HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01/22/2014 MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
Port Angeles, Washington 98362
January 22, 2014
6:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members Present: Thomas Davis (by phone), David Miller, Tim Boyle,
Duane Morris, Scott Headrick
Members Absent/Excused: Doc Reiss, George Reimlinger
Staff Present: Sue Roberds, Scott Johns, Nathan West, Heidi Greenwood
Public Present: Bruce Emery, Joshua Bunch, Field and Gena Mead,
Andrew Chapman, George Kheriaty, Marie Souza, Bradley
Peterson, Trudy Teter, Paul Stiger
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chair Boyle opened the regular meeting at 6:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Morris moved to approve the December 9, 2013. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Headrick and passed 4 — 0 with Commissioner Miller abstaining due to
absence at the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING:
Chair Boyle read the qualifying questions for quasi judicial proceedings to the Commissioners.
All Commissioners responded that they had no Appearance of Fairness issues to report. No
objections were noted from any member of the audience.
REZONE APPLICATION—REZ 13-01 — GREEN CROW,
Campbell Avenue/Porter Street: Proposal to rezone approximately 1.56
acres from RS-9 Residential Single Family to RHD Residential High
Density.
Associate Planner Scott Johns reviewed and summarized the staff report recommending rezone
of the subject property to RMD Residential Medium Density rather than RHD Residential High
Density as proposed by the application. He explained that during analysis of the rezone
application, staff determined that a rezone to High Density could not be supported. The
Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation of the property, a land inventory, character of the
streets serving the site, and available services would support a recommendation to Medium
Density. Staff noted these issues to the applicant who agreed that Medium Density would be
more appropriate for the site. A January 22, 2014, letter from Green Crow is included regarding
Planning Commission Allinutes
Januat),22,2014
Page 2
this matter. As a result., staff is recommending a revised Finding 9 to the original staff report and
a new in support of a recommendation to RMD Residential Medium Density.
Commissioner Morris asked several questions relative to the basis for zoning as shown on the
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. He asked for clarification as to the difference between
RHD and RMD zoning densities. Mr. Johns explained that the Comprehensive Plan is the
primary guide for planning in the City with imprecise margins between land use designations
allowing for flexibility relative to specific boundaries. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
allows morphing between an intended land use designation to another depending on specific
circumstances outlined in the Comprehensive Plan document. All of the property south and east
of the subject property is designated to be MDR Medium Density Residential but has not been
developed to MDR densities by the property owner, to date. Much of the property in the area
designated for medium density development has developed as single family such that the
expected increased density for the area has not, and cannot now be achieved.
Chair Boyle opened the public hearing.
Nathan West, Director, City of Port Angeles Community & Economic Development, noted
for the audience that this will be the only public hearing for this item. There will not be a public
hearing before the City Council.
Bruce Emery, Green Crow Properties, 724 East 8t" Street noted that his employer owns
abutting properties to the east and south and it is not in the best interest of those they have sold
properties to thus far, nor future purchasers, to overdevelop the subject property. They have a
good deal more property to develop and they wish to be good neighbors. They agreed with
staff's recommendation to increase density only to medium density rather than high density
given the neighborhood sentiment, to protect the developing area, and established neighborhood.
One reason for requesting an upzone to high density was because the property immediately abuts
a high density use along Campbell Avenue and another is because a portion of the property is
designated High Density Residential. When he originally applied for the rezone, he mistakenly
reviewed the RMD Chapter of the Zoning Ordinance thinking the action would result in a
density of some 19 units. They would agree to a RMD designation if approved. He agreed that
the RED density would allow some 60 units, which would not be appropriate for the area. So he
agreed that from a density perspective, the RMD designation would result in a more reasonable
medium density for the area. The highest desired density is 22 units. Looking at 4 or 6 plex
cottage units, a max build out would be 19.
Eckard Avenue is not pedestrian or traffic friendly. Green Crow owns a good deal of property in
the area adjacent to the subject property. In developing property along Campbell Avenue to a
high density use several years ago, Green Crow an internal street was planned to access from
Campbell to, within, and through the Green Crow property that was approved for a planned
residential development. The subject property is part of that larger development. An easement
was retained along the eastern portion of the most northwest lot owned by Green Crow within
the larger site that could provide an interior access to the subject property rather than from
abutting Porter Street. A significant amount of landscaping is required between medium density
and single family land uses which should provide a good buffer to the single family
neighborhood.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 22,2014
Page 3
Mr. Emery noted that further upgrade to Campbell Avenue may be required when additional
development occurs accessing Campbell Avenue from the larger Green Crow property. A
medium density development access from that point may trigger that upgrade. But it is possible
to access the subject property such that access from Porter Street is not necessary. The RMD
zoning is a good transition zone between lower density and higher density development. Most
importantly, the land use element of the Growth Management Act requires that all development
be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. The amended proposed
rezone is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Green Crow realizes that
the Comprehensive Plan does not specifically identify the entire subject area as being appropriate
for RHD zoning and he believes that staff has correctly analyzed the potential provided for the
Comprehensive Plan for Medium Density zoning. The Plan actually indicates that more of the
area should have been medium density than is developed. Because a large amount of the Green
Crow property has developed to single family, that potential no longer exists. The proposal to
medium density would establish a medium density development in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
In closing, Green Crow is willing to address concerns and mitigate any negative issues that are
foreseen with medium density development. As landowners in the area, they are not interested
in imposing negative impacts to the neighborhood.
George Kheriaty, 1108 Eckard Avenue thanked the Planning Commission for their service
and thanked Green Crow for being socially responsible, and staff for serving the public. The
intersection of Porter and Eckard is extremely narrow being approximately 400 square feet in
area, with the road being 24 feet in developed width. The intersection of Porter Street and
Campbell Avenue is considerably larger at some 2,000 square feet in area. There is a wetland in
the midst of the Green Crow property with a wet area in the middle of where the proposed access
roadway would be. There is substantial water runoff in this area. Every home in the area has
significant compaction issues. While he appreciated that the City and developer are trying to do
what they can to address long standing water issues, water runs down the street every day. The
use of Porter Street as an access point would not be ecologically sound. Access from Campbell
Avenue would be great.
Mr. Kberiaty acknowledged that people need housing. He strongly believes that access to the
proposed site, if developed to a multi family density, should be via a better developed street [than
Porter Street] with less impact to existing ecology conditions in the area which in this case would
be Campbell Avenue. He responded to questions regarding the surface water issue for his
property in the neighborhood. He responded to Commissioner Miller that an alternate access to
the subject property would allow him to accept an upzone of the subject property.
Andrew Chapman, 1158 Eckard Avenue lives on the corner of Eckard Avenue and Porter
Street. The [half] street is a poorly developed street intersection: it is very narrow. He has water
runoff in his yard deep enough to support ducks. Multiple family development will bring
unacceptable traffic along Eckard and/or Porter Streets. The property owner already has a good
deal of property designated for Medium Density development: why is it not developed?
Bradley Petersen, 1151 Eckard Avenue has real concerns about access from the subject site to
Porter Street. Eckard Avenue is not developed to handle a lot of traffic which is accessed from
Planning(70minission Minutes
January 22,2014
Page 4
Mt. Angeles Road. An entrance to the subject property would likely be from Mt. Angeles Road
to Eckard Avenue to Porter Street. Eckard Avenue can't support a high volume of traffic: it is
constructed with no lighting, no shoulder, it's very narrow, and there a lot of children.
Paul Stagen, 1119 Eckard Avenue reiterated that residences in the area have standing water
underneath. Water concerns in the area are well known.
Joshua Bunch, 1111 Eckard Avenue reiterated that Porter Street is not pedestrian or even
vehicle friendly. Traffic from Porter Street as a result of the proposal is a big concern.
Field Lee, 1127 Eckard Avenue agreed with previous speakers and believes that access should
not be permitted from Porter but should be from Campbell Avenue to this site. There are plenty
of high density areas for development.
Chair Boyle asked if there were additional speakers and noted that this is the only public hearing
for this rezone proposal.
Commissioner Morris noted that the concerns expressed are not selective to this particular
neighborhood, but are common to many neighborhoods. He believes that many of the concerns
expressed are those that will be addressed at the time of development.
Planner Johns responded that virtually any development of the subject property will require
improvement to the east side of Porter Street which is a substandard street. That street
development will result in, at minimum, widening of the roadway abutting the developing
property. If the abutting property is developed to a medium density rather than a single family
density, that roadway improvement will result in not only widening to the full street width, but
will include full amenities - curb, gutter, and stormwater. Even single family development
would require improvement but not necessarily curb and sidewalk. He spoke briefly regarding
roadway design techniques used to calm traffic patterns. He agreed with the applicant that
multiple family development of the neighboring Green Crow property was always intended to
access Campbell Avenue, not Porter Street.
Trudy Teter, 1103 Eckard Avenue agreed with previous speakers. She noted that other
neighborhoods have at least one side of the roadway has a sidewalk. She said that it is important
to plan for pedestrian safety when designing neighborhoods. Her neighborhood doesn't have
sidewalks.
In response to Commissioner Miller, staff stated that the City does not enter into conditioned or
contract rezones.
There being no further comment, Chair Boyle closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Morris thanked the audience for taking the time to participate in the public
hearing process. He noted that the concerns expressed by the neighborhood will remain issues of
concern by Commission members and by staff in making future decisions regarding any
subsequent development processes.
Planning Commission Minulev
Januag 22,2014
Page,5
Commissioner Morris moved to recommend approval of a rezone to RMD Residential
Medium Density citing the following 13 findings and 5 conclusions:
Findings
I An application for rezone of a 1.56 acre parcel from Residential Single Family RS-9 to
Residential High Density (RHD) was received by the City of Port Angeles Department of
Community & Economic Development on December 9, 2013, from Green Crow
Properties. Green Crow Properties is the owner of the subject property. The application
was deemed to be complete on December 11, 2013.
2. The subject general vicinity is largely developed with low density residential uses south
of Park Avenue and west of Porter Street. Properties located east of Porter Street and
north of Campbell Avenue are partially built out with a mix of multi-family and single
family uses.
3. The site is located in the Mount Angeles Neighborhood which is in the City's East
Planning Area on the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map.
4. The entire City Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map were reviewed with respect to
the proposal. The following elements, goals, and policies were found to be most relevant
to the proposal: Growth Management Element Goal A, Policy 1; Land Use Element Map
Goal A, policy 2; Goal B, Policies 1,3, & 4; Goal C, Policies 1, 2, 3, 4. These references
are attached as Attachment B to the January 22, 2014 staff report.
5. The City's Comprehensive Plan provides an expected framework for land use decisions
within the City. The zoning of any property must be consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan Land Use Map that illustrates where certain classifications of uses may occur within
the City.
6. Changes to the City's Zoning Map must be in the public interest and must be consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map in accordance with Section 17.03.020
of the Port Angeles Municipal Code.
7. The subject property is identified on the City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land
Use Map as being mostly in an imprecise margin area between the High Density
Residential (HDR) designation (to the north), Medium Density Residential (MDR) (to the
south and east), and Low Density Residential (LDR) (to the west). A small area of the
site (18%) is located within the HDR designation.
8. Much of the land designated for medium density residential (MDR) use in the vicinity
has been developed at single family residential low density standards, leaving little MDR
land available for medium density development.
9. Approximately 17.3 acres of land in the Mount Angeles neighborhood is zoned as
Residential High Density. Of that land zoned RHD, 8.5 acres or 49% remains
undeveloped. Approximately 13 acres of land is zoned as RMD in the Mount Angeles
neighborhood. Of that land zoned RMD, 3.5 acres or 29% remains undeveloped. Based
on this analysis, there is a greater need for RMD zoned land in the Mount Angeles
neighborhood than the need for RHD zoned land.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 22,2014
Page 6
10. The subject site is located between existing RHD zoned areas and RS-9 zoned areas. The
Comprehensive Plan(Land Use Element, Goal C, Policy 4) indicates that RMD zoning is
appropriate to use as a transition between different land uses.
11. The SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of Non-Significance on January
21, 2014. This satisfies the City's State Environmental Policy Act review. Future
development actions will require individual review dependent on the action.
12. Notice of the rezone application was placed in the Peninsula Daily News on December
15, 2013. Surrounding property owners were notified by mail on December 13, 2013.
The site was posted on December 11, 2013. Written comment was taken on the proposal
until December 30, 2013. Several comment letters in opposition to the proposal were
received from neighbors as a result of the legal notification and site posting.
13. Several comment letters were received from surrounding property owners indicating that
they do not believe high density development is appropriate for the area. Loss of
neighborhood character and adverse traffic impacts were the most commonly cited
reasons for the objections.
Conclusions:
A. Other properties exist within the general neighborhood that are currently zoned RHD.
There is not a lack of available property zoned for high density residential development
in the general area. As such, the proposal appears to serve a single private interest. No
supporting documentation was submitted to indicate a need for additional high density
residential zoning in the City or in this particular neighborhood.
B. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map indicates that most of the site is located between
three land use designations in an imprecise margin. Only the northeast portion of the
subject property, comprising 18% of the site, is designated High Density Residential on
the Comprehensive Plan Land Use map. The majority of nearby lands are designated as
MDR Medium Density Residential. Information was not presented indicating a need to
extend the High Density Residential (HDR) designation to encompass the subject
property.
C. Development trends in the area and in the City do not indicate a recognized need for
higher density housing. Such a need would have to be documented in order to approve
the proposed rezone. Currently, the rezone is inconsistent with the growth and
population trends of the City of Port Angeles.
D. Rezoning the property to Residential Medium Density meets the land use needs of the
city and neighborhood, reduces expected neighborhood impacts, and continues the
established urban design of the area.
E. Rezoning of the site to RMD Residential Medium Density rather than RHD Residential
High Density would not reduce the allowed density below the proposed number of units
that are indicated in the application materials as being anticipated for development on the
site provided in the rezone proposal.
Planning Commission Minutes
Jantimy 22,2014
Page 7
Commissioner Scott Headrick seconded the motion. Commissioners Headrick, Morris, and
Boyle voted in favor of the motion. Commissioners Miller and Davis opposed the motion.
Motion passed 3 - 2.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
None
STAFF REPORTS
Commissioner Morris asked if staff can use Google Earth maps for presentations.
REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS
None
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
Z `Vr 4
Sue Robc`/ds, Secretary Tim Boyle,le, r
PREPARED BY: S. Roberds