the City to use the Erickson
Playfield parking lot.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes. June 28, 1995
Page 4
Findinfs:
A. The new parking lot will reduct traffic impacts currently generated by the
YMCA.
B. The landscape buffering in the parking lot will reduce the visual and land
use impacts on adjacent residences.
4. The YMCA does not have a shared parking agreement with the City to use the
Erickson Playfield parking lot.
5. In 1995. Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 95(03)03 was approved subject to the
following conditions, and citing the following findings and conclusions:
Condition:
1. There shall be no organized activities in the outdoor play area beyond 11
p.m.
Findings:
1.
The request is to permit expansion of the existing YMCA facility located at
302 S. Francis Street as proposed in Attachment A.
2. A conditional use permit was approvedfor the existing use in 1984 (CUP
84(10)16) subject to the conditions and based on the findings listed below:
Conditions:
1. That the yards adjacent to Francis and East Third Streets be
landscaped with lawn or other ground cover and shrubs next to the
buildings, and afive-foot wide landscape buffer with mixed
ornamental trees and shrubs, having a mature height of not less
than sixfeet, be planted along the west property line;
2. That five-foot wide sight-obscuring planting strips containing
shrubs with a mature height offivefeet be installed along the east
and west sides of the off-street parking lot.
Findinfs:
A.
The YMCA facility is functionally related to the existing play field
and park in this vicinity.
B. The-new addition will be more compatible with surrounding
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes. June 28, 1995
Page 5
residential uses.
c.
The landscape buffering will reduce the visual and land use
impacts on adjacent residences.
3. The subject property is zoned RS-7. Land uses adjacent to the subject site
are asfollows:
To the north:
To the south:
To the east:
Clallam County Veterans Center;
single family residences and the site's parking lot;
single family residences and Erickson Play field and
parking area; and
single family residences.
To the west:
4. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site as Low Density Residential.
Comprehensive Plan policies which have been identified as being most
relevant to the proposal are contained in the staff report.
5. The proposed expansion is for the development of an outdoor play area
for the purpose of day care sen,ices.
6.
The proposed play area will reduce the existing landscaped yard area
along Francis Street to a 20' by 20' vision triangle area adjacent to
Francis Street and Third Street and two aproximately 2' by 15' planters
along Francis Street.
7. The site and the surrounding area's Comprehensive Plan land use
designations have not changed since the original approval.
8. The site and the surrounding area's zoning designations have not changed
since the original approval.
9. The site and the surrounding area's existing land uses have not changed
since the original approval
10. A Determination of Non-Significance was issuedfor the project on
January 13, 1995.
J J. The fenced play area provides an opportunity to better control
unauthorized outdoor activity.
Conclusions:
A.
The proposed expansion must be conditioned to be compatible with the
adjacent low density residential uses.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28. 1995
Page 6
B.
The proposed expansion is in conflict with Condition # 1 of the original
Conditional Use Permit {CUP 84(10)16}.
C. Based on the evidence submitted, there are circumstances that justify
reducing the previously approved conditions of approval for this use.
D. As conditioned, the play area meets a portion of the community-wide need
for youth and adult recreational opportunities.
E. As conditioned, the conditional use permit takes into account the close
proximity of the residence located on the east side of Francis Street and
attempts to adequately mitigate any negative impacts from those
residences.
6. In 1995, Variance No. V AR 95(03)03 was approved citing the following findings
and conclusions:
Findings:
1.
The request is to reduce the required north side yard setback from 13 feet
to one foot and to increase the allowable lot coverage from 36 percent to
38 percent in order to allow expansion of the existing weight room facility.
2. The property is designated as Low Density Residential in the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
3. The property is zoned RS-7 (Residential, Single Family).
4. The proposed use is a conditionally permitted use in the RS-7 zone.
5. A 13 foot street side yard setback is required in the RS-7 zone.
6. The maximum allowable lot coverage in the RS-7 zone is 30 percent.
7. The proposed expansion of the existingfacility increases the lot coverage
to 38% of the subject lot.
8. The City approved CUP 84(10) 16 which established Francis Street as the
subject property's front Jot line.
9. The subject property is approximately 43,000 square feet in size with a
width of approximately 280 feet and a depth of approximately 108 feet.
10.
The majority of other RS-7 properties ill the vicinity are standard 50' wide
and 140' deep Townsite lots.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes -June 28.1995
Page 7
11.
The property adjacent to the north and a portion of the property to the
east of the subject property are non-residential uses.
12. Most of the other RS-l properties in the vicinity are surrounded by
residential uses.
13. There are several other RS-l properties in the vicinity with structures
encroaching into the required side yard setback.
14. There are a few other RS-7 properties in the vicinity that have lot
coverage greater than the allowable 30%
15. No agency reviewing the application identified any potential adverse
impact to the public health, safety, and welfare attributable to the
issuance of the variance.
16. All decisions and orders of the Board shall be final and conclusive,
unless, within ten days from the date of action, the original applicant or
an adverse party makes application to the Superior Court of the County
for a writ of certiorari, a writ of prohibition, or a writ of mandamus.
17.
The site is bisected by the 3/4 Street alley.
18. In 1988, there was an adverse possession judgement against the subject
site which resulted in the loss of approximately 1,120 square feet.
Conclusions:
A. Based on the staff report analysis, public review and comment, the Board
of Adjustment's discussion and deliberation, and the findings listed above,
the approval of the proposed variance would not be a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in
the vicinity and zone in which the property on behalf of which the
application was filed is located
B. Based on the staffreport analysis, public review and comment, the Board
of Adjustment's discussion and deliberation, and the findings listed above,
there is no special circumstance associated with the property which
deprives the property owners of rights and privileges permitted to other
properties in the vicinity and zone in which it is located.
c.
Based on the staff report analysis, public review and comment, the Board
of Adjustment's discussion and deliberation, and the findings listed above,
the proposed variance would not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and
zone in which the subject property is situated
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28. 1995
Page 8
7.
The subject property is zoned RS-7. Land uses adjacent to the subject site are as
follows:
To the north:
To the south:
To the east:
To the west:
Clallam County Veteran's Center;
Single family residences and the site's parking lot;
Single family residences and Erickson Playfield and parking area;
Single family residences.
8. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site as Low Density Residential.
Comprehensive Pan policies which have been identified as being most relevant to
the proposal are Land Use Goal B, and Policy C.l, and Goal I, and Utilities and
Public Services Policies B.3, B.4, and C.6.
9. The proposed addition will reduce the existing landscaped yard area along East
Third Street to one foot adjacent to East Third Street.
10. The site and the surrounding area's Comprehensive Plan land use designations have
not changed since the original approval.
11. The site and the surrounding area's zoning designations have not changed since the
original approval.
12.
The site and the surrounding area's existing land uses have not changed since the
original approval.
13. A Determination of Non Significance (DNS) was issued for the project on
February 16, 1995. No appeal was received.
Conclusions:
A The proposed expansion can be conditioned to be compatible with the adjacent
low density residential uses by plantings in the strip between the sidewalk and East
Third Street and by the addition of three new parking spaces.
B. While the proposed expansion is in conflict with Condition NO.1 of the original
Conditional Use Permit [CUP84(10) 16], testimony and circumstances justify
reducing the previous conditions of approval for this use.
C. The CUP approval is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the intent of the
RS-7 Zone.
D. The CUP is in the public use and interest because it provides needed community
seTVlces.
Commissioner Campbell seconded the motion, which passed 5-0.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28. 1995
Page 9
EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 92(04)04 -
BUDGET RENT A CAR. Northeast corner of the Front/Oak Street intersection:
Request for extension of a permit to allow the continuation of an independent
parking lot in the CBD, Central Business District.
Planning Office Specialist Sue Roberds reviewed the Planning Department's report
recommending the use be approved for extension for an additional one year period and
responded to questions regarding the history of the use. Chair Nutter opened the public
hearing.
Jim Heckman, 111 East Front Street, stated that often other parking in the area is
adequate. The additional lot is used only when other lots are full. An attendant is only on
duty during those times when other Budget Rent A Car lots are full. Vehicles are then
directed to the additional lot and an attendant assists in parking. Otherwise, parking is on
an honor basis for the subject lot.
There being no further testimony, Chair Nutter closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Campbell moved to approve of the extension request with the
following conditions:
Conditions:
I. The extension shall be for a one year period, until May, 1996.
2. A parking lot attendant shall be on-duty during those times when vehicles are
being parked.
Findings:
1. The Central Business District zone allows for independent parking lots as a
conditional use.
2. The use of the property as a parking lot is non consumptive of the limited land in
the Central Business District and can be converted to a higher use.
3. There are other independent parking lots in the vicinity.
4. The Victoria ferries generate the need for long-term off-street parking in the
Downtown area.
5.
The City's Parking Ordinance requires that parking lots providing required parking
shall be paved with concrete, asphalt or other hard surface paving. The Ordinance
does not contain standards for parking Jots not intended to provide required
parking.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minures - June 28. 1995
Page 10
6.
The applicant has operated the parking lot at this location since the summer of
1990.
7. There have been no complaints with regard to the operation of the parking lot
during the past five years of operation nor during the current publication and
posting period.
8. In 1994, the Planning Department recommended the parking area be paved in
accordance with the City's Parking Ordinance, No. 1588, as amended.
9. The Planning Department has expressed concern as to how long such a use may be
considered temporary and therefore not be required to observe more permanent
conditions.
10. On May 11, 1994, the Planning Commission approved extension of the conditional
use permit with the provision that a parking attendant be on-site during times when
vehicles are being parked but did not require the area to be paved at that time.
Conclusions:
A.
As conditioned, the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding commercial
uses and with the intent of the CBD zone.
B. As conditioned, the Conditional Use Permit is in the public use and interest and is
not detrimental to the public welfare.
C. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Central
Business District designation.
Commissioner German seconded the motion and offered a friendly amendment that
the extension be for a two year period. Staff explained that the reason for the
recommendation of a one year renewal is due to the basis that this operation has
maintained that it is a temporary use which has been allowed to exist with Jess than
minimum standards because of that temporary nature. . Changes are being planned in the
Downtown which could affect the parking lot situation and that was the basis the
Commission has maintained one year renewals up to this point on this project. The
maker of the motion concurred with the amendment. Commissioner Philpott noted
that he was uncomfortable with two years as he concurred with staff, but would vote
for a two year extension. On call for the questiont it passed 4-1. Chair Nutter voted
in the negative as staff explained why a one year extension would be preferablet and
her vote was in support of that recommendation.
AMENDMENT TO THE CITY'S SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS IN
COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: (Continued from
June 14, 1995.)
.
.
.
Planning Commisslan Minutes - June 28, 1995
Page 11
Planner Sawyer requested that the item be continued to the July ]2, 1995, meeting of the
Commission at Director Collins' request.
Chair Nutter opened the continued public hearing. There being no one present to testify,
Commissioner German moved to continue the item to the July 12, 1995, meeting.
Commissioner Winters seconded the motion, which passed 5-0.
FINAL PLAT - SEAMOUNT ESTATES V. Eighth and Evans Streets:
Approval of a final plat creating seven residential lots in the RS-7,
Residential Single Family District. (Continued from June 14, 1995.)
Planning Office Specialist Sue Roberds reviewed the past action on the final plat approval.
Commissioner Winters concurred with staff that he had reviewed the plat and found it to
be in conformance with all of the Citis standards and conditions imposed during the
preliminary approval. He therefore moved to instruct the Chair to sign the final mylar
and forward a recommendation to the City Council that the Mayor should also be
authorized to sign the final mylar.
Findings
1. The approval is for a seven (7) lot subdivision as depicted on the final plat entitled
It Seamount Estates VI and received on May 10, 1995;
2. The property is zoned RS-7, Residential Single Family.
3. The 1976 Comprehensive Plan designates the site as suburban residential, which
encourages single family development on 9,000 to 14,000 square foot lots. A
number of Comprehensive Plan Policies have been identirfied as most relevant to
the proposal including: Goals Nos. 1,3, & 5, Residential Policies Nos. 4, 5, 7 - 9,
11 & ]2, Circulation Policies Nos. 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11 & 20, Urban Design
Policies No.4, Community Facilities and Services Policy No.2, and Social
Objectives Nos. 2 - 3, Circulation Objectives Nos. 1 - 2, and Land Use Objectives
Nos. 1 - 6.
4. The proposal has been reviewed with respect to the areas of concern listed in
Section 58.17.110 RCW (Subdivision).
5. The approval is conditioned so that the lots meet the dimension and area
requirements of the RS-7 Zone.
6.
The preliminary approval was conditioned to require street improvements be made
to City standards.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes. Jrme 18, 1995
Page 11
7.
The application was conditioned to ensure adequate water, stonnwater and sewer
facilities for the subdivision development.
8. A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) was issued on June 15, 1993, for the
proposal. .
9. None of the three abutting rights-of-way have been identified as school walking
routes or arterial roadways.
10. The Port Angeles School District has planned and funded a new elementary
school, which will be built within six years of this development. The nearest
elementary school (Hamilton) has a capacity of379 students, but an enrollment of
625 students.
11. The applicant presented an alternative site plan with the cul-de-sac eliminated.
12. The subdivision has been redesigned to eliminate the half cul-de-sac.
13. Ten foot radius property corners have been provided on street intersections.
14.
The preliminary plat was reconfigured as a result of testimony provided at the
preliminary plat public hearing. The current submittal is consistent with direction
given to the applicant's representative following the preliminary plat public hearing
in 1993.
15. The final submittal was received on May 10, ]995, and was reviewed and
approved by the City Light, Public Works, and Planning Departments for
compliance with the preliminary plat conditions of approval per Section 16.08.040
of the Port Angeles Municipal Code (PAMC).
16. The Addendum attached to the Seamount Estates, Division V Protective
Covenant, dated June 14, 1995, makes provision for maintenance of the storm
water drainage system.
17. The Planning Commission reviewed and approved the final plat at a duly
publicized public hearing conducted on June 14, 1995, per Section 16.08.040 of
the P AMC.
Conclusions:
A The subdivision is consistent with the 1976 Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan,
under which the application was made.
B.
As approved, the subdivision is consistent with the Port Angeles Zoning Ordinance
and Subdivision Regulations.
.
.
.
Planning Commjssion Minutes - June 28. 1995
Page 13
c.
Appropriate provisions have been made for the public health, safety, and general
welfare i and for such open spaces, drainageways, streets or roads, alleys, other
public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, and safe
walking conditions for pedestrians.
D. The public interest is served in the platting of this subdivision.
E. Development of this property at current densities is not found to be detrimental to
the Port Angeles School District.
F. The Planning Commission preferred the applicant's alternative site plan
(preliminary submittal) with the half cul-de-sac eliminated.
Commissioner Campbell seconded the motion, which passed 4-1, with
Commissioner German abstaining as he had not participated in the public hearing
for the final submittal.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 95(06)10 - CLALLAM COUNTY
HOSTELRIES. 1132 Hazel Street: Request to allow an addition to a permitted
group home use in the RS-7, Residential Single Family District. (Continued from
June 14, 1995.)
Senior Planner Dave Sawyer reviewed the Planning Department's report recommending
approval of the conditional use permit and responded to Commissioner Campbell
clarifying the requirement of condition No.4 for the construction of a drainage ditch
along the easterly portion of the site to direct surface flows into the roadside ditch
extension, as requested by the Public Works Department. The City is working on the
completion of a stormwater plan which will allow the City to better deal with deficiencies
in the stonnwater system that exist at present.
Chair Nutter opened the public hearing.
Jessica Schreiber, 3116 Greentree Lane, stated that the reason for the request to
increase the floor area of the home is to provide a multi-purpose area which would also
allow the residents an area for privacy with visitors and family members. The area will not
be used to allow an increase in the residency, which is twelve residents. Although the
group home proposal was initially seen as adversarial by the neighbors, during the past
fourteen years in existence the concerns initially raised have been worked out and the
home has existed as a very good neighbor for many years. When contacted about the
proposed expansion, neighbors were very supportive. Ms. Schreiber indicated that the
staff's proposed conditions of approval could be complied with.
In response to Commissioner Campbell, Ms. Schreiber stated that the recent removal of
trees which was a requirement of the original permit was an oversight. The intention is to
fully restore the buffer area to a state acceptable to the City.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28, 1995
Page 14
Tony Kapetan, 1114 Madrona, although not one hundred percent opposed to the
proposal, stated specific concerns regarding the use and the proposed expansion. He did
not agree that the use has been accepted by the neighborhood, and stated that the
neighborhood feels it is useless to oppose the issue as the basic residential use is already
approved. The entire site should be fenced. The expansion area should not be used as
bedrooms. Fast growing trees should be planted in the replacement buffer area.
In response to Commissioner Winters, Mr. Kapetan answered that he had not contacted
the applicant with specific operational questions or concerns as he preferred to have the
answers from City personnel.
Mr. Kapetan elaborated further on his concerns and reasons why the group home property
should be fenced.
Jessica Schreiber explained further that the new room would be used fOf family
gatherings and social activities for the residents. Staff meetings may occasionally be held
in the room as well. The residence is a home, not an office. Staff is on-site twenty-four
hours a day.
Gary Gleason, 2211 East Seventh Street, noted that the property is fenced on the south.
Most of the neighbors fenced their properties following the initial conditional use permit
approval with one fence even being paid for by the group home administration in an effort
to be good neighbors. .
SusanTaylor, 1021 S. Cherry, is a supervisor at the residence. There have not been any
incidents resulting from the use for many years, although in the beginning, there were
some initial problems. The entire property is not fenced simply due to the expense and
because there is no need as the residents are supervised when outside.
In response to Commissionef Campbell, Ms. Taylor answered that the residents are
developmentally disabled persons. The residents are not mentally disfunctional or violent.
No referrals from the court system are taken. She was completely agreeable with the
conditions of approval.
Planner Sawyer noted that the original conditions of approval need to be complied with
and any new conditions must be tied to the current requirement to add a multi-purpose
room to the existing use. He clarified that a conditional use permit is not a variance of a
zoning regulation but is a permitted use with conditions.
Following further comment from Mr. Kapetan regarding the very justifiable need to fence
the entire site, Chair Nutt~r closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Winters moved to approve the conditional use permit as requested
with the following conditions:
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28. 1995
Page 15
Conditions of Approval:
I. The applicant shall .submit for approval to the Planning Department a detailed
landscaping plan for the area included in the eastern and southern property line
setback areas. Such plan shall include a variety of evergreen trees and shrubs
sufficient to adequately provide a visual buffer for the adjacent residential
properties.
2. The landscaping plan's improvements shall be installed by the applicant and
approved by the Planning Department prior to final occupancy for the addition is
approved by the City.
3. To avoid further cumulative impacts the existing roadside ditch along the south
side of Hazel Street shall be extended westerly from its present terminus east of the
site to the existing driveway presently serving the hostelry.
4. A ditch or other approved measure shall be constructed along the easterly portion
of the site to direct surface flows into the roadside ditch extension.
and citing the following findings and conclusions:
Findings:
Based on the information provided in the staff report including all of its attachments,
comments and information presented during the public hearing, and Planning Commission
discussion and deliberation, the City of Port Angeles Planning Commission hereby finds
that:
1. The request is to permit the addition of an approximately 660 sq. ft. multi-purpose
room to the existing group home facility located at 302 S. Francis Street as
proposed in Attachment A
2. A conditional use permit was approved for the existing use in 1981 (CUP
81(01)01) subject to the conditions of approval listed below:
1. That 25100t setbacks be maintained adjacent to the Fairmount Avenue
and Hazel Street rights-ol-way and at least 20 feet be maintainedfrom the
south property line;
2.
That the natural trees be retained to the maximum extent possible, and
additional landscaping plan be submitted to the Planning Department;
3.
That the sewer be extended/rom the SprncelHazel alley at Euclid Street to
serve this site by gravity, or some other diversion, subject to the approval
of the Public Works Department;
.
.
.
Planning Commis:ion Minutes - June 28. 1995
Page 16
4. That the Hazel Street, Fairmount Avenue and alley rights-of-way adjacent
to the parcel be rededicated;
5. That the off-street parking area be improved as required by Ordinance
No. 1588, as amended, and pursuant ta the site plan as submitted;
6. That na occupancy be permitted until the water problem has been solved
3. The subject property is zoned RS-7. Land uses adjacent to the subject site are as
follows:
To the north:
To the south:
To the east:
To the west:
single family residences;
single family residences;
single family residences; and
single family residences.
4. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site as Low Density Residential. A
Comprehensive Plan objective which has been identified as being most relevant to
the proposal is contained in the staff report.
5. The proposed addition does not extend into any required setback area.
6.
The site and the surrounding area's Comprehensive Plan land use designations have
not changed since the original approval.
7. The site and the surrounding area's zoning designations have not changed since the
original approval.
8. The site and the surrounding area's existing land uses have not changed since the
original approval.
9. A Determination of Non-Significance was issued for the project on May 10, 1995.
10. The applicant has remained in compliance with conditions I and 3 through 6 of the
original six conditions of approval.
11. All of the natural trees have been removed from the eastern property setback area
and no other landscaping is in place.
12. The proposed addition is located on the eastern portion ofthe existing property.
13. A group home is a conditionally permitted use in the RS-7 Zone.
Conclusions:
A The proposed addition will not result in an increase in the number of residents
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28, 1995
Page 17
residing at the existing facility.
B.
As conditioned, the proposed addition is consistent with the City's Comprehensive
Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
C.
As conditioned, the proposed addition is consistent with the facility's original
conditional use permit CUP 81(01)01.
D.
As conditioned the proposed addition is consistent with and compatible with the
purpose of the RS-7 zone.
E.
As conditioned the proposed addition is not contrary to the public use and interest.
Commissioner King seconded the motion, which passed 5-0.
Planner Sawyer explained the appeal process to the audience.
COMMUNlCA TIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
None
STAFF REPORTS
Planner Sawyer indicated the information placed on the dais concerning the County's adoption of
the Port Angeles Regional Comprehensive Plan as well as copies of the City's Shoreline Master
Plan and the Parks and Recreation Plan. Additionally, he noted the letter received from Larson
Anthropological Archaeological Services at the request of the Lower Elwha S'Klallam Tribe
indicating concurrence with the conditions of approval regarding the City's Waterfront Trail
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit approved on June 14, 1995.
REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS
Commissionef Campbell thanked staff on behalf of the Commission for the follow-up with the
Tribe concerning the Waterfront Trail SMA.
Chair Nutter thanked the Commissioners for their extra efforts in attending the neighborhood
meetings and felt that the turn out has been very good and the meetings productive thus far.
Commissioner Winters indicated he would not be able to attend the final neighborhood meeting
scheduled fOf July 26, as he would be out of town.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - June 28, 1995
Page 18
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.'m.
_~~.c
Brad Collins, Secretary
~~9~
Lind Nutter, Chair
'./
PREPARED BY: S. Roberds
e:
PLEASE SIGN IN
NAME:.
I :><'" ~ .vr
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
Planning Commission Attendance Roster
Meeting Dale: 1~A1 r<j.~ J; /99..:::, --
ADDRESS:.. .
\'212- {,R 6,.; -#: 2. Po12"t AA t,\'r 'vJ Ir
;z. 'J.II i,?tt lN' Por't A
. 6 Qhu r .
6di
t (