Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 08/03/2005 (2) I. II. III. IV. . V. VI. VII. VIII. . ~ORTANGELES WAS H I N G TON, U. S. A. COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION 321 East Fifth Street August 10, 2005 6 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLLCALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting of July 27,2005 and special meeting of August 3, 2005- '--7J o-L ~ LcL PUBLIC HEARING: EXTENSION of Conditional Use Permit - CUP 03-06 - Saturday P A Farmers Market: Continuation of farmers market activity on Laurel Street between Front and First Streets COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC STAFF REPORTS REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Len Rasmussen (Chalr),CheneK.1dd (VlCe Chalr),DaveJohnson, Kevm Snyder,Betsy Wharton, Candace Kahsh, John Matthews PLANNING STAFF Mark Madsen, DIrector; Scott Johns, Assoclate Planner, Sue Roberds, Asslstant Planner . . . MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington 98362 August 10, 2005 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Leonard Rasmussen, Dave Johnson, Cherie Kidd, Kevin Snyder, Candace Kalish, John Matthews, and Betsy Wharton Members Absent: None Staff Present: Mark Madsen, Sue Roberds Public Present: E.J. Beckett, Bob and Lindi Lumens, Tracie Hedin, Kia Kozun, Sandy Long, Haley Oien, J an Harbick, Richard Stephens, Robert and Maegan Jones, J. Rene Eubank, Scott Johns, Taylor Jennings, Dania Humphreys, Julie Gardiner, Rick Mathis, Peter and Jane Vandarhoof, Edna Petersen, J. Anthony Hoare, Alan Turner, Tom Bihn, Cynthia Turner, Joseph Newes, Jean Fairchild, Patricia Walker, Jelorma McClean, Ernst Schaefer, Carrie Donnelben, Edward Kelly, Paul and Peggy Wesley, Debi Breitbach, Russ Veenema, Elissa Arnheim, Jeanne Covilmotones, Jean Parkman, Tim and Sherie Maddox, Marlis and Frank Nilsen, LeRoy and Virginia Sproat, Bill Thomas, Connie Rogers, Makula Cleveland, Cookie and Daniel Callaham, Denise Brennan, Elissa Buttocolla, Diane Markley, Tim Smith, Dan Miller, Larry Leonard, Eickle and Charles Strickland, Patrick Downie, Ed Chadd, Catherine Harper, Toni Harper, Sheila Gregg, Luran Webster, Marc Etlin, Gisela Simons, Karl and Janie Baymor, Beth Loveridge, Jane Sheflar APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Snyder moved to approve the July 27, 2005, regular meeting minutes as presented. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Kidd and passed 5 - 0 with Commissioners Rasmussen and Johnson abstaining due to absence at the meeting. Commissioner Kalish noted an incident with a renter of hers that occurred at the Farmers Market. It was determined that the situation did not represent a conflict of interest or appearance of fairness. Commissioner Rasmussen explained the public hearing rules and procedure for the evening meeting. Chair Rasmussen indicated that those who testify must sign the "Sign In" log and affirm that their testimony will be truthful to the best of their knowledge. . . . Planmng CommISSIOn Meetmg - August 10, 2005 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING: EXTENSION of Conditional Use Permit - CUP 03-06 - Saturday PA Farmers Market: Continuation of a farmers market activity on Laurel Street between Front and First Streets. Assistant Planner Sue Roberds reviewed the Community & Economic Development Department's staff report recommending extension of the conditional use permit with conditions. Chair Rasmussen noted that three issues appear to continue to be of concern to local merchants: location, use of public restroom facilities, and parking. He asked what efforts have been made to find a permanent site, how the concerns regarding sanitary facilities have been handled and ifthere are any remaining parking issues. Planner Roberds indicated that she was not aware of efforts specific to relocation ofthe Market use from Laurel Street. Market operators participated in an effort to make the public restroom facilities in the area more desirable, purchased signs directing customers to the public sanitary facilities, and that main parking concerns appear to have been addressed as 25 monthly permits have been obtained from the Downtown Parking Association. Chair Rasmussen stressed that the issue under discussion is extension ofthe land use in its present location and whether the use has operated per the conditions of approval. The Chair asked that those who present testimony try to not be repetitive of a previous speaker's testimony and try to confine subsequent testimony to what can be added to previous information. He then opened the public hearing. Maegan Jones, 525 East 1 flh Street, spoke as President ofthe Port Angeles Farmers Market Association and presented written information to the Commission regarding the value of a farmers market to a community. She stated that the Port Angeles Farmers Market is a place where people can come and have fun while getting to know each other. The Market creates foot traffic by getting people out oftheir vehicles and onto the sidewalks of Downtown benefitting local businesses. There are currently 3,706 farmers markets on record with the USDA. At this point, Chair Rasmussen interjected that the Commission is aware of the value offarmers markets to a community and asked that testimony be confined to the land use issue dealing with why the current location (public street) should continue to be the temporary site of the Market in the Downtown and to note how previous issues with some Downtown businesses have or can be resolved. Ms. Jones continued to speak further as to items that can be found at the Downtown Market and noted that the Market is at a crucial stage for growth. She concluded that a Market Manager has recently been hired and will work to expand the Market activities and asked that the use be approved for an additional 3 years in the current location in order to allow the completion of a business plan and to find a permanent location for a Market activity in the Downtown. Commissioner Kalish noted that most of what was said addressed the issue of farmers markets. She asked specifically what is it is about the current location that makes it so important to the Market. Ms. Jones responded that Laurel Street is an essential, beautiful, location with a little bit of green space located between the ferries and the fountain and is a step above a parking lot. The Market's goal is to create a permanent site. The Market location is beneficial to all of Downtown because of its centralized location. Jelorma McClean, 222 Rife Road, Market Manager, noted that, during the 2004 review, the Market was not specifically charged with finding an alternative site. What was understood was that the Market needed to create a vibrant atmosphere for the Downtown and to address the . . . Plannzng CommiSSIOn Meetzng - August 10, 2005 Page 3 conditions of approval, but she did not understand that a direction had been given to actively seek an alternate site. The existing location is highly visible and draws people to the Downtown which benefits Downtown merchants. There are 7 businesses on Laurel Street that are cut off from direct access by vehicle during Market operation. Two of those businesses moved to Laurel Street expressly to take advantage of the Market. Three of the businesses are strong supporters of the Market, and the Market has worked with the remaining businesses on Laurel Street to improve accessibility on Saturdays. After two years as a pedestrian walkway on Saturdays, the Market use is an established traffic pattern. Traffic on cross streets is not impeded. Although some businesses report a drop in sales, other businesses do not notice a negative affect on their sales. In light of conflicting data, she is not willing to conclude that it is solely the Market activity that affects those businesses that report a downturn on Saturdays. The Market management has spent a good deal of time searching for a permanent location but has not been looking for an interim site that would only serve as a move from one temporary location to another. Most efforts have been directed toward how to take a market to the next level, to find a permanent location, and how to finance a structure. She noted other communities - W oodinville, Bellingham, Olympia, Puyallup - that are working toward permanent public market sites. She asked that the Market be allowed to remain in the current location for an additional 3 years in order to determine the best location for a permanent site and to work through funding issues. In response to Commissioner Kalish, Ms. McClean responded that every move causes a loss of customers which is always a setback to the success of a Market. She is aware that Laurel Street is a temporary site but stated that it would be devastating ifthe Market were required to close during the peak season. Commissioner Matthews asked about the Market administration and if plans are in place to acquire financing for a permanent site. Ms. McClean responded that a plan is in place to gain support and to seek funding sources for a permanent site similar to other market uses. She believes that such a plan can be finalized within a three year period. Commissioner Kidd commented on the benefits of farmers market but questioned whether the Market administration had given consideration to rejoining the other market use in town - why are there two markets in town? She noted the letter from the original market, Gertie's, inviting the Downtown Market to rejoin them. She does not believe that the intent is to close down the Downtown Market but that a site can be found that works for everyone. Janie Baymore, 136 Southridge Drive, Port Angeles spoke in support of the Downtown Market. As a new resident to Port Angeles, the Market brings her to the Downtown shopping area twice a week where she enjoys shopping the Market and other local businesses. Having the Market in the heart of the Downtown is a huge asset. Being from the east coast, she has witnessed small town commercial revival due to farmers market uses. The current Market does not create a parking problem. Laurel Street is a perfect place for a farmers market. Commissioner Kalish asked if Ms. Baymore would continue to seek the Market out if it were to be relocated. Ms. Baymore said that she would probably go to Sequim. She spends more money in Port Angeles due to the Market location. Commissioner Rasmussen asked for clarification as to whether Ms. Baymore would seek the Market out if it were to be relocated elsewhere in the Downtown or if it were to rejoin with the original market use on First Street. Ms. Baymore noted that she would certainly patronize the Market elsewhere in the Downtown but would prefer its centralized location. She was not aware of the original Market use on First Street. . . . Planmng CommiSSIOn Meetzng - August 10, 2005 Page 4 Russ Veenema, Executive Director of the Chamber of Commerce, 121 East Railroad Avenue noted that he discussed the Downtown Farmers Market use and location. with Chamber members. While the Market has helped in the creation ofthe tourism product and is part ofthe mix of creating a wonderful guest experience Downtown, it is clear that the Chamber membership is very divided as to whether the conditional use permit should be extended in its current location. It was also clear that Chamber membership outside ofthe Downtown was divided and so the Chamber of Commerce Board could not come to a consensus as to a recommendation for the extension of the Market use at its current location. He hoped that a common ground can be found with respect to location, times, and products sold that will allow for all to work together. In response to Commissioner Wharton, Mr. Veenema stated that the Chamber would be delighted to be a facilitator or to help with the process of trying to find a more permanent location for the Market. Alan Turner, 104 East First Street, Port Book and News, stated that it seems that the Market use is meeting all of the conditions of approval of the conditional use permit except for personal observations and opinions as to whether people are pro and con. Wednesdays and Saturdays are the busiest days for his business due largely to the Market activity in the Downtown. Many of his customers say they would not shop Downtown if not for the Market. His customers and fellow merchants have been complaining about parking for twenty years but they still come back and most of the merchants are still in business. Parking is not as much an issue in the Downtown as is merchandising, customer service, hours of operation, unsavory alleyways, and pathetic public restroom facilities. Downtown is never as crowded or as active as it is on Market days. Mr. Turner said that "although our Downtown has a great view it suffers from a lack of vision." The Market allows the creation of a corridor that draws people from the waterfront. Whether the Market increases or decreases any particular business' sales is not relative. It is not the job of the Market to bring customers. Such an activity in the Downtown makes the Downtown more vital and a valued location which will increase business for everyone. He understands the Market's desire to be in the center of the center of it all. Even if the Market were to adversely affect his business, he would support the use in the Downtown because the activity is positive and will reward all the businesses in the long run. While he realizes that some who are in opposition to the use on Laurel Street truly do have legitimate issues, he is not convinced that all ofthe opposition to the Market is really about the Market - some of it is genuine and some of it is just Downtown politics. In response to Commissioner Kalish, Planner Roberds agreed confirmed that, generally speaking, when dealing with a conditional use permit extension, ifthe activity is in compliance with the conditions of approval, an extension should be given. In this specific case however, previous Commission minutes reference a good deal of discussion between Commissioners regarding the use of Laurel Street for the activity and reveals that consensus was not reached that the specific site location would be appropriate for long term use. She noted that specific wording in the July 28, 2004 minutes identifies that "If problems haven't been identified and addressed in another year, another location may be needed." Director Madsen added that anytime an extension is being considered, it is appropriate for the Planning Commission to consider if additional conditions are needed to allow a special use to be allowed. Commissioner Rasmussen noted that his recollection of past Commission consideration of the Laurel Street location was to ask the Market management to address specific issues identified by Downtown businesses at the earliest opportunity because the Commission recognized that there were still issues of concern to be worked through. . . . Plannmg CommiSSIOn Meetmg - August 10,2005 Page 5 Paul and Peggy Wesley, 106 North Laurel operate two businesses on Laurel Street, supported the use on Laurel Street and noted that it benefits their businesses. Laurel Street is perfect for the Market activity because the buildings offer protection from prevailing westerly winds. Their businesses realize great benefits from the Market activities and they can actively participate in the use. They would not have located on Laurel Street if not for the market at that location. Ed Kelly, 1844 Monroe Street also supported the Laurel Street location. He stated that it is difficult for him to walk distances because he is handicapped and the location in the street offers a solid surface for walking. A problem with the original market location (Gertie's) is that the surface of their use area is uneven. He asked that something be done about restroom use for the Market - maybe portable sanitary facilities should be considered. He doesn't find parking to be a problem with handicapped users of the Market at its current location and thanked the Port Angeles Police Department for its understanding in allowing him to park in some unusual places due to his handicap. Commissioner Snyder stated that it is important not to give any suggestion that neither the Commission or the City of Port Angeles is responsible to find the use a permanent location. The Market is a business and, while the use is good for the community, it is the Market's responsibility to identify and secure a permanent location. Robert Jones, 525 East 1 {f" Street clarified that the Market is looking for a permanent location but also noted that the Land Use Element ofthe City's Comprehensive Plan encourages "... special business activities such as farmers markets during the tourist season particularly in the Downtown and on Laurel Street." He encouraged those in opposition to the Market location to attend the open Market meetings and to work with the City Council and the City Planning Commission to iron out any issues. Denise Brennan, 423 South Albert Street is a Market vendor. She stated that Laurel Street is a crucial location for Market vendors due to its visibility. Market vendors are wonderful ambassadors for local businesses. The Market is a good business incubator as location is everything. Market vendors need protection from prevailing winds. Commissioner Kidd thanked Market vendors for being such good ambassadors for the City but noted that the site is a temporary location. Taylor Jennings, 105 East Front Street stated that one major reason for choosing a rather dingy building for her business in the Downtown is due to its proximity to the Market activity. The use is truly the center of the Downtown. The location draws people from the waterfront to the Downtown. None of their customers have ever complained about inconvenience during Market operations including those customers who are handicapped. Although Market vendors offer products that could be considered in direct competition to products that she sells, Market vendors have directed customers to her business on many occasions. She noted that the Downtown public restrooms are disgusting and she can understand why people don't want to use them but she has never been asked to furnish restroom facilities. She was saddened to hear that the location is not permanent and suggested that the Laurel Street corridor be considered as an open public plaza area. Timothy J. Smith represented himself and, as the Vice President and Chair of the Port Angeles Business Association Board of Directors, was authorized to respond to questions regarding a letter submitted by the PABA in association with extension of the Market location. He provided a briefhistory ofthe Downtown revitalization in Port Angeles as he served as the City's point person from approximately 1994 to 2005. During his tenure in that effort, a document was developed in 1997 that is to his knowledge the most current document adopted by the City of Port Angeles on Downtown revitalization and is entitled the Downtown Forward Plan (April, 1997). It was essential to get broad community involvement in formulating the Plan and every Downtown property owner . . . Planmng CommiSSIOn Meetzng - August 10,2005 Page 6 was contacted for their input. The City Council, Transit Commission, Port of Port Angeles, Downtown Association, Chamber of Commerce, Port Angeles Business Association, both ferries, and citizens at large, were involved with the Plan. A main conclusion that was reached through extreme consensus was that Laurel Street should not be turned into a pedestrian plaza but that a pedestrian walkway should be developed from The Landing to First Street. As the process developed, it was obvious that there was no consensus for closing any portion of Laurel Street. It was agreed that Laurel Street should serve pedestrians better but not at the expense of vehicular traffic. Consensus was reached that a market meander should be developed in the parking area between Railroad Avenue to Front Street and from Lincoln Street west to mid block with a further connection between Front and First Streets. Prior to his retirement, talks occurred with the Market as to potential Downtown locations. A temporary location was provided in Laurel Street but it does not appear that there is sufficient motivation to pursue the described market meander from the 1997 plan. Mr. Smith concluded that the City should work with the adopted public development plan and that a three year extension is too long in this temporary location to motivate Market proponents to identify a permanent location. Patrick Downie, 331 East 11th Street, a former Planning Commissioner, well remembered the Downtown plans that have been discussed. Good City planning promotes diversity, encourages community connections, encourages and promotes overall economic development, and fosters good public communications. He suggested that, given the comments previously made, a compromise be struck to extend the conditional use permit for an additional 12 - 18 month period with a requirement for a reporting mechanism such that efforts to find a permanent location or alternative site are identified in that time period. Such a conclusion will encourage interested parties to continue to work together toward a resolution. Kia Kozun, 1865 E. Andersen Road stated that the Market needs to retain its current location for the next three years but the location will not meet the Market's ultimate needs. She is aware that a permanent site is needed and is certain that the new Market Manager will focus on that need. The Market is on the cusp of developing into a viable community component. Tremendous effort has been made to get to this point even before the hiring of a manger. She noted that Market vendors participated in an upgrade to the public restrooms to serve customers and the public. She strongly encouraged a three year extension in the current location for the success of the Market. In response to a question from Commissioner Wharton as to drawbacks ofthe Laurel Street location, Ms. Kozun answered that while Laurel Street is a fabulous location, there are issues with setting up the Market, blocking a public street, and keeping an alley open. It would be great if Laurel Street were permanently blocked off as it is a lot of work to prepare the area for the Market use. Joseph Nevis, 112 North Peabody Street stated that he is basically neutral as to location. He suggested that the Oak Street property be open to development as a village green where the Market can operate and be open to a lot more venues. He believes that Market vendors have been good citizens and an extension should be allowed. Tom Binh, 108 West First Street agreed that the Downtown Market is positive for the Downtown. He opens his business on Saturdays because of the Market and believes that it draws visitors from the waterfront and ferry areas that benefits many Downtown businesses. If the community decides that a public property should be closed down every week so that it can be used for public activities, so be it, it is a good use of public tax dollars. The City has assisted development proposals in the past, why not now? Mr. Binh submitted a letter for the record stating his thoughts. Damien Humphreys, Merrill Com 116 East 8th Street reiterated that the Market needs a stable location and should be allowed to remain on Laurel Street for a limited time. Mr. Humphreys . . . Planmng CommISSIOn Meetzng - August 10, 2005 Page 7 submitted a letter from Merrill Com, a local marketing firm, stating that the Market has done what they were asked to do. Remaining in its current location is a good marketing decision for the Market and will ultimately benefit the citizens of Port Angeles. All parties should be able to work together to find a suitable permanent Market location. Ernst Shaefer, 10 Olympian Place operates a business on Laurel Street and strongly urged the continuation ofthe Market use on Laurel Street. The Market location is one ofthe main reasons he moved back to Laurel Street from another business location. The Market benefits businesses in the area. Business health in the area is not negatively affected due to the Market activity. In response to Commissioner Snyder, Mr. Shaefer responded that he would support the permanent closure of Laurel Street. In response to Commissioner Snyder, Mr. Shaefer indicated that he would be an active proponent in closing Laurel Street Julie A. Gardner, 109 East First Street is a business owner in the area. Ms. Gardner provided comparative information relative to her business sales indicating that sales are consistently down on days the Market is in operation. There is a clear indication that a measurable impact is occurring due to a change in circulation patterns during Market activities creating avoidance behavior that negtively affects Downtown businesses throughout the entire week and year. Time analysis on Wednesday specifically indicates that a majority ofthe impact occurs between 3 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. which is when the Market begins operation. She would appreciate an opportunity to sit down with a subcommittee and review all ofthis information. She is in favor of a Market use in the Downtown but not the regular closure of Laurel Street. Pedestrian malls are antiquated 1970's urban renewal strategies that destroy natural patterns that economies create in older urban centers. The current market site in the center of the Downtown takes advantage of the location to the detriment of other established businesses in the Downtown which are therefore subsidizing the Market's growth. The issue of whether the Market should remain in Laurel Street as a temporary use has degenerated into a values dialogue that has been divisive. She hoped to bring solid marketing facts into the mix of information for consideration. Commissioner Wharton asked that, in addition to the quantitative analysis whether Ms. Gardner could provide a sense of the qualitative changes. What is the change that most directly affects her business. Ms. Gardiner does not perceive that parking is an issue. Generally speaking its strictly the avoidance behavior during Market hours. Jean Fairchild, 3524 Mt. Pleasant operated a business in the Downtown for thirty years and was led to believe that The Landing would provide open places for activities such as a Market. As a previous Downtown propertylbusiness owner, she is opposed to the closure of Laurel Street for miscellaneous public events. This is an ongoing problem, not a new issue. She hoped that after twenty years of discussion, we could all work toward finding a permanent place for a market activity. Rick Mathis, 102 West Front Street noted that the current site was approved as a temporary use. Enough time has been given for the Market to have cited a permanent location. During the extension proceeding in 2004, the Planning Commission specifically asked that the Market and the Downtown Association meet with the merchants that had concerns and try to resolve the issues. So far, neither organization has met with any ofthe merchants who had issues, to his knowledge. In fact, the Downtown Association did not even survey its members as to the Market use until the day prior to the current hearing. While the Market is an asset to the Downtown, the regular closure of Laurel Street for is an imposition to his business. He doesn't want to be negative to the Market but believes that the Market has not tried to address issues of affected merchants such as himself. The Market location has altered shopping patterns of people in Port Angeles and not just on Saturdays and Wednesdays. Some customers say that they avoid the Downtown on Market days due to the disruption and three additional years is too long to continue with this disruption. This issue has pit . . . Plannmg CommiSSIOn Meetmg - August 10,2005 Page 8 business against business creating a hostile environment. The public restroom identified for Market vendors and customers is more than 200 feet from the subject area which is a violation of Health Department rules. He does not want to see the Market leave the Downtown but he does not want to see Laurel Street closed on a regular basis. Business owners were told this would be a temporary closure, it's not temporary anymore. In response to Commissioner Kalish, Mr. Mathis responded that since the date the Market started in the location, there has been a complete disregard to the merchants who have complaints. He additionally answered that he has the only public restroom between Front and First on Laurel Street. The public restroom that should be used by Market vendors and customers is located more than 200 feet west of Laurel Street in a parking lot and is not in good shape so people use his restroom facilities. He responded that a requirement for portable sanitary facilities may alleviate the problem, but he wasn't sure. Commissioner Wharton noted that it appears that, while no one wants to shut down the Market or to have it move from the Downtown, some compromise needs to be reached. Mr. Mathis responded that after the 2004 extension, the Downtown Association talked about forming a committee to try to deal with specific issues. That organization never came to pass. The Market does not pay rent equal to surrounding businesses but uses Laurel Street to its benefit. To wait until one day before an extension hearing is to take place to try to cooperate is a blatant disregard to merchants who are doing business and creates a hostile business environment. Eika Strickland, 613 Cedar Park Drive is sorry to see that the community is so polarized. She is an enthusiastic supporter of the Market and all of the Downtown. There is a problem in the Downtown and it isn't just with the Market. At 5:30 p.m., most stores are closed. Visitors have declared "this town is dead!" Edna Petersen, 217 North Laurel Street asked that the 2004 extension of the conditional use permit not be approved. Everyone was directed to study the effects of the closure of Laurel Street and to try to solve some of the problems. Optional sites were suggested. She presented pictures to refute the statement made in 2004 that approximately 900 - 1000 people visit the Market on Saturday. Although the City's Comprehensive Plan identifies that a Market is a desirable component of a healthy Downtown, nowhere in the Plan does it say that the closure of a major street each Saturday is good planning. She presented petitions that indicate the Downtown Association membership does not overwhelmingly support the closure of Laurel Street. The location of the Market on Laurel Street has pitted business against business in the Downtown. Saturday is the biggest shopping day ofthe week and to have it endangered is a lethal blow. The closure of Laurel Street takes up 17 on-street parking sites, impacts the use of two parking lots. She provided quantitative figures indicating that although her store is an economic factor in the life of Downtown Port Angeles, her business has been significantly and negatively impacted since the Market has been operating in Laurel Street. She provided a letter from the original Gertie's Farmers Market inviting the Downtown Market to rejoin them. She opposed giving the Market any more time in Laurel Street. She is out of time and so are many other businesses due to the Market's location in Laurel Street. In response to Commissioner Wharton, Ms. Petersen responded that some traditional Saturday holiday activities over the past year have been total failures since the closure of Laurel Street. Commissioner Kidd asked if consideration had been given to the Market rejoining with the original Market in another location ofthe City. Chair Rasmussen asked that the question be held for a rebuttal period. . . . Plannzng CommiSSIOn Meetzng - August 10, 2005 Page 9 Bonita Melville, 1320 Marie View operates the Diamond Gallery in the 100 block of West First Street. Ms. Melville has tried to be a good neighbor but Saturdays have become the worst business day of her week. She spoke emotionally about fighting for her business livelihood. She could close on Saturdays and have better days. Her customers have reported that they have a hard time getting to her due to the closure of Laurel Street. The Market is a good Downtown use but a public street is not the right location for the activity. Lindy Lumens, 120 West First Street, Raven's World and Colour Palette was initially excited about the Market coming to the Downtown. As overall business is down 30%, she decided to study sales patterns. Traditionally, Saturdays have been the busiest day. Now, Saturdays are the slowest day. She referred to spreadsheets to indicate that her sales on Saturdays are down 43 % while Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday sales are down only 12%. Wednesdays are down 44%. She doesn't know what else could cause this type of a drop particularly on Market days. She shops the Market but does not want it to continue to affect her in such a dramatic manner. Asking for a three year extension does not seem like a temporary situation. Anthony Hoare, 2873 East Beach Road stated that the closure of Laurel Street is a significant impact to Downtown businesses. He expressed concern as a property owner that the Market use should not result in the closure of a public street and noted several other locations where such a use could locate. He likes the concept of the Market but not the location. Laurel Street is a significant street and has a significant impact on the value of his property. Very little effort has been made by the Market management to place signage identifying the location of public restroom facilities. He suggested that if an extension is approved, the Market not be permitted to locate in the street during the holiday months of November and December, that a report be provided identifying the number of vendors operating on various Market days, and that specific reporting parameters be set to indicate that strong moves are being made to find a permanent location for the use. Bill Thomas, 110 North Laurel stated that the Market use helps his business very much. Market days are his best days while non Market days are really sad. He supports the continued use of Laurel Street for the Market use. Peter Vanderhoof, 585 Wasankari Road has served on the Market Board since it began. He noted that a great deal of effort has been expended in seeking a permanent location for a Market use in Port Angeles that would support the Downtown. He has not seen a verifiable statistical or even a reasonable analysis that shows there is the probability that there is a cause and effect relationship between the Market in Laurel Street and a downturn in Downtown sales. Diane Markley, P.O. Box 2835, Port Angeles owns the building that extends from First Street to the Front/First Street Alley on Laurel Street. As Laurel Street is the only access to her building, it is difficult, limiting, and inconvenient to utilize the second floor of her building during the Market operation. Even though she supports the Market, she is opposed to continually working around their schedule. It is time for the Market to be open minded enough to explore a new location. A plan should have been in place by this time. The permit is a temporary permit. It is critical that Laurel Street remain open to traffic at all times. People will branch out once they're in the Downtown so another Market location in the Downtown will benefit Downtown businesses. Larry Leonard, 1030 Olympus A venue opposed the use of Laurel Street for a public market. Property owners expect Laurel Street to be open. Diane Markley's building and Bill Thomas' business are accessed from Laurel Street. Both businesses are important to the Downtown; however, one is negatively impacted and one is interactive. The street needs to remain open. A short extension would allow a gradual transition from the street location, possibly 3 months. Why is there a need for two markets in a City of 20,000 people? The two markets should join. . . . Plannmg CommiSSIOn Meetmg - August 10,2005 Page 10 Mark Ecklund, 585 Wasankari Road is a vendor at the market and supports the Market use. He does not live locally but would like to come back to farm in the area and would like to have a farm to come back to. People who mill about the Market are happy people and provide a lively environment for the Downtown that is not there at present. We need to stop using scapegoats for local problems and consider that the global economy is what's really causing the problem. Peggy Wesley, 106 Laurel Street enjoys watching people walk by and mingle during Market days. While her business is accessed only on Laurel Street, it seems that the business owners who are complaining about a loss of business have plenty of unencumbered access. She chose her present location because of the Market use in Laurel Street. Ed Chadd, 307 West ~h Street noted that the Market is growing and will ultimately help the local economy. There will be a connection between a healthy farmers market and a vibrant Downtown. There is real momentum in the Market. The collective public good is served by leaving the Market where it is at present until a permanent location is identified. He didn't see a reason for, but was not opposed to, an extension of at least 18 months with a condition for consistent reporting to show progress toward identifying issues as to the future of the Market. The Market needs more time in its current location. Dan Miller, P. O. Box 1142, Port Angeles noted that Market vendors do not pay the same fees as other businesses in the Downtown. Closing a public street does not seem necessary with so many parking lots available for the use. Kevin Thompson, 130 W. Front Street supported the continuation of the Market its current location. His business, although a block away from the main activity, continues to grow on Market days. He agreed that during the initial months of Market activity in its current location the flow of traffic was somewhat interrupted but, particularly over the past two years, business continues to grow on Market days. He is happy to be part of the Market activity as a Downtown business. In response to Commissioners Kalish and Snyder, the ability to put out sale racks on Market and special event days has helped business tremendously. Connie Rogers, 2017 West Third Street is from a small town in Washington that has exhibited the same retail decline due to internet sales. Aria Holzchuh, Executive Director of the Port Angeles Downtown Association (PADA) said that the P ADA conducted a fairly intense person to person survey/interview with regard to the Market location on Laurel Street in 2004. The results identified businesses that felt that the use was better off in a different location, those who were being helped by the Market location, and those who just thought that Downtown was better for having the Market in the Downtown. The highest impact was felt to be businesses within 150 feet east, west, and north of the Market location. The survey average identified that 70% ofthe businesses favored the Market location on Laurel Street. Beyond 150 feet, 82% of businesses favored the location on Laurel Street and ninety-two percent (92%) of businesses within the entire Central Business District wanted the use in the Downtown. Sin c e then, excluding those business owners who have expressed concerns and spoke during the 2004 extension process, she could not recall that any additional businesses expressed concerns. Because of these issues, the P ADA Board, which is elected by its membership, voted to keep the use in the Downtown as being in the best interest of the Downtown. Ms. Holzchuh provided a short history of how the Market began in the Downtown. She also noted that the Port Angeles Downtown Association sought out the Market and asked them to consider a location in the Downtown. The Market management, Tim Smith of the City, and the Downtown Association have actively considered many different locations. It was understood that a Market use would be developed in the Gateway facility, until 200 1. Because of an apparent change ofthought, a location in Cherry Street was considered along with other City properties. John Brewer . . . Plannmg CommiSSIOn Meetmg - August 10,2005 Page 1 I of the Peninsula Daily News offered that property if Laurel Street becomes unavailable. It is possible to request that the City amend the PBIA contract to allow the use of a City owned parking lot for the activity; however, the Market has recently expressed opposition to the use of a parking lot property. Peter Vanderhoof agreed to join an economic restructuring committee ofthe P ADA to try to identify issues of concern. The meetings were to be open meetings. However, this didn't get done for one reason or another. The Market didn't just ignore the direction to address the issues. Aria Holzchuh indicated that new signage has been made directing the public to the public restrooms, that an attempt to work with the City to upgrade the public restroom in the Downtown was not too successful, and that the search for a permanent site has been ongoing. She said that a major concern of the PADA Board is that the current review of the Market's Downtown location has set business against business in a negative way. The only other public property that was actually considered to a permanent location for the Market was Cherry Street; however, currently there are letters on file that discourage the use of any public street. In response to Commissioner Wharton, she responded that she does not believe the Market can move to a permanent site location in 12 - 18 months. It takes more time to build a business. The P ADA Board felt that the Market deserved a little more time to finalize their business plan and build toward a permanent location. In response to Commissioner Snyder as to a recommendation from the P ADA, Ms. Holzchuh favored an 18 month extension to identify a permanent location. He asked the Market Manager what time frame would be needed to work through the business issues so that a further extension is not needed. Jelorma McClean said that while the Market management has begun the process of site seeking and are working with the City on development issues, no real resolution is on the horizon. She could not respond to Commissioner Snyder's question as she did not corne prepared to discuss alternate locations as she was not aware the issue would be the main topic of discussion. In response to Commissioner Kidd, Ms. McClean did not believe that rejoining the original Market use on First/Chambers Street is possible. Although an invitation to locate at the Gertie's Market site has been made, she did not believe that the Gertie's Market is in conjunction with the Downtown Market operation. Community & Economic Development Director Mark Madsen suggested that both due to the hour and the repetitiveness ofthe testimony that it may be appropriate at this juncture to continue the meeting for 30 days to allow for a review of the testimony and to bring parties together to formulate a definite plan of action. Meagan Jones wanted it on the record that the Market management has been thinking of a permanent location since prior to locating in the Downtown and have focused on fulfilling the conditions of permit approval for the past year. She reiterated improvements that the Market has made and stated that the activity should not be pushed into a parking lot. If the market is not given a three year extension at this time, it will be difficult for the Market. Commissioner Kalish moved to continue the public hearing to September 14, 2005. Considerable discussion took place as to what progress could be reached by continuing a decision for 30 days. The apparent polarization of businesses in the Downtown on the issue was distressing to all. It was questioned whether or not a 30 day period of time would bring any new information forward or if indicate any new solutions that have not been discussed. It was decided that although the Market management had lived up to the conditions of approval, the issue that has not been addressed was that no definite information has been provided identifying a permanent site. Plannmg ComnusslOn Meetmg - August 10,2005 Page 12 Commissioner Johnson suggested that a one year extension could be reviewed with specific conditions. Commissioner Kalish stated that she believes the community has reached an impasse and she encouraged a 30 day period to seek out compromise information. Commissioner Kalish restated the motion which was seconded by Commissioner Kidd. Commissioner Wharton noted that, it being the heart of the harvest season, she could not vote for a delay in the decision. If an extension is needed, a 60 day period may be needed to allow a return to the discussion after the harvest season. Commissioner Matthews suggested that if a lengthy continuation is desired, the public hearing should be closed in the interim. In response to Chair Rasmussen, Planner Roberds responded that when an extension is applied for, a 90 day extension is automatic. If the Commission's action is to continue to a date specific, the permit would remain valid until that time. The question was called/or and the motion died. The Chair called for a break at 11 :30 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 11 :35 p.m Following the break, Chair Rasmussen said that since he had cut Ms. Jones off in her comments, he asked if she had anything further to say. Ms. Jones responded that an extension for less than a three year period would be very difficult as it would require a great deal of energy to be directed toward preparing for the next extension period and would impose a burden on the Market Manager as it would divert her efforts from focusing on a long term plans to focusing on the next extension event. With the help of Commissioner Kalish, Ms. Jones agreed that an explanation of details by the Market Manager at the time of extension regarding a good solid business plan, if a short extension is granted, would not be a real burden and may help to better define the future of the Market. Ed Chadd suggested that the Commission designate an extension period and make it clear that significant progress shall be made at a specific time, and then be the judge of whether real progress has been made. Bob Lumens supports the Market in the Downtown and does not want it to be gone but asked what happened to the suggestion that the use be moved to a different area, such as a parking lot. From a parking, traffic, and financial standpoint, the same issues will be present a year from now. A lot of businesses feel that the current Market site is hurting their businesses. His wife has looked at all the numbers and they believe that the Market location is definitely a major cause for their retail loss. Movmg the use to another location in the Downtown for a period oftime to allow them to gain a business foothold, define a business plan, and find a permanent site should not be a problem for them. It's not just that 17 prim'e parking spaces are taken up for the use during its operation, it's that and all the other spaces that are bemg taken up in the area relative to the activity. lfthe use were to be located to a larger site where parking could be contained on-site, it would give them that same exact amount oftime to look for a permanent solution but would allow other businesses to function normally once again. He didn't see a down side to this scenario particularly since Market managers have said they don't know how long it will take to find a permanent location. Richard Stevens, 806 E. Lauridsen Boulevard works as an associate with the P ADA. There is tremendous vitality to the area during the Market use. He has spoken to business owners who are for and agamst the Market site. He encouraged brainstorming solutions and ongoing work to determine the future ofthe Market m the Downtown. It is very evident that there are deep divisions within the Downtown and that the Downtown has problems that are bigger than the Market. He hoped that a recommendation or deCIsion would include a mechanism that gets all parties working together m a meaningful way because a straight extension will only solidify the problem. Lindi Lumens asked that if an extension IS approved, it be for a short period and that the Market not be allowed to operate during the holiday season - weather is usually not good during the . . . Plannmg CommiSSIOn Meetmg - August 10, 2005 Page 13 holiday season, few vendors are on the street, and it is a big shopping season for established businesses. Commissioner Wharton asked ifit is possible for the Market to locate in Darrel Vincent's Laurel/First Street parking lot during the holiday season as it is a slow time of year for the Market. Edna Petersen confirmed that she contacted Mr. Vincent about the use of his lot and was told that he would rent the site to the Market. Larry Leonard urged the Commission to focus on whether or not Laurel Street should be closed on Saturdays for the farmers market use. Anthony Hoare indicated that the Commission should not ignore merchants who feel stressed and are suffering because of the closure of Laurel Street. There is an alternative: you can just say no. There are other alternatives, particularly parking lots that have been offered. The closure of Laurel Street does not mean the demise of the Market. Greater than a majority of Downtown businesses have signed a petition stating that they do not support the regular closure of Laurel Street. Marc Etfin, 585 Wasankari Road suggested that businesses that feel they are losing business because of the Market become temporary vendors at the Market. Sandy Long, 809 Masters Road asked that the Commission publish the list of names ofthose who signed the petition in opposition to the regular closure of Laurel Street. E.J. Beckett, 421 East 12th Street noted that she had spoken to several business owners who signed the petition in opposition to the regular closure of Laurel Street who regretted signing the petition. Diane Markley urged the Commission to focus on the fact that the Market has been given options to go other places but they have chosen not to. She questioned whether they will ever be in favor of leaving the site. Aria Holzchuh explained the makeup of the most recent P ADA survey. The most recent survey only surveyed a specific area of 101 businesses. The petition goes beyond that area so the two documents cannot be compared. She did not believe that the numbers submitted represented more than one-half of the Downtown businesses. Peggy Wesley does not understand why merchants one block away feel that the Market is affecting their businesses when those directly on the street feel that the Market directly benefits their businesses. Rene Eubank, 1605 South Golf Course Road cautioned that if the Market use is placed in a parking lot, then parking issues will be further impacted in the Downtown - this seems counter productive. Jelorma McClean proposed that a compromise be agreed to at this point. She noted that she does not have a lot of authority (because many of her Board members had left the meeting) but she asked that the Market be able to continue operation in Laurel Street until at least October. They may be able to relocate the use during November and December and continue to work with other Downtown businesses and groups for a more permanent action. Alan Turner reiterated that many Downtown businesses would be adversely affected ifthe Market leaves the Downtown. Peter Vanderhoof expounded on the benefits ofthe farmers markets and asked that the use be extended for an additional three year period. He asked that the Commission approve the conditional use permit for three years, and they will relocate sooner if they possibly can. They are trying to help build a sustainable local community and help the Downtown but they need more time to get that effort off the ground. . . . Plannzng CommiSSIOn Meetzng - August 10, 2005 Page 14 Appearing that there were no more speakers, Chair Rasmussen closed the public hearing. Director Madsen noted that, at this point, the Commission must decide that the use (1) does or does not comply with the conditions of approval; and (2) that no significant adverse changes in circumstances have been made in order to approve a conditional use permit extension. Commissioner Wharton moved to extend the conditional use permit for an additional three years with the condition that the Market take steps to ameliorate the issues of the merchants involved and that a reporting mechanism be imposed with specific reporting parameters. (The motion died for lack of a second.) Following extended discussion on the issues brought out during the public hearing, particularly with regard to an appropriate time frame and a reason for such time frame being to ensure that a permanent site location be identified sooner rather than later. Commissioner Kidd moved to approve the conditional use permit extension for an additional one year with a condition that quarterly progress reports be submitted to identify a permanent Market location, citing the findings and conclusions cited in staffs report in support of that motion. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Snyder. Afriendly amendment was suggested that a condition be added that Laurel Street not be used during the months of November and December to address the concern expressed in public testimony and that a progress report be submitted in six months by the Market Manager identifying what has been done relative to a permanent location, long term plans, and how various issues stated of Downtown merchants have been addressed. Commissioner Kidd agreed with the amendment. Further discussion ensued regarding the need to provide a longer extension - perhaps 18 months - to allow the Market time to comply with the conditions of approval. The motion was called for subject to the following conditions, findings, and conclusions as follows: Condition: 1. Conditional Use Permit CUP 03-06 is hereby extended to operate from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. each Saturday until August 10, 2006, with the understanding that the Market management will submit six month progress reports as to how the issues of affected businesses have been dealt with, long term plans, and plans for a permanent location for the use. Market use may not occur in Laurel Street during the months of November and December, 2005. Findings: Based on the information provided in the Planning Division Staff Report for CUP 03-06 dated August 10,2005, 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. The Port Angeles Farmers Market submitted an extension request to continue the Saturday Market activity (CUP 03-06) on July 18, 2005. The Market is intended to provide a location where local farmers and artisans can sell their goods to the public. 2. The site is located in the Port Angeles Downtown on Laurel Street between First and Front Streets. A Wednesday Market use has operated on the site for the past three years. While the Wednesday Market use was extended until May, 2008, in 2003, the Saturday Market activity that is operated by the same group, was given a one year extension to August, 2005, in order to continue to work through specific issues regarding Market location, parking, and signage. . . . Plannzng CommiSSIOn Meetmg - August 10, 2005 Page 15 Individual stands are approximately 10' by 10' and 12' in height and are placed along both sides of Laurel Street. 4. P AMC 17 .96.070(E) Extensions of Approved Conditional Use Permits identifies criteria for the extension of approved conditional use permits. "Extensions of approved conditional use permits shall be considered in accordance with the same procedures as for the original permit application and may be granted for a period of one to five years provided that the following minimum criteria are met: (1.) The use complies with the permit conditions; and (2.) There have been no significant, adverse changes in circumstances. 3. 5. Public notice ofthe extension proposal was made in compliance with P AMC 17.96.140 with publication appearing in the Peninsula Daily News on July 22,2005, posted on the site on July 19, 2005, and mailed to property owners within 300 feet ofthe subject property on July 22, 2005. Written comment was received from Downtown business owners and operators both for and in opposition to the Saturday Market location. 6. The SEPA Responsible Official adopted DNS #951 (as DNS #1029) for the continued operation ofthe farmer's market on Saturdays at the Laurel Street location on June 23, 2004. Farmers markets are a community activity and are widely supported. The Washington State Farmers Market Association specifies what products may be sold at farmers markets and that they should promote local agriculture and handicrafts. The public health and interest must be maintained by addressing environmental health requirements for hand-washing and restroom facilities, by addressing compatibility with adj acent uses and other uses permitted within the CBD, by firmly establishing a staging area for vendor vehicles and conveyances, and through compliance with local sign code requirements. 8. A study was authorized in 1978 (Kramer, Chin, Mayo, Central Business District and Urban Design Study) by property owners and merchants within the Port Angeles Downtown for the purpose of developing a plan to improve the Central Business District. The study provided an in depth overview of development in the Downtown and included a survey of property and business owners within the area as to what types of uses would enhance the "Downtown for the People" and encourage the pedestrian nature of the area. The survey identified farmers market uses as being a desirable amenity to the Downtown area. The survey also encouraged the closure of Laurel Street from Front Street to First Street to encourage an open plaza area at the City's core to unify Downtown activities and the waterfront area. 7. 9. The subject property is identified on the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map as Commercial and is zoned Central Business District (CBD). The CBD provides wide flexibility in designating commercial uses. 10. The purpose ofthe CBD Zone is to strengthen and preserve the area commonly known as the Downtown for maj or retail, service, financial, and other commercial operations that serve the entire community, the regional market, and tourists. It is further the purpose of this zone to establish standards to improve pedestrian access and amenities and to increase public enjoyment of the shoreline. Although farmer's markets are not listed as a permitted or conditional use in the CBD or any other zone, P AMC 17.24. 160.(J) allows for "...other uses compatible with the intent ofthe Zoning Code..." by conditional use permit. The City has approved conditional use permits for Market activities within the CBD since 2002. Planmng CommiSSIOn Meetmg - August 10, 2005 Page 16 . . The Comprehensive Plan was reviewed and the following goals and policies are the most relevant to the proposal: Land Use Goals A, D, and E and Policies AI, and A2, Transportation Policy B 16, Economic Development Goals A and B, and Policy A2. 12. Adjacent uses include retail stores, office uses, restaurants, banks, apartments, a barber shop, and parking facilities. 13. Laurel Street is a local access street that is closed to traffic during Market activities. Market operations include traffic control barricades provided by the City and signage provided by the Market management to alert and educate the traveling public to the activity and to the location of public restroom facilities. The FirstlFront Street alley shall remain open for emergency and local access traffic during Market hours of operation. 11. 14. Farmer's market uses are not mentioned in the Parking Ordinance, under P AMC 14.40.070. Unspecified uses shall meet the requirements of similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director. The Director previously determined that 10-12 parking spaces are required for customers and an additional (1) parking space for each vendor is required. A letter identifying that 25 monthly parking permit are provided through the Downtown PBIA was submitted with the extension request. 15. Clallam County Environmental Health Department personnel reported that the Market vendors are operating in compliance with Health Department standards as of this writing. No concerns are anticipated with the management of the Market. The City's Police Department had no issues nor did the Public Works and Utilities or Building Division note concerns during the current extension review period. 17. Significant testimony was provided regarding continued concerns from business members of the community during the August 10,2005, public hearing. 18. During the August 10,2005, public hearing, as a matter of compromise, the Market Manager suggested that shorter extension could be considered for further studies of specific issues of concern. Main issues are that long term plans be reviewed in six months and would should include work progress toward a permanent site for the Market. 16. Conclusions: Based on the information provided in the Department Staff Report for CUP 03-06 dated August 10, 2005, including all ofthe information in the public record file, comments, and testimony presented during the public hearing, the Planning Commission's discussion and deliberation, the above listed conditions of approval and findings of fact, the City of Port Angeles Planning Commission hereby concludes that: A. . The Saturday Farmers Market operates in compliance with the conditions ofpermit approval. Although letters in opposition to the permitted location were received, a majority of Downtown businesses expressed support ofthe location identifying that the use is in accord with other permitted activities in the Central Business District. Both letters of support and in opposition to the location were received during the public comment period for the extension and identified that only the location was of main concern to those in opposition to the permit extension. Adj acent and nearby businesses, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Port Angeles Downtown Association indicated that the use and the permitted location are complimentary to other activities within the Central Business District. . -. /' . Planmng CommiSSIOn Meetzng - August 10, 2005 Page 17 As conditioned, a Farmers Market located in the Downtown is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, and most specifically with the goals and policies identified in Finding No. 11 above. C. The City's previous approval of conditional use permits for farmers markets in the CBD is precedential and therefore the use is in compliance with Section 17.24.160(1) (Central Business District) of the Port Angeles Municipal Code. B. D. Through membership in the City's Downtown PBIA, Market vendors are in compliance with the City's Parking Ordinance Section 14.40 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code. E. As conditioned, the permitted extension of the Saturday Farmers Market activity will continue to serve the general public and will remain in the public interest. Market management and others in the Downtown Association have endeavored to address the concerns of adjacent business owners who remain in opposition to the use being permitted on Laurel Street and remain willing to continue to work with interested property owners with regard to solutions that will allow the activity to continue to operate in concert with other Downtown merchants and to provide an interesting place that draws customers to the Central Business District as a whole. It is in the City's best interest to encourage a vibrant, interactive, interesting Downtown that citizens are drawn to and feel comfortable in that will encourage shopping locally. F. As conditioned, extension of CUP 03-06 meets the requirements of Section 17.96.070 P AMC for the extension of an approved conditional use permit. The maker of the motion and the second agreed and the motion was called for passing 4 - 3 with Commissioners Wharton, Kalish, and Rasmussen voting in the negative. Those voting in the negative identified the following as their main issues with the motion: Commissioner Wharton: The result is not substantially different than from a year ago. The decision doesn't move far toward problem solving being more a delay Commissioner Kalish: A year is too short - 18 months would have been best. Commissioner Rasmussen: We haven't done anything to address the issues of the Downtown merchants who have presented the case that they are losing business and revenue. There should have a way to compel the various sides to work closer together with a better plan acceptable to everyone. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC Edna Petersen, 107 N. Laurel, thanked the staff for their assistance. STAFF REPORTS None REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS None . . . Planmng CommISSIOn Mmutes Page J 8 ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 1: 1 0 a..m. ~md~-~ J Mark Madsen, Secretary PREPARED BY: S Roberds · ~ORTA.NGELES WAS H I N G TON, U S. A PLANNING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE ROSTER AND TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting Agenda of: ~ u t1 u.5, / /) I dLJ~. , ~ To help us provide on accurate record of those in attendance, please sign in. Your signature acknowledges your presence. If you plan to testify, by your signature below, you certify that the testimony given is true and correct under penalty of perjury by the laws of the State of Washington. Signature below DOES NOT REQUIRE you to testify. ADDRESS: Agenda Item No. ~t . 1)/ \ JU j l/ - , ....---- ....---- ........ /v (V V I , , I . t~ 12- \ J -r([ · FORTA,NGELES WAS H I N G TON, USA PLANNING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE ROSTER AND TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting Agenda of: To help us provide an accurate record of those in attendance, please sign in. Your signature acknowledges your presence. If you plan to testify, by your signature below, you certify that the testimony given is true and correct under penalty of perjury by the laws of the State of Washington. Signature below DOES NOT REQUIRE you to testify. . ADDRESS: ~~ Agenda Item No. (V -- ~ rA fA I\J" ~ ....---- drll l~ c: \MyFiles\FORMS\Mtgrostpc. wpd W I Pi (!-J-r ~l · ~ORTANGELES WAS H I N G TON, USA PLANNING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE ROSTER AND TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting Agenda of: To help us provide an accurate record of those in attendance, please sign in. Your signature acknowledges your presence. If you plan to testify, by your signature below, you certify that the testimony given is true and correct under penalty of perjury by the laws of the State of Washington. Signature below DOES NOT REQUIRE you to testify. . Agenda Item No. ....-- . C: \MyFiles\FORMS\MtgrostpC. wpd · ~ORTA.NGELES WAS H I N G TON, USA PLANNING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE ROSTER AND TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting Agenda of: To help us provide an accurate record of those in attendance, please sign in. Your signature acknowledges your presence. If you plan to testify, by your signature below, you certify that the testimony given is true and correct under penalty of perjury by the laws of the State of Washington. Signature below DOES NOT REQUIRE you to testify. Agenda Item No. ....-- . c: \MyFiles\FORMS\Mtgrostpc. wpd