Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/12/1990 . . . AGENDA PORT ANGELES PLANNING COMMISSION 321 East Fifth Street Port Angeles, W A 98362 September 12, 1990 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL ill. A PPRO V AL OF MINUTES: Special meeting of August 30, 1990. IV. NEW BUSINESS: 1. SEPA APPEAL PROCEEDING - POINT NO POINT TREATY COUNCIL: An appeal of the Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official's issuance of a Determination of Non-Significance regarding Daishowa's proposed construction of a 69 kV substation at its Port Angeles Mill (See item V.2). This item is not a public hearing. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA 90(09)110 - DAISHOWA AMERICA CO.. LTD. - Marine Drive at the base of Ediz Hook: A Shoreline Permit to allow construction of a recycled paper facility. 2. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA 90(09)112 - DAISHOWA AMERICA CO.. LTD. - Marine Drive at the base of Ediz Hook: A Shoreline Permit to allow contruction of a 69 kV substation at the site of Daishowa's Port Angeles Mill. 3. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA 90(09)111 - CITY OF PORT ANGELES - Marine Drive between Oak and Hill Streets: A Shoreline Permit to allow extension of the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail. 4. STREET V ACA TION PETITION - STV 90(09)04 - RICHARD L. GRIMSLEY. ET AL - East Sixth Street west of Liberty Street: A petition to vacate a portion of the Sixth Street right-of-way west of Liberty Street. . . . Planning Commission Agenda Page 2 5. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT - ZCA 90(09)05 - M&R TIMBER - City Wide: A proposed amendment to the Zoning Code in order to allow all residential dwelling types as a conditional use in a Planned Residential Development. 6. APPEAL OF SHORT PLAT APPROVAL - SHP 90(07)09 - RANDY AND MARLENE HART - 2600 Block of Milwaukee Drive: An appeal of a condition of short plat approval requiring the improvement of Milwaukee Drive adjacent to the proposal short plat. VI. OLD BUSINESS: 1. WITHDRAWAL OF PERM1T APPLICATION - SMA 90(07)109 - OLYMPIC MEMORIAL HOSPITAL. VII. COMMUNICATIONS FROM mE PUBLIC vm. STAFF REPORTS IX. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS X. ADJOURNMENT NOTES: The Planning Commission will not, except at the discretion of the Chairman, commence a new hearing after 10:00 P. M. Project files and applicable City umd use regulations may be reviewed prior to the public hearing in the Planning Department. Copies of all material in the files are available al a cost of $,25 per page. All correspondence pertaining to a hearing item received by the Planning Department at least one day prior to the scheduled hearing will be provided to Commission members before the hearing. Planning Commission; Larry Leonard, Chair; Ray Gruver, Vice-chair; Bill Anabel; Roger Catts; Donna Davison; 1im Hulett; Bob Philpott. Planning Staff; Bmd Collins, Planning Dir'<<tor; Gmnt Beck, Associate Planner; Sue Ro~rds, Planning Office Specialist. . . . PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington September 12, 1990 I CALL TO ORDER Chairman Leonard called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. II ROLL CALL Members Present: Ray Gruver, Jim Hulett, Larry Leonard, Bob Philpott, Donna Davison, William Anabel. Members Excused: Roger Catts Staff Present: Grant Beck, Sue Roberds, Ken Ridout, Bruce Becker. II APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Anabel moved to approve the minutes of the August 30, 1990, special meeting, with the following amendment: Under Item VI, Public Hearings, Permit Request for DelHur, Inc., page 7, Duplex units would read: "Mr. Collins stated that duplex units would not be allowed on several of the lots." Mr. Gruver seconded the motion, as amended, which passed 4 - 0, with Mr. Philpott and Ms. Davison abstaining. IV NEW BUSINESS SEPA APPEAL PROCEEDING - POINT-NO-POINT TREATY COUNCIL: An appeal of the Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official's issuance of a Determination of Non-Significance regarding Daishowa's proposed construction of a 69 kV substation at its Port Angeles Mill (See item V.2). This item is not a public hearing. Chairman Leonard explained that this item is not a public hearing and those able to make presentations include the applicant (Daishowa), appellant (the point-No-point Treaty Council), and City staff. Chairman Leonard explained the meeting procedure and opened the discussion to staff. Grant Beck, Associate Planner for the City of Port Angeles, was sworn in by Chairman Leonard. Mr. Beck reviewed the Department Report and stated that following review of the application and environmental checklist as submitted by Daishowa America, Ltd., the Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of Non-Significance. Based on that determination, an environmental impact statement was not required of the project. The Point-No-point Treaty Council filed a timely appeal of the Determination of Non- Significance postmarked on August 24, 1990. The basis for the point-No-point Treaty Council's appeal was: PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 2 . A. The SEPA checklist does not provide for investigation, surveys, and documentation of possible Native American archeological sites located within the proposed project site. B. There are no proposed measures in the checklist to reduce or control erosion, either during construction or after construction has been completed. Mr. Beck noted the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program establishes standards relating to archeological areas and historical sites. Those standards include observation of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and Chapter 43.51 RCW which provides for the protection, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction of areas and structures significant to American and Washington State history, archi- tecture, archeology, and/or culture. These requirements were deemed adequate by the Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official to ensure protection of possible Native American archeological sites located in the area of the development. Mr. Beck noted the Planning commission's options following review of the appeal issues. . Rachel Kowalski, 1666 Lower Elwha Road, Port Angeles, and Bob Heinith, 7850 NE Klallam Road, Kingston, were present repre- senting the Treaty Council. Ms. Kowalski and Mr. Heini th were sworn in by Chairman Leonard. Ms. Kowalski expressed concern that construction crews in the area would not be looking for artifacts. She stated that someone trained in archeology should do a survey prior to any construction activity at the site. Mr. Heinith, Water Resource Biologist for the point-No-point Treaty Council, requested that the appeal be upheld and a mitigated DNS be issued for the project in order to have a qualified archeological team do a survey to assure that no artifacts will be missed and no archeological impacts will occur due to the construction project. Mr. Heinith further stated that any construction with possible impacts on the shellfish environment should be given careful consideration and a basic plan to ascertain the effect of the construction on the shellfish population should be required prior to construction. . Chairman Leonard asked how erosion could occur from this site which could impact the shellfish population. Mr. Heinith responded that when the present impervious surface is removed in preparation for the construction activity, and with the coming rainy season, erosion could occur into the strait. Ms. Kowalski stated that the entire area is well documented as a historical site but has never been surveyed for arti- facts. She reiterated the request for a survey to be done PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 3 . prior to the proposed construction activity. Ms. Davison questioned Ms. Kowalski and Mr. Heinith as to a depth level the Tribes are concerned with in the area. Mr. Gruver asked whether the Tribes had ever had any concerns with the provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and Chapter 43.51 RCW to date. Mr. Heinith indicated there had never been a question as to the provisions of the regulations. Robert Heller, 1001 4th Avenue, Seattle, attorney for Daishowa America, Ltd., and Dean Reed, 3120 South Peabody Street, engineer for Daishowa America, Ltd., were present, representing Daishowa, and were sworn in by Chairman Leonard. Mr. Heller reviewed the SEPA appeal procedures, including RCW 43.21C.090 and the Port Angeles Municipal Code. Mr. Heller stated that the site has previously been extensively disturbed. The proposed activity will not cause excavation to a depth as far as previous construction. . Mr. Reed explained that in searching old records of the site, drawings were produced which showed extensive piping in the area. Mr. Reed presented drawings indicating piping lacing the area as deep as 6 feet below grade. He further stated that the proposal will remove old pipelines which have been abandoned. The new construction is proposed to be at a depth of only 3 feet below grade. Mr. Reed stated that Daishowa has direct control over all excavation for the site proposal. All contractors will be especially cognizant of possible diggings in the area, especially due to the appeal proceeding. Mr. Gruver asked if the proj ect engineer has training in archeological sites. Mr. Reed answered that the project engineer probably does not have that background, as he is an electrical engineer. Mr. Hulett questioned Mr. Reed on the elevations and grades of the excavation site. Mr. Reed further stated that soils will be removed from the site and stored adjacent to the site. In the event of heavy rains, the runoff would be directed to an existing storm sewer system which is connected to the primary and secondary treat- ment systems. . Mr. Heinith stated that the burden of proof should be on the applicant to prove that the proposal will not cause impacts on the site. He referred to a report by Barbara Lane who, he stated, is a noted anthropologist. He stated that the reports contain information on aracheological sites on Ediz Hook, indicating that this was a very well-used area. He further noted that the request is to mitigate the DNS in order to . . . PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 4 allow for an archeological survey and more detailed plans concerning the erosion control on the site. Previous con- struction at the site may not have uncovered or buried the archeological remains. Ms. Davison asked if the study on Ediz Hook by Ms. Lane gave reference to specific areas on the Hook. Ms. Kowalski stated that the Klallam Tribes were in the Hook area prior to the U. S. Coast Guard's use of the Hook. Ms. Kowalski's grandmother is a Klallam Indian. Mr. Heller noted that State law was written to require noti- fication of the County (city) engineer upon discovery of any evidence of possible archeological significance during the construction. Mr. Reed further noted that he had tried to contact Mr. Heinith on September 10, 1990, to allow review of the informa- tion and the site. Mr. Reed said that Mr. Heinith was unable to return his call or review the site. Mr. Hulett noted that upon review of the previous engineering drawings of the site, it seems apparent that the site is at present laced with wide underground pipe beds, indicating the area has been substantially disturbed in the past. Mr. Gruver asked if State law prescribes that the inspector on this type of site be an archeologist. Mr. Beck said that to his knowledge, that is not a requirement. Mr. Gruver moved to uphold the Determination of Non- Significance, citing the following findings and conclusions: Findings: 1. Chapter 27.53 RCW provides for the protection of archaeologically significant areas. 2. Section F.18.a through c of the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program provides for the protection of archaeologically significant areas. 3 . The location of the proposed construction in relation to the Daishowa Mill site will minimize any potential erosion and surface water runoff attributable to the new construction. 4. Surface water runoff at the Mill site is collected and treated by the secondary sewage treatment facility. Conclusions: A. The proposal is unlikely to have a significant adverse impact upon the environment. PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 5 . In speaking to his motion, Mr. Gruver noted that it is important to protect all archeological areas but there has been no example that current law would not protect the site. Mr. Philpott seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. V PUBLIC HEARINGS SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA-90(09) 110 - DAISHOWA AMERICA CO., LTD. - Marine Drive at the base of Ediz Hook: A Shoreline Permit to allow construction of a recycled paper facility. Mr. Beck reviewed the Department Report recommending approval of the Shoreline Permit, subject to two conditions. Chairman Leonard opened the public hearing. . Wally Malkinson of Pacific Liaicon, 4190 Cedar Hill Drive, victoria, B.C., was present representing Daishowa. Mr. Malkinson gave an overview of the project site and stated this would be a $37 to $40 million project which will produce approximately 170 average air-dried tons per day. The proposal is to process old newspapers, old directories and old magazines into pulp which will amount to approximately 40% of the raw product of the Mill's production of newsprint. The project will employ 125 to 150 people at peak, with up to 15 people upon completion. Mr. Malkinson further stated that documents had been submitted indicating that the proposal will be downzoned for flood purposes. Stan Hicks, Fourth and liE" Streets, resident manager for Daishowa America, Ltd., stated that the company is in agree- ment with the Department Report and the conditions attached; but further stated if a Shoreline Management Permit is needed for construction of the Trail through the Mill site (Condition No.2), the City should obtain such permit. The City should also assume liability for the Trail upon completion and Daishowa would like to participate in the location of the Trail through the Mill site. Mr. Hicks objected to the bond as requested by staff, indicating that Daishowa has been in the community for some time and has shown good will in its efforts so far. There being no further comment, Chairman Leonard closed the public hearing. . Mr. Hulett questioned staff as to the comment by Mr. Hicks concerning objection to the bond for the Waterfront Trail development. Mr. Beck explained that the city expected to accept liability for the Trail upon completion, and to obtain permits for the development. He stated that a bond would be needed only if PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 6 . the operation of the facility would occur prior to construc- tion of the Trail. He also felt that Daishowa's oral agree- ment would be unenforceable. In response to the Commission, Mr. Hicks stated that a letter of agreement would not be objected to. Mr. Hulett moved to approve the Shoreline Substantial Develop- ment Permit to allow construction of a recycled paper facility, subject to the following conditions and citing the following findings and conclusions: Conditions: B. Any development within the FEMA-designated 100-year flood plain shall comply with all requirements of the Port Angeles Flood Damage Prevention Code, Chapter 15.12 PAMC. Prior to operation of the recycling facility, the appli- cant shall construct the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail on property under Daishowa I s control. Plans for the Trail shall be based on the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail Plan and shall be approved by the Port Angeles Parks and Public Works Departments prior to construction. A. . Alternate locations for the Trail may be approved by the Port Angeles Parks and Public Works Departments. The City may grant permission to operate the facility, provided that a letter of agreement or an improvement bond acceptable as to form and amount by the Director of Public Works and the City Attorney is posted in the amount of the estimated value of the construction of the Waterfront Trail. If a bond is not provided, the appli- cant shall enter into a written agreement to construct the Trail. Daishowa shall construct the Trail no later than two (2) years from the date of operation of the recycling facility. The city of Port Angeles will assume liability for the Trail after construction and shall obtain all required permits for the construction. Findings: 1. The proposed recycling facility would be located at the site of Daishowa America's existing directory paper mill and would not extend a heavy industrial use into an area not currently used for such activity. 2. Provided Daishowa constructs the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail through the Mill, the proposal will provide pedes- trian visual and physical access to the shoreline in an industrial area. . 3. Any construction within the FEMA-designated 100-year flood plain will be required to meet the" standards for development wi thin such areas, as found in the Port PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 7 . Angeles Flood Damage Prevention Code, Chapter 15. 12 PAMC. 4. The Planning Department and Planning Commission gave serious consideration to flood hazard issues during review of the shoreline permit application. 5. The Port Angeles comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code identify the property as industrial, while the site is designated as Urban by the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program. Conclusions: A. The proposal is consistent with the Port Angeles Compre- hensive Plan and Zoning Code. B. The proposal, as conditioned, is consistent with the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, the Shoreline Manage- ment Act, the Waterfront Trail Plan, and the Flood Damage Prevention Code. c. The proposal, as conditioned, is in the public use and interest. . Ken Ridout, Deputy Director of Public Works for the City of Port Angeles, noted that if the area for the Trail is not in the public right-of-way, Daishowa will have to grant an ease- ment to the City for maintenance of the Trail. He also noted that a bond is a normal course of action and is not directed at the applicant. Mr. Gruver seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA-90(09) 112 - DAISHOWA AMERICA co., LTD. - A Shoreline Permit to allow construction of a 69 kV substation at the site of Daishowa's Port Anqeles Mill. Mr. Beck reviewed the Department Report recommending approval of the proposal subject to one condition. Chairman Leonard opened the public hearing. Dean Reed, 3120 South Peabody Street, engineer for Daishowa, gave an overview of the project, with background of the upgrades to the Mill since the 1988 purchase by Daishowa America. Mr. Reed indicated that Daishowa America would like to begin construction on this project as soon as possible. There being no further public comment, Chairman Leonard closed the public hearing. . Mr. Hulett moved to recommend approval of the permit as pro- posed, subject to the following conditions, and citing the following findings and conclusions: PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 8 . Condition: A. Prior to operation of the electrical substation, the applicant shall construct the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail on property under Daishowa's control. Plans for the Trail shall be based on the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail Plan and shall be approved by the Port Angeles Parks and Public Works Departments prior to construction. Alternate locations for the Trail may be approved by the Port Angeles Parks and Public Works Departments. The city may grant permission to operate the facility, provided that a letter of agreement or an improvement bond acceptable as to form and amount by the Director of Public Works and the city Attorney is posted in the amount of the estimated value of the construction of the Waterfront Trail. If a bond is not provided, the appli- cant shall enter into a written agreement to construct the Trail. Daishowa shall construct the Trail no later than two (2) years from the date of operation of the recycling facility. The City of Port Angeles will assume liability for the Trail after construction and shall obtain all required permits for the construction. . Findings: 1. The proposed electrical substation yard would be located at the site of Daishowa America's existing directory paper mill and would not extend a heavy industrial use into an area not currently used for such activity. 2. Provided Daishowa constructs the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail through the Mill, the proposal will provide pedes- trian visual and physical access to the shoreline in an industrial area. 3. Any construction wi thin the FEMA-designated 100-year flood plain will be required to meet the standards for development within such areas, as found in the Port Angeles Flood Damage Prevention Code, Chapter 15.12 PANC. 4. The Planning Department and Planning Commission gave serious consideration to flood hazard issues during review of the shoreline permit application. 5. The Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code identify the property as industrial, while the site is designated as Urban by the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program. . Conclusions: A. The proposal is consistent with the Port Angeles Compre- hensive Plan and zoning Code. PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 9 . B. The proposal, as conditioned, is consistent with the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, the Shoreline Manage- ment Act, the Waterfront Trail Plan, and the Flood Damage Prevention Code. C. The proposal, as conditioned, is in the public use and interest. Mr. Gruver seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. The Commission took a 10-minute recess at 8:50 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 9:00 P.M. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA-90(09) 111 - CITY OF PORT ANGELES - Marine Drive between Oak and Hill Streets: A Shoreline Permit to allow extension of the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail. Mr. Beck reviewed the Department Report recommendong approval of the Shoreline Permit. Chairman Leonard opened the public hearing. . Ken Ridout, Deputy Director of Public Works, stated that the proposal is to place a minor amount of ballast and two inches of asphalt on the Trail area from Oak Street along Marine Drive to Hill street. The proposal is an extension of the city's current Waterfront Trail. Ms. Davison asked if herbicides which may spill into the water would be used in the asphalt process. Mr. Ridout noted that a very small amount of herbicide is used and there could be some runoff below the surface, possibly in the area of the Boat Haven. Mr. Ridout stressed that the usage amount is very small, but natural seepage may occur at some point. Paul Cronauer, 728 Milwaukee Drive, asked if the city has considered the use of concrete instead of asphal t, which would eliminate the need for herbicides. Mr. Ridout indicated that the cost would be quite a bit more than what is planned for the Trail. There being no further public testimony, Chairman Leonard closed the public hearing. . Mr. Philpott moved to recommend approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit to allow extension of the Port Angeles Waterfront Trail along Marine Drive, citing the following findings and conclusions: Findings: 1. The proposed Waterfront Trail extension will provide access to the public shoreline, which is a separate, non- PLANNING COMMISSION september 12, 1990 Page 10 . . motorized, vehicular and pedestrian path linked to other parts of the circulation system in the City but separated from streets used by motorized vehicles. 2. The Waterfront Trail extension provides numerous oppor- tunities to view the Harbor, strait of Juan de Fuca, Canada, and Mt. Baker. The access provides an unusual recreational environment compared to the typical City park and sports fields, and can be used by young and old residents from the entire city. 3 . The proposed extension of the Waterfront Trail does not convert the shoreline resource into irreversible uses or detrimentally alter the natural conditions of the shore- line and has minimal impacts on the shoreline area itself. 4. The proposal is an implementation of the City's adopted Urban Waterfront Trail Plan, which is a bicycle and hiking path which provides public access to the water and links the rest of the City's circulation system. 5. The proposal provides development and expansion of recre- ational areas on Port Angeles Harbor. 6. The access, recreation area, and interpretive signage are improvements that facilitate public access to the shoreline, which reflects a design attention to the importance of environmental quality and natural resources of the existing shoreline area by developing within areas that have already been altered by man. 7. The Waterfront Trail extension provides significant recreational opportuni ties for joggers, walkers, bicyclers, and passive recreational activities, such as sight-seeing, picnicking, beach combing, nature walks, fishing, birding, and observation of marine commerce in the Harbor. The construction of the access areas will significantly increase the recreational facilities within the City of Port Angeles. Conclusions: A. The proposal is consistent with the Port Angeles Shore- line Master Program; specifically General Regulations C.2 and C.5; Land Use Elements D.2, D.4, and D.6i Natural Systems Element E.1.ai and Recreation Use Regulations F.19, a through d. . B. The proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Plan. c. The proposal implements the City's adopted Port Angeles Urban Waterfront Trail Plan. r~ PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 11 . D. The proposal is consistent with the city's Comprehensive Plan, specifically circulation Policies Nos. 7 and 10, Parks and Recreation Pol icy No.3, and Urban Design policy No.2. Mr. Anabel seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. STREET VACATION PETITION - STV-90 (09) 04 - RICHARD L. GRIMSLEY, ET AL - East sixth street west of Liberty Street: A petition to vacate a portion of the Sixth Street right-of-way west of Libertv Street. Chairman Leonard stepped down from the dais due to a possible appearance of fairness problem. Vice-Chairman Gruver assumed the chair and opened the public hearing. Mr. Beck reviewed the Department Report and displayed a map of the current and previous vacation proposals. Richard L. Grimsley, 1301 East Sixth Street, stated that the original vacation put the road over a bank which would have been a lengthy process to resolve. Following lengthy discussion and considerable review of the previous and current proposals, Vice-Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing. . Mr. Hulett questioned staff concerning the Thomases' property which had been included in the original request but left out of the new proposal. Mr. Beck noted that Mr. Thomas had been sent a copy of the Department Report and an agenda. Doris Lee, 1235 East Sixth Street, in response to a question from the Commission concerning Lot 17, Block 190, which is owned by Ms. Lee, noted that she would not object to all her property being included in the vacation, to more closely resemble the previously approved street vacation. It was the consensus of the Commission to include the Hopfners' property in this petition, which had been included in the previous street vacation request, in order to make the current request more closely resemble the previous request, already approved by the City Council, and considered to be s public benefit. Mr. Hulett moved to approve the street vacation petition as submitted, subject to the following condition: A. That the property owned by Mr. Hpofner and Mrs. Lee (the east 30 feet of Lot 2, Block 211, and Lot 17, Block 190), be included in the street vacation request, and that Mr. Hopfner submit a written agreement to that effect for the file. This recommendation is made citing the following findings and conclusions: . . . . PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 12 Findinqs: 1. street Vacation Petition No. STV-90(04)01 was approved by the City Council through Ordinance No. 2589. This street vacation includes the property under the proposed vacation, and several other adjacent lots. This street vacation was approved subj ect to the following conditions: An easement to access utility facilities will be provided and a 20-foot non-exclusive easement for ingress and egress shall be formally granted to the City and to the owners of property adjacent to the right-of-way vacated herein by written easements in a form acceptable to the City from the owners of the property adjacent to said street. All properties under a single ownership shall be combined through the Zoning Lot Covenant process. 2. The Planning Commission and City Council have determined previously that vacation of a large portion of the Sixth Street right-of-way is in the public interest. 3. Vacation of the subj ect right-of-way would place the property on the City's tax rolls and be in the public interest. 4. Sixth Street in this location is undeveloped and unneces- sary to traffic circulation in the area. 5. The Light Department has indicated that an easement across the vacated Sixth Street and Mr. Grimsley's property will be required for access to maintain power poles in the area. 6. The Fire Department has indicated that a 20-foot access road should be maintained to Lots 17 and 18. 7. Based on the applicant's testimony, the street vacation approved by Ordinance No. 2589 would not be finalized, due to the location of the existing access road. Conclusions: A. Vacation of this portion of Sixth Street is in the public use and interest and would be a public benefit. Mr. Anabel seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Chairman Leonard rejoined the commission. It was the consensus of the Commission to extend the meeting to 11:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 13 . ZONING CODE AMENDMENT - ZCA-90(09)05 - M & R TIMBER - City-Wide: A proposed amendment to the Zoning Code in order to allow all residential dwelling types as a conditional use in a Planned Residential Development. Chairman Leonard stepped down to an appearance of fairness question and left the meeting room. Vice-Chairman Gruver opened the public hearing. Mr. Beck reviewed the Depar~ment Report recommending approval of the Zoning Code Amendment. Don Corson, Manager of Planning and Development for M & R Timber Company, representing M & R Timber Company, presented a display depicting a hypothetical situation which could occur if the Code amendment is approved and at present, and pointed out the disadvantages of the present regulations and the advantages of the proposal. He stated that the proposal would allow more concentration of open space, availability of narrow view corridors , community control over site development, design flexibility to allow the best management of site values, slope erosion control could be minimized, and better views would be available if the proposal were to be approved. . Mr. Roberts, 1212 West Fourth Street, a neighbor in the area, was present to oppose the Zoning Code Amendment. Mr. Roberts stated that the proposal, as submitted, would cut off the views of the surrounding residential areas, and asked Mr. Corson if this proposal is for condominiums. Chairman Gruver explained to Mr. Roberts that the hypothetical situation as displayed by Mr. Corson should be considered an example, not site-specific. Mr. Roberts thanked the Chairman for this direction, but stated that if this proposal is for the Fourth Street area, it would indeed impact the area and should be explored more thoroughly. Steve Streeter, 1233 West Fifth street, opposed the proposal. He stated he had just become a resident of the City of Port Angeles in the "F" street area and was obj ecting to the proposal, as it would block his view. Mr. Hulett and Ms. Davison again noted this is not a site- specific proposal but is City-wide in its scope and should be considered for all properties within the City, and not for the area which the project display may have resembled. Mr. streeter noted that he had been a councilman in the Oregon area for some time, and urged the Planning Commission not to make a mistake which could affect the people on Fourth street. . Stan Hicks, Fourth and "E" Streets, opposed the Zoning Code Amendment for property which may be developed on Fourth Street. PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 14 . Joe Michalczik, 520 West Third street, expressed opposition to the Zoning Code Amendment proposed. Mr. Michalczik stated that the Commission should give more consideration to a proposal of this type. Mr. Hulett noted that through this Zoning Code Amendment proposal to add all residential building types and uses classified as conditional uses in the underlying zoning district as conditional uses in Planned Residential Develop- ments, the Planning Commission and City Council would have more control over development in certain areas pertaining to setback, height, grouping of buildings, and open space than would presently be allowed in those zoning districts. Vice-Chairman Gruver noted that the proposal, as presented, allows more flexibility and control in PRD situations than is presently available. Mr. Beck stated that all residential building types would be conditional uses, and in order to approve a conditional use permit, the Planning Commission has to make a specific finding that the proposals would be consistent with surrounding land uses, which would result in more control than is presently built into the Ordinance. . Mr. Michalczik noted that his main concern is that one developer is asking to change the Ordinance based on the fact that he has a site problem with property which he is develop- ing. Marcella Streeter, 1233 West Fifth street, stated that it is a pleasure to walk the Fourth street alley near her home and view the Harbor. She stated this proposal would be an open door to condominiums on the bluff, and development of the bluff areas should be taken very seriously, as bluffs are very fragile. Bill Dawson, 1244 West Fourth street, expressed concerns with development on the bluffs. Mr. Hulett reiterated this is not a site-specific proposal and should be looked at in view of the entire City zoning Ordinance. Mr. streeter again requested the Commission do more study on this issue and not respond to a specific builder's request at this time. The Commissioners explained in detail that this is not a site- specific issue and should not be considered as one. . Don Corson said that the public use and public controls would be stronger with the passage of this amendment. The amendment allows for infill of awkward sites throughout town. " . . . \ PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 15 There being no further comment, Vice-Chairman Gruver closed the public hearing. Ms. Davison stated she is not comfortable with the issue at present. Mr. Philpott noted that perhaps there are means other than a Zoning Code Amendment to achieve the proposed results and suggested postponement of this action at this time. Mr. Beck noted this is an application which is before the Commission, and in order to duly process the application, the applicant is entitled to some form of action in a timely fashion. Vice-Chairman Gruver noted that if it is the belief that mixed residential uses are possible and appropriate, then the only logical alternative is to allow mixed uses, and the condi- tional use element of the Planned Residential community allows strong control for the city and its residents. Mr. Anabel stated that he, too, was uncomfortable with the proposal at the present, and opted for a postponement for more information and comprehensive study. Vice-Chairman Gruver stressed that the PRD conditional use permit process can totally control a development and is more completely encompassing than a rezone allows for control of mixed uses. Mr. Hulett moved to re-open the public hearing and continue it to October 10, 1990. Ms. Davison seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Chairman Leonard rejoined the Commission. Mr. Hulett moved to continue the agenda items beyond 11:00 P.M. Mr. Anabel seconded the motion, which failed 3 - 3. Chairman Leonard noted that the remaining item, the Hart short plat appeal will be placed on the October 10, 1990, meeting. VI OLD BUSINESS WITHDRAWAL OF PERMIT APPLICATION OLYMPIC MEMORIAL HOSPITAL. SMA-90(07) 109 Ms. Davison stepped down due to an appearance of fairness problem. Mr. Gruver moved to accept withdrawal of the Shoreline Permit submitted by Olympic Memorial Hospital. Mr. Hulett seconded the motion, which passed 5 - O. Ms. Davison returned to the dais. PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1990 Page 16 . VII COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None. VIII STAFF REPORTS None. IX REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS Mr. Philpott questioned the status of the Thunderbird Boat- house. Mr. Beck noted he had visited the site, and at his last visit, the Boathouse was coming into compliance with the Conditional Use Permit requirements. Mr. Philpott also noted that it was difficult to hear the Commission and audience participation in the meeting tonight and requested staff investigate the sound system problem. X ADJOURNMENT Mr. Anabel moved to adjourn the meeting Hulett seconded the motion, which passed . Secretary at 11:48 P.M. 7nimOUSIY. SR: LM PLAN. 376 . ~ . .0'" N"\~() CITY of PORT ANGELES ATTENDANCE ROSTER 'IYPE OF r.1EETING DAm OF r1EETING LOCATICN PL.~COMMISSION ~ ~A ~ /0(' /99(7 1" / CI'I'Y HALL ADDRESS: NAME: . .