HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 10/07/2005 pORTA_NGELES CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
October 7, 2005
I. CALL TO ORDER - SPECIAL MEETING:
II. ROLL CALL:
Members Present:
Mayor Headrick
Councilmember Braun
Councilmember Erickson
Councilmember Munro ~.
Councilmember Pittis
Councilmember Rogers
Councilmember Williams
Staff Present: Oth0r Staff Present:
Manager Quinn ~ ~,'~.
Attomey Bloor
Clerk Upton ~
G. Cutler
M. Madsen v/
D. McKeen
T. Riepe
Y. Ziomkowski
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Led by: t/J/LtJ_t~_~ Q/YLL~ _03_~
pORTANGELES CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
w. s ... o ~ o .~ u, s... Attendance Roster
DATE OF MEETING: October 7, 2005
LOCATION: City Council Chambers
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
Attendance Roster
DATE OF MEETING: October 7, 2005
LOCATION: City Council Chambers
CITY O
W A S H I N G T O N, U.S.
City Council Appeal Hearing
Procedures
Information For the Public:
· An Appeal Hearing is not open for public comment.
· The Time allotted for the hearing is from 6 PM to 10 PM.
· The appeal is a quasi-judicial proceeding that must be conducted with fairness and
procedural due process.
· The hearing is a closed record appeal. It is based on the record made at the Planning
Commission hearing. A record of the Planning Commission hearing has been
furnished to the council. There will be no witnesses or new evidence.
· Each party will have equal time to present its case to the City Council.
· Each party will be allowed equal time for rebuttal.
· The Council has the right to ask questions at any time, and time taken for that
· purpose will count against the time allotted to that party.
· The City is a party to the appeal. The role of the City's Planning staff is to represent
and defend the decision of the planning commission. In that role the staff has the
same rights to speak and file briefs as other parties.
· At the conclusion of the arguments, the City Council may begin deliberations, or may
schedule another time for deliberations
· Unruly behavior, such as booing or hissing or harassing remarks, is prohibited.
!p_ ORTAN IiL S
W A S H I N G T O N, U, S, A.
MEMO
Date: September 16, 2005
LEGAL
DEPARTMENT To: City Com2cil
William E. Bloor Michael Quirm, City Manager
City Attorney Becky Upton, City Clerk
[4531]
From: William E. Bloor, City Attorney
Devrris Dickson
Sr. Assistant City
Attorney Subject: Farmers' Market Appeal - Procedure
[4532J
Summary: This offers suggested information for the public and for the Council
Candace Kathol regarding the procedure to be followed in the Farmers' Market CUP appeals.
Legal Assistant
[4536]
Information For the Public:
Diana Lusby ('Provide copies to appellants and to those who attend the hearing, )
Legal Administrative
Assistant The Farmers' Market appeal hearing will be conducted on October 7, 2005. Time
[4530] allotted: 6 PM to 10 PM that evening.
Jcanie DeFrang
Legal Admimsmtive The appeal is a quasi-judicial proceeding that must be conducted with fairness and
Assistant procedural due process.
[45301
Randi Felton The hearing on October 7 is a closed record appeal. It is based on the record made at
,egal Records Specialist the Plann2ng Commission hearing. A record of the Planning Commission hearing has
[4576] been furnished to the council. There will be no witnesses or new evidence.
Each party may, but is not required to, file a brief in support o£its own position on or
before September 16, 2005.
Each party may file a brief in response to a brief of another party on or before
September 23, 2005.
Each party may file a reply brief on or before September 30, 2005.
Each party will have 30 minutes to present its case to the City Council.
Each party will be allowed 10 minutes for rebuttal.
The Council has the right to ask questions at any time, and time taken for that purpose
w/Il count against the t/me allotted to that party.
Memo to City Council, Michael Quh,- Becky Upton Page 2
Re Farmers' Marker Appeal
September 13, 2005
The City is a party to the appeal. The role of the City's Planning staffis to represent
and defend the decision of the planning commission. In that role the staffhas the
same rights to speak and file briefs as other parties.
At the conclusion of the arguments, the City Council may begin deliberations, or
may schedule another time for deliberations.
For Council:
The City Council, and not the appellants, has ultimate control over the procedure of
the hearing. The only caution is that the hearing procedure must satisfy basic
standards of fa/mess and due process. The heating must be procedurally fair, and it
must be conducted by impartial decision makers.
A general outline of the hearing procedure follows:
Mayor calls to order; opens the hearing.
State the purpose of the hearing, including a brief description of the CLIP
application and the action that the Council may take on the application.
State the ground rules for the hearing and the manner m which it will proceed;
identify time limits on speaking.
City Plarming staff represent the planning commission and defend the decision of
the commission. They are entitled to the same opportunity to speak as the
appellants. Ordinarily, they would be given the final opportunity to speak, but that
is controlled by the council.
Ask ali speakers to speak into the microphone and give their names and addresses.
All comments should be addressed to the city council, should be relevant to the
application, and should not be of a personal nature.
Avoid repetitive comments.
Unruly behavior, such as booing or hissing or harassing remarks, is prohibited.
Ask if everybody understands these roles.
Address appearance of fairness issues:
The concern is that tiffs hearing be fair/n form and substance as well as
appearance. Therefore, ask a series of questions:
Does any member of this Council stand to gain or lose any financial benefit as a
Memo to City Council, Michael Qum,~ Becky Upton Page 3
Re Farmers' Marker Appeal
September 13, 2005
result of the outcome of this hearing? Can you hear and consider this in a fair and
objective manner?
Has any member of this Council engaged in communication outside this hearing
with opponents or proponents on the issue to be heard? If so, that member must
place on the record the substance of any such communication so that other
interested parties may have the right at this hearing to rebut the substance of the
cornmunication.
Does any member of this Council know whether or not their employer has a
financial interest in the area for which this appeal is based, or has an interest in the
outcome of this proceeding?
Does any member of this Council live or own property within 300 feet o£the area
for which this appeal is based?
Does any member of this Council have any special knowledge about the substance
or the merits of this proceeding which would or could cause the Council person to
prejudge the outcome of this proceeding?
Is there a member of this Council who believes that he or she cannot sit and hear
this matter fairly and impartially, both as to the respective positions of the
proponents and the opponents of the requested appeal?
Is there any member of the audience who because of the "Appearance of Fairness
Doctrine" has grounds to disqualify any member of this Council from hearing this
matter? If so, please state the name of the Council person and the reason or reasons
why you believe that Council person should be disqualified because of the
"Appearance of Fairness Doctrine."
Any member disqualified based on appearance of fairness grounds must leave the
hearing room and must not participate further concerning the application.
After the Council persons have been qualified the Mayor should read the following:
During the pendency of any quasi-judicial proceeding, no member of a decision-
malting body may engage in ex parte communications with opponents or
proponents with respect to the proposal which is the subject of the proceeding.
This prohibition does not preclude a member of a decision-making body from
seeldng in a public hearing specific information or data from such parties relative
to the decision if both the request and the results are a part of the record.
At conclusion of arguments:
Close the hearing and state what steps are to occur next regarding the application.
Memo to City Council, Michael Qum,, Beckq¢ Upton Page 4
Re Farmers' Marker Appeal
September 13, 2005
Deliberations on a quasi-judicial matter can occur following fne hearing or at some
other time. Council may find it best to postpone deliberations until members have
had time to review the exhibits and perhaps listen again to some or all of the
recorded testimony. Be careful not to delay the deliberations and eventual decision
beyond the statutory time limit, October 24.
Generally it is recommended that the deliberations occur in open session.
However, the Open Public Meetings Act exempts from its coverage that part ora
meeting which relates to quasi-judicial matters between named part/es.
If the deliberations are held in an open meeting, comments from the audience
should not be permitted.
Deliberations by the hearing body are not considered part of the record for
purposes of judicial revie*v of the decision.
The vote on the appeals must occur in open session. After the vote is taken, the
city council should direct the staff or legal counsel to prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law in support of the decision. After preparation of the findings and
conclusions, the hearing body must vote to approve them or to send them back for
modification.
The decision must be based on evidence hacluded in the record and be consistent
with the legal standards that apply to the appeal.
If you would tike to discuss any of these issues, please feel free to contact me.
William E. Bloor
City Attorney
G:~LEGAL~vlEM OS.2005\Council. FarmersMarketAppealRulea.090S05.wpd
Port Angeles City Council
Mayor Richard Hedfick
P.O. Box 1150
Port Angeles, Wa 98362 September 15, 2005
Re: Appeal of CUP 03-06 - Port Angeles Farmers Market (PAFM)
Julie A Gard'mer, President
McLean's Shoes, Inc.
109 E. First, Port Angeles, Wa
I appeal CUP 03-06 on the basis that former Planning Director Brad Collins, in his role as
the SEPA responsible official, erred in both content and procedure when he adopted the
DNS#951 (CUP 01-02) as DNS#979 (CUP 02-02) and later DNS# 1029 (CUP 03-06).
Furthermore, Collins was acting upon the direction of the City Manager Mike Quinn who
effectively derailed the SEPA process by directing Collins to apply DNS#951 to an
unrelated site and causing the city engineers to revise their project review comments to
prevent the requirement of a traffic study for the closure of Laurel street and it's
associated impacts.
During 2002 significant violations of the State Enviromental Policy Act (SEPA)
Procedures and Rules and the Washington Administrative Code occurred at the direction
of the City Manager. The record will show that the errors were intentional, were
detrimental to the public welfare and may have resulted in financial damages to
established merchants throughout the Central Business District. In addition, the decisions
made by the City Manager were both legislative and policy in nature which is the
exclusive responsibility of an elected governing body, in this case the Port Angeles City
Council. These actions along with failure of the City Council to take action for nearly
four years to correct the errors raises the issue of constitutionality and lack of due
process.
Specifically:
1. Content: The subject of the SEPA review, meaning the location of a
Wednesday and later a Saturday market on Laurel street had not been properly
defmed as per WAC 197-11--060(3)(a) in the adoption of DNS#979 and
DNS#1029.
2. Incomplete or Unavailable Information: The City failed to conduct a traffic
analysis or an analysis of alternatives to the Laurel Street site. Furthermore,
the City Department of Community Development (DCD) failed to base their
analysis on the "worst case scenarios" given the lack of traffic information
available during the review process per WAC 197-11-080 (1), (3)Co).
3. Threshold determination process - Additional considerations: At no time
during the CUP review process for relocation of the PAFM downtown was any
Appeal of CUP 03-06- J.A. Gardiner 1
kind of environmental review ever conducted. Though discussion of the need
for traffic and economic impact analysis had occurred on numerous occasions
by City staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council, no studies were
conducted nor was the State Environmental Protection Act Policy, Rules and
Procedures ever applied. WAC 173-802-070
4. Phased Development: If the expansion of the market to Laurel street had
been viewed as a phased development, the SEPA review was not proper since
the process broke the review system into fragments and avoided discussion of
cumulative impacts. It segmented the proposal and avoided present
consideration of the proposal(s) and their impacts that are required to be
evaluated in a single environmental document under WAC 197-11-060 (3) (b)
or 197-11-305(1).
5. Use of Existing Documents: Use of existing documents specifically
DNS#951 was not proper because the elements under review had changed as
prohibited per RCW43.21 C.034.
6. Permit Expiration: Regardless of the violation of SEPA Policy, Rules and
Procedures and the WAC, CUP-03-06 Expired on May 15, 2005 for failure to
apply for an extension prior to thc expiration date.
7. Constitutional Rights And Due Process: By having relied on an unrelated
SEPA Checklist and the City Manager's legislative and policy decisions
regarding CUP 02-02, there has been no means within the CUP review process
for supplemental environmental review. Providing exclusive use of a public
right-of-way to a private organization constitutes a girl of public property by
the City Council through the unchecked actions of their staff.
CONTENT
DNS#979 (Exhibit B) was adopted from DNS#951 (Exhibit A) on June 8,2002.
DNS#951 specifically applied 223 East Fourth Street being the Clallam County
Courthouse parking lot. This location involved no street closures and existed in a Public
Building and Parks zoning classification. The adoption of DNS#951 as DNS#979
applied the same analysis to a public fight-of-way in the Central Business District (CBD)
that had not been identified in the original SEPA Checklist nor had been the subject of
the required SEPA analysis.
WAC 197-11-060 Content of environmental review.
(3) Proposals.
(a) Agencies shall make cemain that the proposal that is the subject of environmental review
is properly defined.
(i) Proposals include public projects or proposals by agencies, proposals by
applicants, if any, and proposed actions and regulatory decisions of
Appeal of CUP 03-06- d.A. Gardiner 2
(b) Proposals or parts of proposals that are related to each other closely enough to
be, in effect, a single course of action shall be evaluated in the same environmental
document. (Phased review is allowed under subsection (5).
In a memo dated 4-15-02 (Exhibit C)Assistant Planner Sue Roberds issued a memo to
Public Works, Building Division of the DCD and the Fire Department in which she states
"a review of traffic impacts and mitigation measures for tourist traffic including ferry use
will be paramount in the [SEPAJ review ". On 4-16-02, Roberds issued a memo (Exhibit
D) to the state Dept.of Transportation stating the need for a traffic study from the
applicant and offering a "heads up" to WSDOT staff'Jerry Moore. On April 16, Associate
Planner Scott Johns sends a letter (Exhibit E) to Farmers Market representative Klm
Johns informing her the that the Public Works Department does not support the proposal
and has requested a traffic study. He states emphatically that the SEPA checklist for the
Courthouse site cannot be used for the current proposal. Planning Director Brad Collins
in a memo also dated 4-16-2 states that the DCD staff cannot accept DNS#951 if Public
Works requires a traffic study (Exhibit F).
Collins erred in this statement. DNS#951 could never be applied
to the closure of Laurel street because the subject under
environmental review was 223 East Fourth street. It did not -~
include any consideration of the new location in the CBD
involving the closure of Laurel street for the FlTednesday market.
The Laurel street location had never been defined in the original
checklist per WAC 197-11-060 (3)(a).
City Manager Mike Quinn intentionally and with awareness prevented the SEPA Rules
and Procedures from being applied to CLIP 02-02. In a memo from Mr. Quirm dated 4-
24-02 (Extfibit G), he stated Public Works objections to the current proposal based on
traffic and parking impacts, the cost of conducting a study and the City's responsibility in
conducting such a study. He states that financial concerns do not preclude the obligation
to study impacts and goes on to present an analysis of his own based on no empirical
data and in which he acknowledges that the proposal reflects a permanent location
where traffic impact would be a necessary piece o fin formation.
On the assumption that with a year to year CUP review the city could correct problems as
they occur, he then closed with a managerial decision not to require a traffic impact study
for the closure of Laurel street. As a result, both the Public Works department (Exhibit
H) and the Fire Department (Exhibit I) revised their conditions of approval so as not to
conflict with the content of the SEPA Checklist for DNS#951.
Appeal of CUP 03-06- J..A. Gardiner 3
INCOMPLETE OR UNAVAILABLE INFORMATION
The City galled to conduct a traffic analysis or an analysis of alternatives to the Laurel
street site. Furthermore, the City DCD failed to base their analysis on the "worst case
scenarios" given the lack of traffic information available during the review process.
WAC 197-11-080 (1) Incomplete or unavailable information.
(1) If information on significant a~,'erse kmpac~s essential to a reasoned choice among alternatives
is not known, and the costs of obtaining it are not exorbitant, agencies shall obtain and mciude the
information in their environmental documents.
WAC 197-11-080 O)(h) Incomplete or unavailable information.
(3) Agencies may proceed in the absence of vital information as follows:
(b) If information relevant to adverse impacts is important to the decision and the means
to obtain it are speculative or not known;
Then the agency shall weigh the need for the action with the severity of possible adverse impacts
which would occur if the agency were to decide to proceed in the face of encertainty. If the agency
proceeds, it shall generally indicate in the appropriate environmental documents its worst case
analysis and the likelihood of occurrence, to the extent this information can reasonably be
developed.
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
On March 24, 2003 The Port Angeles Farmers Market applied for an extension of CUP
02-02 (Exhibit J) extending their hours and allowing for 5 years of operations between
June and September. In addition they requested that the Saturday market at the
Courthouse, the subject of the original CUP 01-02 and the appropriate SEPA Checklist
and DNS#951 be relocated to Laurel street as well. The Saturday request involved year-
round oceupatinn and a five year term.
WAC 173-802-070 Threshold determination process ~ Additional considernlions. When
reviewing a completed environmental checklist to make the threshold determination, the
responsible official or his designee will:
(1) Independently evaluate the responses of the applicant and note comments, concerns,
corrections, or new information in the right margin of the checklist.
Although the City Manager had stated in his April 24, 2002 memo that year to year
adjustment could be made, no new information was forthcoming from the applicant to the
City in regard to traffic impacts and proposed mitigation measures. Upon the adoption of
CUP 03-06 in 2003, the Port Angeles Farmers Market development project had become a
permanent and much expanded activity that shut down a critical public right-of-way two
days a week. This activity altered local economic patterns and circulation routes in the
CBD and impaired existing businesses in the dally conduct of their affairs by increasing
congestion and eliminating parking.
By the time the PAFM sought an extension of CUP 03-06 on 4-19-04 2004 (Exhibit K),
146 shoppers had signed a petition objecting to the extension, and yet there was no SEPA
Appeal of CUP 03-06- J.A. Gardiner 4
review process in place in regard to this activity in which these additional comments
could be given consideration in addition to noted traffic and economic impacts that were
documented in letters from local businesses.
At no time during the CUP review process for relocation Of the PAFM downtown was
any kind of environmental review tn,er conducted. Though discussion of the need for
traffic and economic impact analysis had occurred on numerous occasions by City
staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council, no studies were conducted nor
was the State Environmental Protection Act Policy, Rules and Procedures ever applied.
PHASED REVIEW
Whereas the Washington Administrative Code allows for phased SEPA review of
projects the have component elements, the relocation of the PAFM in thc downtown area
does not qualify under this statute. The segmented nature of the approval process, first
for the Courthouse location on Saturday, then a Wednesday downtown market and finally
a Wednesday and Saturday year-round location reflect a simple operation that has grown
into a sigrfificant major alteration of the economic and transportation system of the
Centre/Business District. It is not proper to evaluate each element as a separate piece
because of the integrated and similar nature of the environmental impacts the market
creates. Furthermore, as stated previously no SEPA review of the Laurel street location
has ever been conducted by the City of Port Angeles.
WAC 197-11-060 (5)(d)(i, ii,iii) Content of environmental review.
5) Phased review,
(d) Phased review ~s not appropriate when:
(i) The sequence is from a narrow project document to a broad policy document;
(ii) It would merely divide a larger system into exempted fragments or avoid
discussion of cumulative impacts; or
(iii) It would segment and avoid present consideration of proposals and their impacts
that are required to be evaluated in a single environmental document under WAC
197-11-060 (3)(b) or 197-11-305(1); however, the level of detail and type of
enviroumental review may vary with the nature and timing of proposals and their
component parts.
USE OF EXISITNG DOCUMENTS
When the PAFM applied for a Wednesday market downtown the same environmental
cheeldist and subsequent DNS#951 was used in spite of a change in timing, location, and
geography. Planning Director Brad Collins had a legal obligation under SEPA to review
the content of existing documents to determine if that information was relevant and
adequate. At Quinn's insistence he was prevented fxom doing so and instead adopted
DNS#951 as DNS#979 and ultimately DNS#1029. Without additional review and
supplemental information allowing an evaluation of the changes in the location such as
traffic circulation and it's related impacts, the use of DNS#951 is in violation of
Appeal of CUP 03-06- J.A. Gardiner 5
RCW43.21.034 since they no longer had similar elements to provide a basis for
comparison of environmental consequences.
RCW43.21 C.034
Use of existing documents.
Lead agencies are authorized to use in whole or in part existing environmental documents for
new project or non-project actions, if the documents adequately address environmental
considerations set forth in RCW 43.21C.030. The prior proposal or action and the new
proposal or action need not be identical, but must have similar elements that provide a basis for
geography. The lead agency shall independently review the content of the existing documents
and determine that the information and analysis to be used is relevant and adequate. If
necessary, the lead agency may require additional documentation to ensure that all
environmental impacts have been adequately addressed.
PERMIT EXPIRATION
In a letter dated July 30, 2004, Assistant Planner Sue Roberds informed Karen Bert,
PAFM Secretary, that CUP 03-06 had been extended to May 14, 2005 (Exhibit L).
Regardless of the violation of SEPA Policy, Rules and Procedures and the WAC, CUP-
03-06 Expired on May 15, 2005 for failure to apply for an extension prior to the
expiration date. On July 5, 2005, Jelorma McClean, PAFM Manager wrote Assistant
Planner Sue Roberds (Exhibit M) requesting an extension of CUP 03-06, nearly seven
weeks after the expiration date.
As a result of the expiration, the previous CUP and related SEPA, DNS adoptions, etc.
are also expired. City staff erred in bringing the proposal before the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission erred in approving an extension and issuing a
notice of Decision dated 8-11-05 (Exhibit N). CUP 03-06 therefore, is not a proper
subject for an appeal. At the present time the PAFM operates without a valid Conditional
Use Permit, obstructs a public tight-of-way, causes economic hardship for downtown
merchants and disrupts the transportation-circulation system of the Central Business
District.
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND DUE PROCESS
By having relied on an unrelated SEPA Checklist and the City Manager's legislative and
policy decisions regarding CUP 02-02, there has been no means within the CUP review
process for supplemental environmental review. The repeated adoption of DNS#951 that
applied to the courthouse parking lot did not contain the necessary elements for
comparison and therefore review and amendment of conditions to CLIP 03-06. This
brings us to the issue of constitutional rights and due process under the police powers of
the state with regard to the land use permitting procedures.
Dedicating exclusive use of a public right-of-way to a private organization constitutes a
gift of public property by the City Council through the unchecked actions of their staff.
Since 2002 there has been a demonstrated negative impact on the private merchants in the
Appeal of CUP 03-06 - d.A. Gardiner 6
CBD because of this transfer and is evidenced in the continuing loss of revenues during
street closures experienced by many merchants. The City of Port Angeles has failed in its
duty to administer it's police powers effectively thought the land use permitting process
for the protection and welfare of it's citizens.
With regards,
Juli~nna G~diner, P~eside-nt
Mfl~/ean's Shoes, [nc
10~q E. First Street
Port Angeles, Wa 98362
(360) 457-7140
Cc: Craig Miller
Miller & Shea
711 E Front Street, Ste. A
Port Angeles, Wa 98362
Megan Jones, President
Port Angeles Farmers Market
525 East l0th Street
Port Angeles, Wa 98362
Appeal of CUP 03-06- d.A. Gardiner 7
EXHIBITS
NO..95~~
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
DETERMINATION OF NON SIGNIFICANCE
R.C.W. Chapter 43.21C/W.A.C. 197-11-340
Description of Proposal: Conditional use permit for the operation of a local farmer's market
consisting of the sale of locally grown food, food products and arts
and crafts, on Saturdays.
.............. t- .... ~ ........~ o., ~, ~. ~, ~ a~a~'~: Th~ activ wiii occm' in the Clallam
County Courthouse parking lot at 223
East Fourth Street, Port Angeles
APPLICANT: Port Angeles Farmers Market
PROPERTY OVCNERS: Clallam County
Lend Agency: CITY OF PORT ANGELES
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it docs not have a probable significant adverse
impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EI8) is not required under R.C.W.
43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review cfa completed environmental checklist and
other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request.
] This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal
for 15 days from the date of issuance. Comments must be submitted by , at
which time the DNS may be retained, modified, or withdrawn.
[ ] There is no comment period for this DNS.
[ X] This DNS is issued per WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period.
June l. 2001
Date B~d Collins, Director
Department of Community Development
You may appeal this determination to the Port Angeles City Council through the Department of Community
Development, 321 East Fifth Street, Port Angeles, WA 911362, by submitting such written appeal to the
Department of Community Development no later than June 14. 2001, You should be prepared to make
specific factual objeetlens.
Responsible Official: Brad Collins, Direoter, Port Angeles Department of Community Development,
321 East Filch Street, Port Angeles, WA 98362, phone (360) 4 ] 7- 4750.
Filing Fee: ~$150.00
pORTANGtiLt!s
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Purpose of Checklist:
The State Environmental Poli~ Act (SEPAl, Chapter 43.21C RCW. requires all govemmen~l
agencies to ~nsider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmen~l
impact statement (ELS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable sign~nt adveme impa~s on the
qual~ of~e environment. The pu~ose of this checklist is to provide info~ation b help you and the agen~ .
identi~ impacts from your proposal (and to redu~ oravoid impac~ from the proposal, if it ~n be done) and
to help the agency decide whether an ElS is required.
Instru~ions for Appficants:
This environmental checklist as~ you to describe some basic info.etlon about your proposal.
Govemmen~l agencies use thb checklist to determine whether the environmen~l impels of your proposal
am signifi~nt, requiting preparation of an ElS. Answer ~e questions bdefly, ~th the most precise info~afim
kno~, or give the b&st description you ~n.
You must answer each question accurately and ~re~lly to the be~ of your knowledge. In most
cases you should be able to answer the questions from your own obse~ations or project plane witho~ the
ne~ to hire expeds. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to yo~pmposal,
wdte "do not kno~' or "does not apply" (N/A). Complete answem to ~e questions now may avoid
unnecessaw delays later.
Some questions ask about governmen~l regulations, su~ as zoning, shoreline, and landma~
designations. Answer these questions if you ~n. If you have problems please ask ~e C]~ Planning
Depa~ent employees to assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all pa~s of your proposal, even ~ you plan to do them ov~ a period
of time or on different par~ls of land. A~achany additional informa~on that will help describe your proposal
or its environmental effects.
BACKGROUND
~. Name of proposed project: ?OV~ ~ ~ ~
A.o~Address°rgenerall°cati°n°fsite:c~ C~, C~¢%~aa~ ~. ~ ,} ~% (or
2. Name, address, and phone number of applicant: _
3. Name, address ano priori, numoer of con~ p~mon iPother than appli~nt: N/A
4. Date checklist prepared: ~- ~-0 ~.
5. Agenw requesting checklist: CI~ OF PORT ANGE~S
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
A. What is the long term objective of this proposal?
Er~vironmental Checklist EVALUATION .FOR
P~ge 2 AC, F. NCY U~F_.,
B. How do? this project relate to long-term plans?
7. Do you h~Pe ~ny plans for future' additions, expansion, or further activity
related tp or connected with this propos,al? .If yes, explain. _ .
8. LEst any envirbnmental information you know about that ~s been prepared,
or will be prepared, directiy reia~,ed to ibis proposal:
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals
of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal?
if yes, explain,
10, List any government appmvats or permits that will be needed for your
proposal, if known,
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed
uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this
checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need
to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies maymodify this form to includ~
additional specific information oO project description.) .
12. Location of the proposal. Give sumcient in aUon for a person to
understand the precise logan of your proposed proje~, including a street address,
if any, and section, township, and range, ~known. If a proposal would oc~r over a
range of area, provide the ra~e or ~undaries of the site(s)· P~vide a legal
description, site plan, vidni~ map, and topographic map, ff reaso~bly available.
While you should submit any plans required by the agent, you are not required to
dupli~te maps or detailed plans submi~ed wi~ any pe~it appli~ons relat~ to thi~
Environmental Checklist EVALUATION FOR
Page ~ AGENC~ USE
PROJECT SPECIFIC ACTIONS:
Complete this section if your proposal involves a project specific action such as
a subdivision, new construction, a new or expanding business, a site specific rezone
(not area-wide), a conditional use pen'nit, a shoreline permit, or similar action:
ENVIRONMENT
1~ Earth
ling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other
B. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example.clay,
sand. gravel, peat. muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify
them and note any prime farmland.
t ,
D.Are them'surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? If so, describe.
E. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any
filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill:
F. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use?
If so. generally describe.
G. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious suffac~
after project codstruction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
H. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to
the each, if any:
2.
A. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal {La,
dust, automobile, odom, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the
project is completed? If any, ge,nerally describe,and give approximate qt~antities if
B. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect you'
proposal? If so, generally describe.
ho.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts
to air, if any:
Envixonmental Checklist EVALUATION FOR '
Pag~ 4 AGENCW UgE
3. Water
A. Surface:
i.) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of
the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds,
wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If apprepdate, state what strea-n
or river it flows into.
200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
iii.) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge matedal that would be
placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands andindicate the area of the site
that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material:
iv.) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or
diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
v.) Does the proposal lie within a 100~year floodplain? If so, note
location on the site plan.
vi.) Does tha preposal involve any discharges of waste material to
surface waters? If so, describe tha type of wasta and anticipated volume of discharge
B. G rou'/~n/d¢'
i.) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to
ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if
known.
ii.) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the
ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage;
industrial, containing chemicals; agricultural wastes; etc.). Descdbe the general size
of the system, the number cf such systems, the number of houses to be served (if
applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to
serve.
C. Water Runoff (including storm water):
i.) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and
method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will his
water flow? Will the water flow into other waters? If so, describe.
Envir. onmental Checklist EVALUATION FOR
Page 5 AGENCY USE
ii.) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters?
If so, generally describe.
13. Proposad measures tc reduce or exmtrcl sud@ca, ground, and runoff
water impacts, if any:
4. Plants
A. Check or circle the type ofvegetation found on the site:
deciduous tree. alder, maple, aspen, othe¢
~evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
--. pasture
__. crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulirush, skunk cabbage,
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, miJfoil, other
__.Other types of vegetation
B. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or
altered? /k)oh,(_. -
C. Proposed landscaping, use of native Plants, or other measures to
preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. /~Jf/-~
5. Animals
A. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the
site or are known to be on or near the site:
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other (.-~. ~,'~(~%
Mammals: deer, hear, elk, beaver, other cTd~
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, otller
B Threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
C. Is the site part of a migration route? !f so, explain.
D. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any,
6. Energy and Natural Resources
A. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) wilt
be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Descdbe whether it will be
used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
Environmental Checklist EVALUATION FOR
Page 6 AGENCY USE
B. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by
adjacent properties? If so, generally describe.
C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the
plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy
impacts, if any.
7. Environmental Health
A. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to
toxic chemicals, risk of fire and ~plosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur
as a result of this proposal? If so, describe.
i) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
ii) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental
health hazards, if any.
B. Noise
i) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect
your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
ii) What types and levels of noise would be creeled by or
associated with the project on a short-~rm or a long-term basis (for example: traffic,
construction, operation, other)? Indicate wi-at hours noise would come from the site.
iii) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
8. Land and Shoreline Use
What is the current use of the Site and adjacent properties?
B. Has the site been used for agriculture? tf so, describe.
C. Descdbe any structures on the site.
D. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
E. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
F. What is the current Comprehensive Plan designation of the s~e?
EnVi.ronmental Checklist EVALUATION FOR
Page ? AGENCY USE
G. What is the current Shoreline Master Program fiesignationofthe site?
H. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally
sensitive" area? If so, specify.
I. How many people would reside or work in the completed project?
J. Approximately how many people would the completed project
displace?
K. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts,
if any: /~//.~
L Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with
e~rting and projected lend uses and plans, if any: -- .
A. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any?
Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
B. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated?
Indicate whether high, middle, or Iow-income housing.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housin~ impacts, if any.
10. Aesthetics
A. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including
antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
' ' B. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any.
1 1. Light and Glare
A. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of d~
would it mainly occur?
B. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard
or interfere with views?
Environmental Checklist EVALUATION FOR -
Page 8 AGENCY USE
C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your
proposal?
D. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impact~
if any. ,A j/A
12. Recreation
A. What desk:j'nated and informal recreationai oppor~uniiies are
the immediate vicinity?
B. Would the proposed proje~ displace any existing recreational
uses? If so, describe.
C. Proposed measur~ to redu~ or ~ntrol impac~ on recreatio~
including recreation oppodunities to ~ provided by the pro~e~ or appli~nt, if
'~3, Histoficand Cultural Preservation
A. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for,
national, state, or local preservation registers knownto be on or next to.the s~e?
if so, generally describe:
B. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic,
archaeological, scientifi9, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
14. Transpodation
A. Identify public streets and highways serving the site and
describe proposed access to the existing street system, Show on site plans, if
B. Is site currently served by public transi~ If not, what is the
approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have?
.owma, ny .ou? the project eliminate? .... _
~. Will the proposal require any new roads or s~eets, or
improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so,
genera,y desodbe/,j , (i d c te ether p,,Uic or private).
Environmental Checldist EVALUATION FOR
Page 9 AGENCY USE
E. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of)water,
rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. ~¢,
F. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the
completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
r
G.. Proposed measu~ to redu~ or control tmnspo~on impa~
15. Public Se~i~s
A. Would the proje~ result in an increased need for public se~i~
(for example: fire protecSon, police prote~ion, heal~ ~, s~ools, othe0? If s~
generally describe.
B. P~posed measures to reduce or ~ntBt di~ impa~on public
se~ices, if any.
16. Utilitie[. Cirdeutiliti~tlyavailableatthes~e: olec~cJ~,natuml
gas, water, refuse se~ice, ~2~ sanita~ sewer, septic system, other.
B. Describe the utilities that are proposed for ~e proj~, the u~l~
providing the se~ice, and the general construction activities on Be site or in the
immediate vicini~ which might be needed.
17. Economics
A. If the proposal will result in expansion of an existing business,
please describe the nature of the expansion: (e.g., additional land and/or
buildings, new equipment, new employees).
B. If the proposal is the creation of a new business, please describe
(e.g, re-use of an existing building and site, construction of a new building).
C. Describe if thc proposal is the first of its type in the community,
D. How many people will the proposal provide employment for at
its completion and w~qal; types of jo~s will, be created (e.o., sales clerks, factory
EBvironmental Checklist EVALUATION FOR '
Page 10 AGENC-'YUSE ..
workers, etc.)? (Jobs created by the construction of the proposal should be
reporied separaieJy.)
E. Where will the materials, goods or services utilized by the
pro?sal come from? -~
F. Where will the goods or services produced by th, e proposal be
utilized?
G. Who will utilize the goods or services produced by the proposal?.
H. Will the proposal after the tax assessments of the area?
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (ESA) INFORMATION
A. LISTED SPECIES
If ESA listed species (salmon, trout, and chars, e.g. bull trout) are pre,ant or
ever were present in the watershed where your project will be located, your projed~
has the potential for affecting them, and you need to comply with the ESA. The
questions in this section will help determine if the ESA listings will impact your
project. (The Fish Program Manager at the Department of Fish and Wildlife regional office
can provide information for the following two questions.)
Are ESA listed salmonids currently present in the watershed in which
your project will be: Yes X No
Has there ever been an ESA listed salmonid stock present in this
watershed: Yes X No__ Uncertain
Please describe puget Sound Chinook Salmon. Strait of Juan d~
Fuca 'summer chum salmon, and bull trout are listed as threatened species
in the Elwha River, Morse Creek. and the Strait of Juan de Fuca includinq
Port Angeles Harbor.
[ If you answered "yes" to either of the above questions, you should
complete the remainder of this section. If not, skip to Non Project Action
Section Page 13]
1. Name of watershed Port Anoeles Regional Watershed fEIwha
Morse).
2. Name Of nearest waterbody ~)e~.-~oc~ ~'~-.~
3. What is the distance from this project to the nearest body of
water? (Often a buffer between the project and a stream can reduce the
chance of a negative impact to fis~h.)l
h- ,h .1^ ',L/X -q
:.nvirop. mental Checklist EVALUATION FOR
'age 11 AGENCY USE
4. What is the current land use between the project and the
potentially
affected w~ter body (parking tot, farmland, etc.)?
5. Is the project above a: ( ) natural permanent barrier (waterfall)
natural temporary barrier (beaver pond); ( ) map made barrier (¢ul~vert,
dam):()other(explain) cu~4~-e-,~ r-~J~J ~,d:~ k-~c~ ~r.,v,~j,
6. tf you checked any of the items listed in the above question #5,
are there any resident salmo~.~jd populations above the blockage? Yes _
No Don't know - /-- .. .
7. What percent of the p.r,oject will be impervious surface (including
pavement and roof area)? ~,af~, ~.~ ,
B. FISH MIGRATION: The following questions will help determine if this
project could interfere with migration of adult and juvenile fish. (Both
increases and decreases to water flow can affect fish migraf~on.)
Does the pro)ecl require the withdrawal of: ~..//;~
1.
Surface water?. __ Name of surface water body
Ground water? __ Amount '
From where? Depth of well
2. Will any water be rerouted? )"}
3. Will there be retention ponds?
If yes, will this be an infiltration pond or a surface discharge to
either a municipal storm water system or a surface water body?
If a surface water discharge, name of waterbody
4.. Will new roads be required? /,_//~ (increased road
mileage
may affect the timing of water reaching a stream and may impact fish
habitat.)
5. Are culverts proposed as part of the project? ,/L/?/'~
6. Will topography changes affect the duration/direction of runoff
flows? Ifyes, describe:
7. Will the project involve any reduction of the floodway or
floodplain by filling or other partial blockage of flows? /,.///:1 If yes,
how w/il the loss of flood storage be mitigated by your project?
Environmental Checklist EVALUATION FOR '
P~ge 12 AGENCY USE
C. WATER QUALITY.
1. Do you know of any problems with water quality in any of the
streams within this watershed? If so, descdbe
2. Will ypur project reduce or increase shade along or ever a
waterbody? ~,) r/
3. Will the project increase nutrient loading or have the potential to
increase nutrient loading or contaminapt,s (fertilizers, other waste
discharges, or runoff) to the waterbody?
4. Will turbidity be increased because of the project activities? ~.,)~
5. Will your project require long term maintenance, i.e., bridge
cleaning, highway salting, chemical sprays for vegetation management,
clearing of parking lots? ~}
D. VEGETATION
1. Will the .project involve the removal of any vegetation from
stream banks?
2. If any vegetation is removed, do you plan to replant? /'~///~
NON-PROJECT SPECIFIC ACTIONS:
Complete this section only if your proposal involves a non-project
specific action such as a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Code
· Amendment, area-wide rezone (City-wide or large sub-ares), specific
rezone, or other similar action:
When answering these questions be aware of to wha! extent the
proposal orthe types of activities likely to result from the proposal would
affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal
were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to wate~
emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous
substances;or production of noise?
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases:
2. }-tow would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish,
or marine life7
nvi. romnental Checklist EVALUATION
age 13 AGE, NC'Y USE
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish,
or marine life:
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural
resources?
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural
resources:
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect
environmentally
sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for
governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers,
threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites,
wetlands, floodplains~/~/~ime farmlands?
Proposed measures to protect such resources otto avoid or reduce
impacts:
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline
use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses
incompatible with existing plans?
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreland and lend use
impacts:
8. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on
transportation or public services and utilities? .-.
L -¢~' ~ J " '
Proposed mc~asures to reduce or respond to such demand(s):
EVALUATION FOR
Environmental Che¢ldist AGENC-~' US~-
Page !4
7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local..
state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment.
i, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge, the above information is true and
complete. It.is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaratic)n of nonsignificance that
it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack
of full disclosure on my paR.
DATE: ~'' ~ O ( PHONE: ~'"c~- ~'//~ ~ ~'~
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
DETERNIINATION OF NONSIGNI~ICANCE
AND ADOPTION OF EX1STING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS
WAC 197-11-640
Description of Current Proposal: The operation of a weekly Farmers' market where local
Farmers and artisans can sell their goods to the public. The proposed location is Laurel Street
between First Street md Front Street in downtown Port Angeles. The Farmers' Market will occupy
the public street space and will require that Laurel Street be closed during the hours of operation for
the market. The hours of operation will be 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. every Wednesday with approximately
1-2 hours of set up and tear down..
· Proponent: Port Angeles Farmers' Market
Location: Laurel Street between Front and First Streets, Port Angeles, Washington
Title/description of documents being adopted: Determination of Non-Significance #951
Agencies that prepared the documents being adopted: City o£Port Angeles
Datethe adopted documents were originally prepared: June 1, 2001
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the current proposal does not have a probable significant adverse
impact on the environment. An environmental impact statemem (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c).
This decisina was made at, er review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on l-de with the lead
agency. This information is available to the public upon request at the Port Angeles City Planning Department, 321 East
Fifth Street, Port Angeles, Washington, 98362, between the hours of $ a.m. and 5 p,m., M-F.
The previous documents have been identified and adopted us being appropriate for this proposal after independent
review; The documentS meet the City of Port Angeles' environmental review needs for the current proposal and will
accompany the proposal to the decision maker.
[XX] There is no comment period for this DNS.
NAME OF AGENCY ADOPTING TI-IE DOCUMENT: City of Port Angeles
SEPA Responsible Official: Brad Collins, Director
Department of Corrmaunity Development
P.O. Box 1150
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Phone Number: (360) 417-4750
Brad Collins, Director
Pub:
pomA
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY.DEVELOPMENT
TO: rre..e~iaFunston, Public Works aud Utilities [J[~! A~H ]7 2009 ;iL
~ou I-Iachnlen, Building Division DCD ~..
Ken Dubuc, Fire Department 1_ _j
Cil'f OF PORT ANGELES
FROM: Sue Roberds, Assistant Planner __ C0~MozlVt 0EVE[0P~EnT
SUB J: CONDITIONAL USE PERNflT - CUP 02-02
PA Farmer's Market - Downtown
Attached is an application for the PA Farmer's Market to locate a semi-year 'round use in the Central
Business Dis~xict. The proposal will involve the closure of Laurel Street between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.
on Wednesdays only fi.om June through October. A review of traffic impacts and mitigation measures
for tourist traffic including ferry use will be paramount in this review. Please review the application and
Thank you.
Attachments
pORTANGELES
W,A $ H I N G T 0 N, U.S.A.
April 16, 2002
IEMO
TO: Jerry Moore, State Depaltment of Transportation
ARTM2ENT
D1VIMUNI'I'~ FROM: Sue Roberds, Assistant Planner
~ELOPMENT
RE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 02-02
Brad Collins, Laurel Street between Front and First Street
Director
4174751
The City has received a conditional use permit to allow a farmer's market in the CBD
Sue Roberds, one day a week between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 7 p.m. The use would operate on
;sistant Planner Wednesdays and would be located on Laurel Street between Front and First'Streets.
4174750 The proposal is to provide typical farmer's market activities as well as "live~ cooking
Scott Johns demonslrafions.
:sociate Planner
4174752 The proposal will require the closure o£Laurel Street between Front and First Streets
on Wednesdays between the hours of 2:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. to accommodate the
..ou Haehnlen activity and necessary set up and break down. The activity is planned fi-om June
~ilcling Official
4174816 through October, 2002. This proposal wiI1 requirethe reroufing offenylraffic for the
proposed operation. Does this pose a concern for the Depm-tment of Transportation?
Roger Vess The City will be requiring a traffic study from the applicant but we have not received
rmit Technician the information at present. This memorandum is intended to be a heads up for you
lw Coordinator and an effort to ascertain if there are any concerns we need to deal with.
4174712
Please forward your comments to this Department no later than April 30, 2002, so that
we can address them (if there are any) in staff's report. Let me know ill can provide
any further information. I realize the applicant's information on the application is
brief.
'Su~.c~berdsj A~sistant PlanneVr
pOR)ANCELES
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
April 16, 2002
Klm Johns
Port Angeles Farmers Market
P. O. Box 863
Port Angeles, WA 98362-0149
Dear Ms. Johns
During review of the application for a Wednesday evening farmer's market in downtown
Port Angeles, several issues have come to my attention.
The Public Works Department does not support the proposal as proposed. Their main
concern is traffic and parking impacts. No mention of traffic control or available parking
was included in your application. Public Works Department has requested that a traffic
study for the project be submitted for their review prior to their approval. The need for a
traffic study means that the SEPA checklist submitted for last years farmer's market at the
County Courthouse parking lot cannot be used for the current proposal. In addition to
submitting a traffic study, a new SEPA checklist will be required.
The traffic study must indicate how traffic and parking impacts will be addressed. Those
impacts must include but not be limited to traffic flow through downtown during the
hours of operation, the possible need for traffic control or directional signage, location
and amount of parking needed by the farmer's market for both vendors and patrons, and
how the farmer's market traffic will affect the traffic using the Coho Ferry Terminal.
A Right-of-Way Use Permit must also be approved by Public Works prior to
commencement of the activity. An application form is available at City Hall in the
Engineering Section of'the Public Works Department.
Additionally, the market must address the issues of public restrooms, drinking water and
hand washing water. These issues will be of concern to the County Health Department
and I would recommend that you contact them to discuss the requirements the County
will establish,
These concerns must be addressed before completing review of the permit application
and making a recommendation to the Planning Commission. Due to the amount of time
needed to prepare the requested materials and for staff review, it is unlikely that the
conditional use permit application will be r*ady for the May 8, 2002 Planning
321 EAST FIFTH STREET · P. O. BOX 1 ~50 · PORT ANGELES. WA 9~362-0217
PHONE: 360o417-4750 · FAX: 3~0-417-4609 · ttY: 360-417-4645
Commissioner's meeting.
If you have questions, please feel flee to call me at (360) 417-4752.
Sincerely, . ~
Scott K. Johns, Associate Planner
Attachment
cc: . file CLIP 02-02
pORT,AN¢ , s
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Date: April 16, 2002
To: Public Works Engineering
From: Brad Collins, Community Development Director
Subject: Farmers' Market Downtown Review Comments
Department of Community Development staff has reviewed the Farmers' Market Conditional Use
Permit application CUP 02-02 and Engineering's comments and have the following questions.
1) The City is currently reviewing a request by the Port Angeles Downtown Association to
periodically close Laurel Street, between Front and First Streets, for occasional special events
such as Arts in Action and a Farmers' Market, one or two days a week during the summer
season (see attached letter). Currently, the City does support business closure of this street
for Arts in Action and other special events, which presumably require a right-of-way use
permit. Is a traffic study being required for any of these street closures?
2) The City has been requested to accept the DNS issued for the Farmers' Market that takes
place in the County Courthouse parking lot. DCD staff catmot accept that DNS, if Public
Works staff requires a traffic study. Will a traffic study identify any traffic impacts that are
not occurring with the other temporary street closures of Laurel Street?
3) The Port Angeles Downtown Association is requesting a ComPrehensive Plan change as
noted in #1 above. Would Engineering's concerns about Downtown business impacts be
satisfied by PADA's good offices on behalf of the Downtown businesses?
Please review these questions with the Director of Public Works & Utilities, and get back to me as
soon as possible, since we have scheduled this application for a May 8tb public hearing.
Fron~ Mike Quinn
To: DOMAI#Q.PO6.GCUT~R
Subject: Fai, mer'.~ M~et P~I ~
Per a ~uer m ~ Jo~ ~ 4116102, ~ wu stet~ t~t P~ Wo~ d~ ~t ~d t~ ~t ~ ~ to ~g a~ tra~c ~. ~ Do~ ~d~
and t~ F~'s Ma~t a~ ~ ~t ~ ~t ~ t~ c8~y ~ r~ to ~ a ~f~ tm~ ~ct ~. W~ ~ do~ not p~e such a
!ii ?APR 24 2002
!
' L L-_CI1Y OF PORT ANGELES
CO-I~M UNITy DEVELOPMENT
CUP/BBP/HOP/RTS CUP 02-02 Reviewed by: Trenia Funston PWU Date 04/08/02
DSTV /rt~ _~o~ Cl. OF PORT ANGELES
VAR by: Ga~ Kenwo Eng~eer Date COMMUNI~ DEVELOPMENT
S~/S~P 1 B~
GENE~L COMMENTS
COMMENT COMMENTS
NO.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 02-02 P.A, FARMER'S MARKET DOWNTOWN
Public Works & Utilities dues out support business closure ofstteut on a regular schedule, only cxonptions is annual public events. In the event this request goes
forward, wc will require thc following:: I
1. Traffic Study and impacts associated.
2. Downtown business'$ which will be directly irnpactccl by this closure must be comantad, individually and or thru Aria Holeschuh Downtown Business Association for
their input. .
3. ~lle~, bctwt,~n l " and Front S~,¢ct must b~ k~pt ~n for lhra ~'affic, , .
4. Barricades and cones for traffic diwrsion will be supplied, set up and taken down by P.A. Farmer's Market personal,
5. P,/[~ht of wa}, Use Permit application to be submitted and rev/ewcd by Public Works~ Fire. and Police Dep, ts. .
PROJECT NAME: CUP 02-02 Farmers Market Downtown LOCATION: Laurel Street between I's & Front Streets File: N:\CITYDEPT~LANNING~CUI~2.02
PW-1104_04 [12/93]
PUBLIC WORKS UTILITIES REVIEW COMMENTS
SENT FOR DEPARTMENT REVIEW ON:
RETURNED COMMENTS TO DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
D CUP/BBP/HOP/RTS CUP 02-02 Reviewed by: Trenia Funston PWU Date 04/29/02
[] STV
[3 VAR by: Gary Kenworthy Ci~ Engineer Date 04/29/02R~,~D
[] SUB/ SHP / BLA
[] RZN
El SHORf;.LINEdBSIP/ESA/UGA [Dy: (Jail McLain PWUflight~ Date
i ENEKAL COMMENTS
COMMENT COMMENTS
NO.
CONDITIONALUSEPERMIT CUP02-02 P.A. FARMER'S MARKET DOWNTOWN
1. Downtown business's which will be dlr~ctly impacted by this closure must bc contacted, individually and or thru Aria Holzachuh Downtown Busineas Association for
their input.
2. Alley between I" and Front Street must be kept open for thru traffic.
3. Barricades and cones for traffic diversion will be supplied 1 set up and taken down by P.A. Farracr's Market personnel.
4. Ril~ht of way Use permit application to be submitted and reviewcd b~/Public Works~ Fire, and Police Dcpts.
PROJECT NAME: CUP 02-02 Farmers Market Downtown LOCATION: Laurel Street between l~ & Front Streets File: N;\CITYDKPT\PLANNING~CIJP02.02
PW- I 104_04 [ 12/93]
To: SROBERDS ~
Date: 4/5/024:13pm L~ L[~: APR - 8
Subject: CUP 02- 02
Sue, ~ OF P~T ANGELES
C0Ml~tlNl~/
·ne Fire Depar~=~ent has rsv~ewcd CUP 02 - 02 for the PA Farmers Market and has
the following comments:
Each vendor space that will involve cooking must have a ~ - 10BO fire
e~inguisher in a readily accessible Io~on at alt times.
All ~mpmssed gas cylinders must ~e secured in o~er to keep them ~m
falling.
All tim hydrants must be kept clear. No booths or/empora~ stor~e may be
plaid with 3' of any tim hydrant or tim depadment connection.
Thanks,
Ken Dubuc
Fire Marshal
Subject:From: CUP Kenneth 02- Dubuc 02 , ~ i[-~I~L_~
Date: 4/16/02 11:16am
Sue -
The Fire DePartment has reviewed the application for CUP 02 ~ 12 for theOR~i~rn~*
COMMtJNITf OEVELOPMENT
Market.
The Fire Department has no objection to this CUP. Vendors must be aware that
they will be required to provide a fire extinguisher for EACH booth that will
be cooking or have any open flame.
Thanks,
Ken Dubuc
To: Planning Board CITY OF PORT ANGELES
Dept, of Cornmun ty Development
City ofPo~ ~geles ,,,
From: Po~ ~geles Fa~ers M~ket
P.O. Box 336, Poa ~geles
Re: Condition~ Use Permit renewal
I a~ ~itLug on bzhalf of the Po~ ~goles F~mers M~ket association to request ~ e~ensiou of
our cuffent Condition~ Use Permit for Laurel S~eet be~een F~st ~d Front S~eets, ~ ~ese
changes:
1. To ~ow the mid-week M~ket to occupy the street described above on Wednesdays,
2:00 PM until 7:00 PM, mid-June to mid-September, 2003 and up to five yea~
2. To ~low the Sa~day M~kot to occupy the s~e spa~ on Saturdays, 7:00 ~ until
4:00 ~, year 'round, for the remaining wee~ of 2003 and up to five yea~ hence,
3. To ~ow ~e M~ket to occupy ~e s~e space on Sunday, June 15, 2003, as requited
by the Chamber of Commerce for the Olympic Peninsula ~arathon, and up to six
additional days per year, as a ~omplement~ f~re ~d a~a~on for speci~
downto~ events, suoh as our recent p~icipation ~ the M~di ~as celebration and
p~ade, the upcoming M~athon, ~d o~er even~ yet to be pla~ed.
From the beginning of the new Po~ ~geles F~mers M~ket in 200l, a ~jor go~ of our
organ~ation has been to se~e the community by establis~ng a ~ving public ~rketplace
where it wH1 most enhance the excitement, a~ra~iveness, ~d economic vibr~cy of Po~
~geles. We underst~d that locating such a m~ket somewhere ~ the downtown ~ea has also
been a long range objective of City pla~g. We believe these changes to our Condition~ Use
Permit will facilitate the ne~ logic~ step towed ~is go~. Th~ you for your consideration of
our request.
Sino, erely, (~ ~
Linda Schreiner, secretary for
The Port Angeles Farmers Market association
Nash Huber, President
Steve Johnson
Christie Johnston
Kathy Robinson
Jim Robinson
Linda Schreiner
Jane Vandexhoof
Peter Vanderhoof
Susan Webster
To: Planning Board
City of Port Angeles CITY OF PORT ANGELES
Dept. of Community DeYelopment
From: Port Angeles Farmers Market
P.O. Box 336
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Re: Conditional Use Permit renewal
I am writing on behalf of the Port Angeles Farmers Market Board of Directors to request
an extension of our current Conditional Use Permit for Laurel Street between First and
Front Streets, with the following changes:
1. We would like to extend our Saturday permit for 4 years, to better eourdina~e with our
Wednesday permit renewal cycle. (we have four years remaining on our Wednesday
permit).
2. If, in the furore, Arts in Action moves to a different location, we would like to rema~
at our present location.
The goal of the Port Angeles Farmers Market remains to establish a public marketplace
that enhances our downtown, provides a new source of econom/c activity for
entrepreneurs in our area, and creates a festive, vibrant atmosphere for our local
population and for tourists visiting our region. Last year was very successful with a year
end gross income total of over $175,000. We expect 2004 to be even better, with new
vendors signing up every week
Thank you for you consideration of our request.
Sincerely, )~~,~_ ~
Karen Bert, se~rehary for ~he~P0~t Angel.es Farmers Market Board of Directors
Nash Huber, President
Maegan Jones, Vice-president
Christie Johnson
Jane and Peter Vanderhoof ':
Steve Johnson
pORT N ELES
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
July 30:2004
"~I MS. Karen Bert, Secretary
PA Farmer's Market
P.Q. Box 336
. - Por~ Angeles, WA 98362
':.~' Re: Extension of Conditional Use Permit - CI0P 03-06
PA [Saturday) Farmer's Market Activity - Laurel Street
Dear Ms. Bert:
As you know, following a public hearing conducted on July 28, 2004, the City Planning
Commission approved a one year extension of the above referenced conditional use permit
with the following conditions:
Conditions:
-- 1. Conditional Use PermifCUP03-06 is hereby extended to'May 1'4, 2005.
2. Products to be sold shall be limited to locally grown plants, food or food products and
.~. associate~, local arts and crafts.
3. Continued compliance with State and County requirements for the handling and sale of
7 food and/or food products is requi~ed including sanitation facility requirements.
"'~ 4. Any consumption of City electric power or City water, or need for garbage collection
.: shall obtain pnur approval from the City and appropriate compensation made.
' '~ 5. The Port Angeles Farmers Market shall pmyide the City with a certificate of insurance
~' naming the City as an additional insured for the'time period .allowed for use.
~ · 6. Necessary educational outreach to vendors and customers about proper use of off-street
parking areas, signage and use of public facilities shall be made.
·: 7. Street barricades'shall be provided by the Port Angeles Farmers Market.
8. The First/Front Alley shallbe kept open for delivery, service, and emergency vekicles..
: 9. A fight-of-way use permit application (with fees) shall be submitted and reviewed by
.... Public Works and Utilities, Police and Fire Depattments prior to the continued Saturday
', operation.
10. The Port Angeles Farmers Market shall submit a parking plan that is acceptable to the
- '- Downtown Association and/or the PBIA in order to continue use of the public right-of-
way.
321 EAST FIFTH STREET ® PO BOX 1150 · PORT ANGELES. WA 98362-3206
PHONE: 360-417-4750 ® FAX: 360-417-4711 · TTY: 360-417'4645
=-~n^~ - ~l ~NNING{~CI.PORT-ANGELES.WA.U$ OR PERMIT$~CI.PORT-ANGELES.,WA.US .... .I
PA Fat*her '$ Mttrk~t
.luly 29, 2004
Page 2 of 2
11. Traditional community sponsored events such as Arts n' Action and other Downtown
holiday activities shall take precedence over the farmers' market tbr use of the sheet.
The Plarming Commission advised that the reason for a one year extension rather than
a four year extension, as requested, was so that issues brought up during the review process
could be worked out over the next year.
As before, an extension request must be applied for prior to May 14, 2005, ifconlSnued
operation of the use is desired. Il'we can pi:ovide may answers to questions you mayhave, please
don't hesitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,
Sue Robe~ds
,Assistant Planner
cc: Parties of Record
Public Works Dept.
222 Rife Road .J0L
Port Angeles, WA 98363
(360) 457-6186 CITY OF PORT ANGELES
Dept. of Comraunity Developmen[
In cclean('-~olvpen.com
July 5, 2005
Sue Roberds
Assistant Planner
City of Port Angeles Planning Department
321 E. 5th
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Dear Ms Roberds:
I am writing to request a five year extension of Conditional Use Permit CLIP 03-
06 to allow the continued operation of a farmers' market activity in the Central Business
District on Saturdays, There have been no changes in the operations of the market since
the current CUP was issued. The market continues to meet the conditions of the CUP.
The current Port Angeles Farmers' Market Board is in the process of creating a long term
strategy for the location of the Port Angeles Farmers' Market. Until we can create a
permanent site for the market, we would like to continue to operate on Laurel Street.
We think a basic function ora farmers market is to serve as a community
gathering place. We also see the market as an economic engine to create new businesses
and to support current downtown businesses. The Market is committed to downtown Port
Angeles and would like to stay in the Central Business District. We have been in
discussion with the Port Angeles Downtown Association, members of the Economic
Development Council, and other organizations in an effort to find a permanent site. A
five year extension would allow us the time explore different venues and to continue to
build the Port Angeles Farmers' Market.
The planning department has been very helpful during this process. Thank you
for your consideration of our request and for you continued support.
Sincerely,
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
321 East Fifth Street
Port Angeles, WA 98362
NOTICE OF DECISION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on August 10, 2005, the Port Angeles Planning
Commission took the following action:
EXTENSION of a conditional use permit to allow the continuation ora farmers market
use in a public street in the Central Business District for a period of one additional
year.
For further information, please contact Sue Roberds, Assistant Planner, City Depm huem of
Community Development, 321 East Fifth Street, Port Angeles, Washington, (360) 4174'/50.
Sue Roberdf Date
Assistant Planner
Pub: 8/16/05
Port Angeles City Council I i SEP 2 2005
Richard Hedrick, Mayor ' ~
C'!TY OF PORT ANGELES
P.O. Box 1150 , ~
Port Angeles, Wa 98362 September 21, 2005
Re: CUP 03-06 Port Angeles Farmers Market Extension Request~
Response to PAFM Appeal by Julie A Gardiner
Introduction
The burden of responsibility lies with the Port Angeles Farmer's Market (PAFM) to
provide mitigative measures as part of their Conditional Use Permit applications to
ensure "the maximum degree of compatibility between [proposed and existing] uses..."
PANIC 17.96.050 (C) Purpose of a Conditional Use Permit. The purpose of a conditional
use permit shall be to assure that the maximum degree of compatibility between uses shall
be attained. The purpose of these regulations shall be maintained with respect to the
particular use of the particular site and in consideration of other existing and potential uses
within the general area in which such use is to be located.
The PAFM has occupied Laurel street since 2002 and has yet to provide a plan for
expansion or future development, mitigative measures, alternative sites, permanent
location proposals, financing or funding proposals as part of the continuing extension of
their CUP permit. To date, the PAFM has consistently held that there is no discernable
impact to adjacent businesses as a result of the closure of Laurel street in spite of staff
recommendations beginning in 2002 calling for extensive transportation and economic
impact studies amid repeated complaints by merchants and shoppers that their presence
on Laurel street impeded circulation, increased congestion and eliminated parking.
In response to PAFM Pres. Megan Jones letter of Appeal dated September 16, 2005, I
assert the following:
Process Defects
1. The (PAFM) claimed there were "defects" in the heating process yet has not cited
the Washington Administrative Code, Port Angeles Municipal Code, Zoning
Code, SEPA process or any other relevant source.
2. Merchants who object to the closure of Laurel street are not obligated to provide
the applicant with information or research prior to a public heating. They are
responsible for their own presentations.
All permit approvals related to CUP 03-06 expired on May 15 2005.
Response to PAFMAppeal of CUP 03-06 1
by Julie A. Gardiner
3. PAFM states that they have "invested much time and energy to develop a
permanent market location". They have occupied Laurel street since 2002 and
are no further along identifying a permanent location, funding mechanism, or
financing plan then they were when they started. Four years does not constitute
"feet to the fire".
4. Chairman Rasmussen interrupted Megan Jones, PAFM Pres.'s presentation
because she would not address the specific need for this site. Jones insisted on
talking about the cultural value of the market which is irrelevant to the CLIP
permit process and the need for mitigative measures. The heating went until 1:00
a.m. in the morning. During ali that time, the PAFM representatives were unable
to make a coherent presentation.
5. All appellants responding to CLIP 03-06 are held to the same time frame for
response regardless if the adoption of Findings and Conclusions occurred at 1:00
a.m. August 11, 2005 or when the written copy became available August 19,2005.
PAFM's inability to develop a coherent plan, presentation or appeal reflects their
own internal level of disorganization at the cost the of merchants in the CBD.
Port Angeles Downtown Association
1. The Port Angeles Downtown Association (PADA) exists as an administrative tool
for the City of Port Angeles to manage the CBD. It's function is to manage the
Parking and Business Improvement district (PBIA) that overlays the CBD. They
do not represent the political positions of downtown merchants. PADA Director
Arla Holschuh has made many statements over the past several years about
vacancy rates and level of support by merchants for projects and events, none of
which ever had credible documentation.
2. John Nance, the Director of Visiting Angels a senior homecare service, has a
conflict of interest with other participants in the appeal process because they use
his services. I pay Mr. Nance between $1200~$2000 per month for his services.
Merchant Testimony
1. McLean's and the Family Shoe store have different clientele though there may be
some overlap. Family Shoe Store has a large public parking lot next to it. The
closure of Laurel street sends potential McLean's customers past Family shoe and
away from the CBD. The two new businesses on Laurel street that support the
market have been present less than a year as compared to the three that left as a
likely result of PAFM's negative impacts.
2. There is no such person associated with Family Shoe Store named Kevin Johnson.
Response to PAFM /tppeal of CUP 03-06 2
by dulie A. Gardiner
3. It is impossible to determine w'nat impact the closure of Laurel street has on the
CBD without an extension traffic study to determine how patterns of circulation
change on the days when the street is closed to through traffic.
Summary
· All permits and approvals related to CLIP 03-06 expired on May 15 2005.
· The City of Port Angeles is not in partnership with the PAFM.
· The Port Angeles Downtown Association is not in partnership with the PAFM
· The PADA does not represent the political positions of individual merchants.
They are a management tool for the City to manage the PBIA.
· The City's Comprehensive Plan does not specifically identify the PAFM in any
manner.
· It is improper and probably illegal to mediate lack of compliance related to the
PAMC, the WAC and SEPA.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
J~L e~ia~j~ ed; 5resident
109 E. First Street
Port Angeles, Wa 98362
(360) 457-7140
cc: Craig Miller, Atty.
Miller & Shea
711 E. Front Street, Ste. A
Port Angeles, Wa 98362
Megan Jones, President
Port Angeles Farmer's Market
525 E. l0th Street
Port Angeles, Wa 98362
Response to PAFM Appeal of CUP 03-06 3
by Julie A. Gardiner