Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-05-11 PC Agenda PacketAGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION 321 East Fifth Street May 11, 2016 6:00 p.m. I.CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance led by Chair II.ROLL CALL III.APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular meeting of April 27, 2016 IV.PUBLIC HEARINGS None V.WORK SESSION 1. Comprehensive Plan Process and Vision Statement Development 2. Proposed Amendments to City Wetlands Protection Ordinance VI.COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC VII.STAFF REPORTS VIII.REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS IX.ADJOURNMENT C OMMUNITY & E CONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting 321 East Fifth Street April 27, 2016 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Duane Morris, Brian Hunter, Chad Aubin, Matt Bailey, Andrew Schwab, Elwyn Gee Members Absent: John Matthews Staff Present: Nathan West, Scott Johns, Ben Braudrick, Heidi Greenwood Public Present: Anne Murray PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Hunter opened the regular meeting at 6:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Gee moved to approve the Minutes of March 9, 2016 and March 23, 2016. Commissioner Morris Seconded the Motion, and all were in approval. ANNUAL ETHICS TRAINING Assistant City Attorney Heidi Greenwood provided a mandatory training on the Washington State Open Public Meeting Act. There was a short discussion on Legislative Action vs. Quasi- Judicial matters. PUBLIC HEARING: None OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: Commission Work Session: 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review Director of Community and Economic Development Department Nathan West updated the Commission on the continuing public process for the Comprehensive Plan. Associate Planner Scott Johns gave a presentation on the current state of the comprehensive plan amendment and the elements included in the Plan. Director West listed the future dates for public participation events related to the Comprehensive Plan visioning process. Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2016 Page 2 Commissioner Schwab mentioned that the Clallam County House Authority has now taken the title “Peninsula Housing Authority”. Commissioner Bailey asked whether there was enough time to bring in all the vision and goals that have just come to light with the public process. Director West replied that there was time, and the next time for an amendment is January 2017. Although the public comment period ends May 13, the Comprehensive Plan is a living document that continues to change and those changes will be reflected in this and later amendments Commissioner Gee asked about the term permeable appearing in the changes. Would those changes negatively affect the ADA standards we now have? Director West responded that the level of engineering with permeable surfaces would not affect ADA in a negative way. Those changes have all taken ADA into account in respect to their surface type and gaps between the surfaces. Commissioner Morris asked about growths rates and how those will change over a period of 20 years. Director West responded that the City has seen a typical growth rate of .3-1.5% over the last 20 years, and those will be the rates to which the Plan is consistent with. Planner Johns added that we have 46% vacancy in the RS-11 zone, 23% in the RMD zone, 11% in RHD, 14% in RS-9, and 4% in the RS-7 zone. Much of this property is not raw land and is ready for new development. Upwards of 500 parcels are platted and have initial infrastructure to place houses down right now. Chair Hunter asked about the intent to implement the public outreach that is currently being done. Planner Johns responded that both Staff and the Consultants are working to summarize public comment and synthesizing it into the Plan. Chair Hunter commented that it would then be important for the Commission to propose any insight and comment on the Plan. Planner Johns agreed. Chair Hunter went over the changes that he had sent via email to Staff. Planner Johns agreed that sea-level rise was something that staff took very seriously. Director West made it clear that although City Council dictates the City’s priority for budget allocation, the Comprehensive Plan is the document that should act as the foundation to the those budgetary decisions. He also responded that it is an important Council and City goal to achieve a compromise on the Harbor Cleanup process. Director West went over the Comprehensive Plan visioning process calendar and the opportunities for the Commission to get actively engaged in the process. Commissioner Schwab asked if the population growth was based in birthrate or migration. Director West responded that much of Port Angeles’ sustained population was due to in- migration. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC Anne Murray, 306 Lopez Ave Ms. Murray stated that she was concerned that the public does not know that the process for the Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 3 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2016 Page 3 Comprehensive Plan Public Visioning is currently underway. She was in favor of a direct mailing for those without children in the school system. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS None. STAFF REPORTS: Cherry Hill Neighborhood Follow Up: Director West reported on the neighborhood meeting that took place on South Laurel Street and that Staff, including the Interim Chief of Police and Public Works and Utilities Director were in attendance. There does seem to be any accident reports or traffic data for the area. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:32 p.m. Ben Braudrick, Secretary Bryan Hunter, Chair PREPARED BY: Ben Braudrick Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 4 Port Angeles Comp Plan Update – Vision Statement City Council Draft Vision Statement – 2034 A vibrant and innovative city, Port Angeles continues to grow its balanced and sustainable economy in harmony with its pristine environment creating a healthy and diverse community. Comprehensive Plan Draft Vision Statement - 2036 Port Angeles is vibrant and prospering, nurturing a balance of innovation and tradition to create an environmentally, economically, and fiscally sustainable community, accepting and cherishing its social diversity, small-town character, and natural setting. In achieving this vision, Port Angeles recognizes the important roles each of the following plays: Environment Port Angeles’ natural setting – with the Strait to the north and the Olympics to the south – is unique and special, with creeks, wetlands, steep slopes and a weather pattern that can be demanding. The town balances the community’s need for economic stability, its potential for growth and the preservation of the areas’ natural systems. Economic development Keeping the community employed, prosperous, educated, and well served are key economic development objectives. The City of Port Angeles facilitates sustained economic growth, directing investment to revitalize activity downtown, support local employment, and keep public services affordable and of high quality. Neighborhoods Slightly more than 25,000 people call Port Angeles home in 2036, residing in neighborhoods that are safe, attractive and rich in character. Airport Fairchild International Airport is an important aviation resource for local residents and businesses, operating as an important economic development and community safety priority and with regular commercial service to SeaTac. Downtown Port Angeles’ central business district is vital and prominent. The central commercial district is one of Port Angeles’ major assets, intimately connected to the waterfront and featuring a variety of retail, civic, residential and professional office uses. Small commercial centers Small-scale commercial centers are located in areas convenient for nearby residents and workers, offering a modest array of goods and services within an easy, enjoyable walk from nearby homes and employment centers. Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 5 Waterfront The central waterfront is an active and successful civic and social space, equally welcoming to residents and visitors. Transportation Port Angeles’ transportation network that moves people and goods to, through and within the community, harmoniously accommodating cars, bikes, trucks, public transportation, planes, boats, ferries, and travel by foot. Community services The community’s systems of housing, transportation, economic development and parks and recreation coordinate to serve all of Port Angeles’ residents, ensuring public safety, economic opportunity, public health and overall community wellness. Trails Port Angeles’ trail system builds on the Olympic Discovery Trail and miles of local trails, contributing to the local quality of life by inviting community residents and visitors of all ages to wander and explore. Parks and recreation Leisure is an important contributor to quality of life, and Port Angeles is committed to provide a robust parks and recreation system in response. Open spaces, both constructed and natural, function to enliven the human spirit. Whether it’s a small pocket park near downtown, a waterfront esplanade, a sculpture garden on the hill, or a vast sports complex, the system serves multiple community needs. Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 6 DRAFT Storefront Studio Participant Comments April 12th-14th, 2016, former Maurice’s Building 1 | P a g e The following are a selection of transcribed comments provided by participants at the “Storefront Studio” held from April 12th to the 14th in the former Maurice’s building at Laurel and First Streets. The studio was open to the public from 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, and was well-attended with approximately 150 members of the public sharing ideas and thoughts. One-dozen poster-sized images were on display, prompting comments on topics ranging from downtown to community services. Guests were given ‘sticky notes’ and invited to post their comments on each subject. Others wrote their thoughts, comments and ideas on an easel-sized pad, or on an aerial map of the city. Transcribed comments from the studio appear below, together with summary notes and draft plan considerations (in grey boxes). Where needed, contextual information or responses to comments is provided [blue, in brackets]. Transportation  “Reroute large trucks out of downtown.”  “More downtown sidewalks.”  “Better weekend transit and transportation options including para-transit.”  “Collaborate with the City of Victoria and the Coho-Ferry for annual flat-rate passes.” [The Coho Ferry operates daily ferry service from Port-Angeles to Victoria, BC]  “Pedi-bike service in downtown in the summertime.”  "Need dependable commercial airline.” [PA’s Fairchild Airport ceased offering commercial flight services in late 2014]  “Use the [downtown] alleys to encourage walking and bicycling by making them more attractive.” Economic Development “Encourage startups by young people.” “Encourage jobs/businesses that attract young families.” Transportation Summary Comments received express a desire for a complete review and updated transportation vision. Concerns center on mitigating impacts of semi (or logging) trucks through downtown. However, improvements were also noted for non-motorized transportation networks such as bicycling and walking. Comments also included expanded transit services as well resumed scheduled airline services. Policy Considerations  Eliminate or reduce impacts of heavy truck/freight traffic through downtown  Promote non-motorized transportation in PA, reducing automobile reliance  Expand service options from private transportation providers (ferry, airlines) Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 7 DRAFT DRAFT 2 | P a g e “Keep our waterfront a working waterfront.” “Improve our image as a tourist destination.” “Coordinate with non-profits and other entities.” “Better support for downtown businesses.” “Redevelop Rayonier property.” [Former pulp mill site encompassing approximately a mile of Port Angele’s waterfront] Trails  “Include urban trail with history on buildings.”  “Signage to let people know where trails are.”  “More trails.”  “Finish and enhance Olympic trail.” [The Olympic Discovery Trail is a 130-mile trail across the Olympic Peninsula. A portion of the trail traverses through Port Angeles]  “Work with homeless to be caretakers of the trails.” Airport Economic Development Summary Notes ranged from aspirational to the practical and specific, expressing a desire to develop new opportunities for Port Angeles. Suggestions included support for entrepreneurial activities, enhancing tourism, site-specific development concepts, and adding new community activities and conventions to draw visitors. Policy Considerations  Advance the work of local community economic development organizations through funding and convening activities  Foster existing businesses and improve downtown amenities  Attract and maintain economic activities complimentary to PA’s marine location and heritage Trails Summary Port Angeles enjoys an active trail system, featuring local and regional connectivity. Comments urged maintaining current trails and broadening the network, including downtown linkages and finishing the Olympic Discovery Trail. Policy Considerations  Promote growth of the trail network throughout the city  Maintain or enhance the safety of trail users  Improve the trail with signage and features that express Port Angeles’ unique identity Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 8 DRAFT DRAFT 3 | P a g e  [Need to have] “Float planes and increased incentives for commercial airlines.”  [Need to have] “A dedicated sea-plane landing area.”  “Explore moving airport … away from densely populated areas and more central to population centers.”  “Involve local residents in any airport modifications.”  “Better signage leading to airport.” Downtown  “Utilize downtown and waterfront for more community activities.”  “Downtown activities in evening and weekends.”  “Promote and increase downtown living units.”  “Encourage downtown living.”  “Find a way to use gateway more often, and enhance its look.”  “More murals downtown.”  “More startup businesses established.”  “Invest in the Lincoln Theater.” [The Lincoln Theater is a downtown PA movie theater which opened in 1916, and closed in 2014.]  “Better centralized parking.”  “Add ‘parklets’ to downtown.”  “A theme, such as an outdoor adventure town.”  “Need more conventions to bring people downtown.”  “Convert some alleyways into attractive pedestrian zones that provide access to local businesses.”  “Convert alleyways into attractive pedestrian zones [for] access to local businesses.”  “Adopt time and place ordinances to regulate panhandling and loitering.” Summary Comments received during the studio ranged from retaining scheduled airport flights to developing a sea/float plane pier facility. Some recognized and commented on both the convenience and economic advantage of an active airport. Policy Considerations  Investigate incentives for attracting and maintaining scheduled commercial airline services  Investigate float plane pier facility  Assess alternatives to airport’s physical layout and site planning Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 9 DRAFT DRAFT 4 | P a g e Small Commercial Nodes  “Create ‘branded’ neighborhoods. Signage, street banners to create sense of place.”  “I’m losing my neighborhood grocery store - be friendly to new businesses, [support] local, neighborhood food.”  “Get Haggen Grocery Store back!” [One of P.A.’s long-time grocery stores, Haggen Food and Drug, recently closed making access to food more difficult for those near the E. Lauridsen Boulevard neighborhood]  “Make it easier to start new businesses in all parts of town.”  “Bring art(s) center to downtown.” Parks and Recreation  “Innovative recreation [and] tourism opportunities.”  “Continue to support maintenance on what we currently have.”  “Consider expanding … Feiro Marine Life Center.”  [Develop] “Spray feature for our new hot summers.”  “City should acquire trees for urban parks.” Summary Of all topics discussed, the greatest number of comments was for downtown. There is a palpable desire to improve the Central Business District (CBD) and make it a viable center of both business and community activity. From improving the arts, to walkability, economic viability, and livability, comments pointed to the need for a holistic strategy for downtown. Policy Considerations  Make downtown a healthy and attractive place to live and work; catering to diverse range of activities and functions  Develop a clear vision and strategy for revitalizing downtown  Encourage downtown living  Investigate opportunities for traffic calming and safety for non-motorized transportation Summary Comments regarding commercial “nodes” or neighborhood business opportunities expressed both the difficulty with loss of services as well as ideas for city policy makers and businesses to consider. Policy Considerations  Incentivize neighborhood commercial/business districts to maintain convenience and accessibility  Allow additional commercial services/uses in a variety of city locations  Develop “placemaking” components within neighborhoods as well as in the downtown neighborhood Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 10 DRAFT DRAFT 5 | P a g e  “Protect parks in neighborhoods.”  “Families with children not using playgrounds and parks due to [used hypodermic] needles found in kids playgrounds and park areas.”  “Incorporate tribal issues and interests into city projects.”  “Community gardens and food forest.”  “Water Park!” [for kids] Waterfront  “Love new waterfront.”  [Need more] “Food trucks! Vendors! Music!”  “Develop watersports in harbor.”  “Continue to retain marine businesses [such as] fish market.”  “Waterfront restaurants with outside seating - make it world class.”  “Bring cruise ships to Port Angeles.”  [Create a] “Destination marina for mega-yachts.”  “Make [the waterfront] better protected from wind, rain, and cold.”  [It would be] “Nice to have a working and affordable waterfront.”  [Need to] “Think Victoria! Much more tourist friendly development.”  “No LNG [liquid natural gas] tanks/terminals on waterfront.” Summary Comments underscore the importance of parks and recreation to residents, and family-friendliness should be emphasized. Other types of recreational facilities were mentioned, taking advantage of Port Angeles’ proximity to marine and mountain environments, and cultural history. Policy Considerations  Take advantage of (and highlight) PA’s plentiful natural beauty, amenities and cultural history  Enhance “family friendly” parks and activities  Ensure parks and recreational facilities are safe environments; ones which contribute to the communities health and quality of life Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 11 DRAFT DRAFT 6 | P a g e Environment  “Expand local salmon farms, incentivize local farms protection.”  “Promote waterfront clean up to stimulate water recreation.”  “Please respect industrial uses. Do not make them harder for them to exist or grow.”  “We need more eco-friendly business.”  “Take fluoride out of water.”  “Coordinate with Olympic National Park for a “Locals Pass” that is less expensive.”  “Plant trees all over.”  “Focus effort on reducing exposure to pollution from diesel fuel combustion.”  [Utilize more] “Soft-infrastructure to ease combined sewer system risk.” Community Services  “Create common collaborative spaces and encourage new events.”  “More drop-in places for parents of young parents of young children (especially in winter).”  “Teen center.”  “Find funding for sober housing and increased treatment options in area.” Summary The waterfront is a central component to life in Port Angeles. Participants hope to see much more activity along the shoreline, but acknowledge the challenge of how to develop the waterfront as a thriving “destination” while accommodating marine-related commerce. Policy Considerations  The waterfront is an essential, highly central component of the city’s future  Develop the waterfront to balance shipping, commerce and tourism  Develop additional improvements to create enjoyable “place” and identity Summary Environmental aspects of the city play a large role its character and identity. Comments recognized this fact, as well as the need to enhance environmental health through cleanup and protection. Policy Considerations  Ensure environmental health and protection is integral with community decision making and development  Create opportunities for more access to nature and the environment  Work to sustain industrial uses without compromising high environmental standards  Work to ensure economic development and environmental protection can support one another. Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 12 DRAFT DRAFT 7 | P a g e  “Services for chemical dependency and mental illness to be expanded.”  [Provide] “Housing to get homeless residents off the street, out of jails and ER rooms.”  “Maintain funding for Humane Society.”  “Promote respect for all agencies in what they bring to the city.”  “Promote access to bicycles and public bike safety.”  “More frequent bus service.” Neighborhoods  “Promote opportunities to incorporate alternative building practices, renewable energy, and other ‘green’ practices.”  “Mixed housing types.”  “Allow more neighborhood commercial and high density housing.”  [Create] “Overnight (volunteer) housing for homeless.”  “Install stop signs in neighborhood intersections.”  “Put sidewalks around elementary schools.”  “More community garden spaces and neighborhood pocket parks.”  “Create arts districts.”  “More cops, better laws, don’t be so easy on thieves and addicts.” Summary Many residents commented on the need for enhanced community services, including homeless, chemical dependency and mental health services; improved transit operations, and services for teens and parents. Policy Considerations  A coordinated and comprehensive strategy for addressing issues of homelessness and chemical dependency  Provide services to all members of the community, including teens, moms, and senior citizens  Improve transit services and support alternative modes of transportation Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 13 DRAFT DRAFT 8 | P a g e Summary Participants expressed their desire to see neighborhoods developed and beautified. Some saw a need for more housing choice in neighborhoods. Others expressed the need for better facilities such as sidewalks, wayfinding, and traffic calming. Policy Considerations  Identify areas to encourage higher density and mixed-use housing in neighborhoods  Encourage neighborhood community spaces, such as gardens and parks  Maintain quality infrastructure, policing and code enforcement  Support public art and creative, community-oriented beautification efforts Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 14 Workshop Results April 12 & 13, 2016 - 6:00 - 8:00 pm Elwha Tribal Heritage Center & North Olympic Peninsula Skills Center 1 | P a g e Introduction During the evenings of Tuesday, April 12 and Wednesday, April 13, approximately 50 community members, plus agency staff and facilitators, met to discuss the planning process for updating the city’s 2036 comprehensive plan. The Plan will assist in guiding city policy over the next 20 years. Following a short presentation, participant groups were asked to consider ten community topics related to planning for the future of the city. They were asked to identify how well each topic is addressed currently, then comparing their hoped-for future state. These groups, seated around a large worksheet, used a numeric scale to quantify the perceived “gap” between existing and envisioned conditions. Groups then considered how they’d prioritize or “weight” their choices, assigning numbers representing a budget (of 10 units) including time, energy and money. Following time allotted for this exercise, each groups presented their findings to the entire audience. The tables and charts below summarize the numeric outcomes from the worksheets completed by the groups. Copies of some of the worksheets are attached. Feature “gap” Many of the results varied significantly by group. However, groups were consistent in identifying “Living Wages” and “Youth Employment” as pressing concerns for the community. These issues, many participants felt, had a ripple effect and touched upon on many of the other items discussed. Furthermore, other gaps included achieving fiscal balance, a vital and active downtown, as well as improvements to the community appearance. Not entirely satisfied with the features (or topics) offered in the exercise, some groups further used the ‘bonus’ portion to identify other areas of concern; where discussion should be centered. This included Public Transportation, Economic Development, and Enhancing the City’s Sense of Identity. Participants felt much smaller gaps existed with the access to the outdoors and a small-town feel. Comments were made about what great outdoor opportunities they enjoy and the sense of community which already exists. The table below lists all categories ordered by the size of the gap between existing and envisioned conditions. The “Total” column expresses the sum of all worksheet gap numbers by topic; the “Ave.” column expresses totals averaged among the all of the groups at both evening workshops, and the “High” and “Low” columns represent highest and lowest gap scores by topic, respectively. Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 15 2 | P a g e Elwha Heritage Center and North Olympic Skills Center Workshop Results April 12&13, 2016 Feature Gap Total Ave. High Low Living wages 50.5 8.4 9 0 Youth employment 42 7.0 9 0 Fiscal balance 38 6.3 5 1 Vital downtown 32.5 5.4 8 1 Community appearance 32 5.3 7 1 Safe 20.5 3.4 5 0 Shopping/services 20 3.3 4 0 Other 20 6.7 7 2 Neighborhood feel 11.5 1.9 2 0 Small-town feel 10 1.7 3 0 Outdoors 6.5 1.1 2 0 Table 1.1 Gap between existing conditions and desired 2036 goal. Priority Regarding allocation of resources, participants recognized that many of the topics were interrelated - anticipating that investment in one area might likely promote positive transformation in another. Groups also noted that some topics, while perhaps critical to the community, cannot be directly addressed by city government. Priority should be given; they felt, to those items which is fall into the purview of the city’s management. Most notable is the lack of emphasis on Living Wages [the largest ‘gap’ identified]. Comments alluded to the connection to a vital downtown attracting business which may provide a greater standard of living for employees and residents. Along with creating and active and healthy downtown, participants also expressed support for the city maintaining a fiscal balance as well as enhancing its efforts on public safety. The table below sorts topics by “weight” (portion of each group’s budget of 10 units), indicating which topics participants thought should receive the most time/energy/funding investment. Higher numbers in the “Total” column indicate higher priority, based on the sum of all group worksheets for each topic. Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 16 3 | P a g e Elwha Heritage Center and North Olympic Skills Center Workshop Results April 12&13, 2016 Feature Weight Total Ave. High Low Vital downtown 17 1.9 4 0 Fiscal balance 14 1.6 2 0 Safe 14 1.6 3 0 Living wages 10.5 1.2 3 0 Community appearance 8.5 0.9 1.5 0 Shopping/services 6.5 0.7 1.5 0 Other 6.5 1.1 2.5 0 Youth employment 6 0.7 2 0 Neighborhood feel 4 0.4 2 0 Outdoors 2 0.2 1 0 Small-town feel 1 0.1 0.5 0 Table 1.2 ‘Weight’ of feature which participants felt needed priority by the City. “Gap” / Weight Relationship The following charts show the relationship(s) between the “gap” of current conditions to an envisioned future and the priority focus which group participants felt should guide planning process. The first table shows ‘gaps’ from largest average of all groups to the smallest average and their corresponding priority weight. A correlation did not exist, but as explained by the participants, the city’s priority use of resources should be spent on management concerns within the city’s primary role. The second table is organized by priority weight and its corresponding ‘gap’. Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 17 4 | P a g e Elwha Heritage Center and North Olympic Skills Center Workshop Results April 12&13, 2016 Chart 2.1 ‘Gap’ of feature by greatest to smallest with corresponding priority weight. 8.4 7.0 6.7 6.3 5.4 5.3 3.4 3.3 1.9 1.7 1.1 1.2 0.7 1.1 1.6 1.9 0.9 1.6 0.7 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 Combined Workshops Average (April 12 & 13, 2016) Gap by Priority Weighting by Community Feature Gap Between Current Condition and 2036 Goal Priority Weighting for Community Focus 5.4 3.4 6.3 8.4 6.7 5.3 3.3 7.0 1.9 1.1 1.7 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 Combined Workshops Average (April 12 & 13, 2016) Priority Weighting by Gap by Community Feature Gap Between Current Condition and 2036 Goal Priority Weighting for Community Focus Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 18 5 | P a g e Elwha Heritage Center and North Olympic Skills Center Workshop Results April 12&13, 2016 Chart 2.2 Priority ‘weight’ of feature by greatest to smallest with corresponding ‘Gap’ between current and future condition. Worksheets The following pages present images of the participant worksheets, including written notes made by group members as they considered their responses to the exercise. Larger-sized scans of the worksheets are available from the City of Port Angeles Community and Economic Development staff. Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 19 6 | P a g e Elwha Heritage Center and North Olympic Skills Center Workshop Results April 12&13, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 20 7 | P a g e Elwha Heritage Center and North Olympic Skills Center Workshop Results April 12&13, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 21 8 | P a g e Elwha Heritage Center and North Olympic Skills Center Workshop Results April 12&13, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 22 9 | P a g e Elwha Heritage Center and North Olympic Skills Center Workshop Results April 12&13, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 23 10 | P a g e Elwha Heritage Center and North Olympic Skills Center Workshop Results April 12&13, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 24 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO WETLAND ORDINANCE 2016 15.24.020 - Definitions: Add clear definition and clarification of wetland at beginning of definitions section .020. This replaces .020(CC) definition. .020 (B) Replace 'adjacent' with 'contiguous'. .020(E) (4) New definition for "wetland creation" .020(F) Added definition for "Cumulative Impacts or Effects" .020 (G) new definition for "Developable Area" .020 (K) new definition for "Functions…" .020 (L) Increase amend the definition of "high intensity land use to be greater than 12 DU/A (was >7 DU/A) .020 (N) Updated reference to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) manual rather than Washington State Department of Ecology (ECY) manual. .020 (Q) Added definition for "In-Lieu-Fee program". .020 ( R) Added definition for "Infiltration" .020 (T) [was Q] remove 'agriculture' and 'forestry' reference from the definition of "Low- intensity land use" .020 (V) Add definition of "Moderate-intensity land use" that includes 'agriculture' and 'forestry' uses and establishes the range of 1 to 7 DU/A as moderate land use. .020 (W) Add definition of "monitoring" .020 (Y) Add definition of "native Vegetation" .020 (CC) Add definition of Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) .020 (FF) Add definition of "Qualified Professional" .020 (LL) Updated reference to "Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Ecology Publication #04-06-025)" 15.24.040 - Lands to which this chapter applies .040(C) Updated reference to "Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Ecology Publication #04-06-025)" and added statement limiting the validity of a wetland delineation to five (5) years. .040(D) Added reference to Ecology Publication #04-06-025 for the standard for wetland rating. Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 25 .040(E) Revised the language of the four tiered wetland rating system to reflect the Washington State Department of Ecology rating system language. .040(2) Replaced 'local government' with 'City of Port Angeles' .040(3) Updated reference to "Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Ecology Publication #04-06-025)" 15.24.045 Wetland Functional Assessment Entire section removed. This section is informative but not pertinent to regulations. Could be made use of as a handout etc. 15.24.050 - Regulated activities and allowed activities. .050 (8) add Class IV General Forest Practices reference to regulated wetland activities. .050 (9) Reformat into list, a, b, & c. .050 (9) added reference to current ECY Stormwater manual for Western Washington. .050(9) added language to reflect ECY policy on bioretention and swales in outer 25% of wetland buffers. .050(11)(a) revised language, no substantive change. .050(A)(12)(a) Added subsection to address trails and wildlife viewing areas potential impacts. .050(A)(12)(d) Add subsection to limit trail impacts in wetlands. .050(A)(12)(f) Revise to add specificity to location of trails in wetland areas. .050(A)(12)(e) correct typo 'dike' should have been 'bike' .050(A)(13) Remove the words "For example". .050(B) Clarify that listed allowed activities in wetlands do not require a Critical Area Report unless there is a loss of wetland functions or values. .050(B)(2) Revise list of allowed activities to include use of nature trails and remove boating, horseback riding, swimming, canoeing, and bicycling from allowed uses in wetlands. .050(B)(6) Revised wording and struck use of nature trails. (redundant) .050(B)(7 & 8) Removed Navigation aids, boundary markers and boat mooring buoys from list of allowed uses in wetlands. .050(B)(8)(a) Revised wording for clarification. .050(B)(9) Add new language to address the removal of non-native noxious weeds from wetland areas. .050(B)(10) Add new language addressing drilling for utility installation underneath wetlands. Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 26 .050(C) Add a subsection to address exemption of small, isolated Category III and IV wetlands under 1,000 square feet from buffer provisions. 15.24.060 Procedures for wetland permit .060 (3) replace 'containing' with 'meeting' and replace 'information' with 'criteria'. .060(6)(a) replace 'notice' with 'documentation'. 15.24.065 Add new section regarding wetland buffers. This new section better describes buffer width specifications and adds moderate land use intensity to the existing low and high intensity categories currently in the code. The three land use intensity categories are defined and lists of uses for each category have been added. Buffer width increases, reduction, averaging, and allowed buffer uses are addressed. Items from 15.24.070 Standards for permit decisions relating to wetland buffers was relocated to .065 to consolidate similar sections. 15.24.070 Standards for permit decisions. .070(C) Moved entire section into subsection 15.24.065. .070 Standards for permit decision, (G) Acting on the Application: subsection (f) amended to include more specific language relative to required wetland signage. .070 Standards for permit decision, (G) Acting on the Application: subsection (g) amended to include more detailed language for fencing of wetland areas. .070(H)(1) language inserted regarding wetland fencing to allow passage of wildlife and minimizes wetland impacts. Also add language requiring work to stop if adverse impacts require mitigation or restoration until such time that a mitigation/restoration plan is approved by the City. .070(H)(2) Add new section stating the approved mitigation sequencing. This is the standard sequence developed by Washington State Department of Ecology and is applied uniformly in ESA Protection Ordinance and Shoreline Master Program. .070(H)(3) Add new section stating the preferred sequence of mitigation actions. .070(H)(4) Add new section requiring preservation of high quality wetlands when 4 criteria are met. .070(H)(5) Replaced the Wetland replacement ratio table with more up-to-date information, based on wetland type and anticipated action. (Based on Washington State Department of Ecology standards). Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 27 15.24.080 - Temporary emergency permit—Enforcement .080(C)(4) Penalties. Added "party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity" to be included along with "person". Two occurrences. .080(C)(6) Replaced 'correction' with 'corrective' 15.24.090 - Non-conforming activities .090(C) Replaced 'God' with 'nature' as in "Act of …..…" Entire Chapter: All section and item numbering has been reviewed and updated as necessary throughout the document. T:\MUNCODE\2016 amendments\Wetland edit 15.24\Changes to Wetland Ordinance list.docx Planning Commission Meeting Packet May 11, 2016 Page 28