HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05/05/1964
.
.
.
\
e .
Minute s of ttle regular meeting of the Port Ange le s Planning Commies ion
May 5th, 1964.
Members present were Anderson, Driscoll, Hankins, Hunt, McGee, Reiners
and Strangeo
Also present were Director of Public Works John B. Warder, Water Supto
Paul Reed and Asa't City Engineer Robert Wtlsono
Minutes of the previous meeting were read and epprove4.
was the he~ring on the application of Delbert Do
Park Ave. for permission to raise and sell
tropica is rom h S omeo e application does not call for any extra
building to accomodate the venture and al~o off-street parking will be
provided if nacessaryo The Commission determtned afte~ discussion, no
particular objection to the proposal and recommend to the City Council
the application be approved, proviied no signs are displayed and no
employees retained.
Next was an application of Fred A. Heg~ of 303 South Ennis Street for
permission to build an open car port within one foot of his east property
l1ne. The area 1n question Is a so called double corner with the two
lots divided, giving an area 70 X 100 instead of the usual 50 X 1400
Hearing on this application was set for May 19th next.
Next under consideration were two matters that hed been refered back to
. the Planning Commission, concerning the g8rkin~ of automobiles on parking
strrpso The areas involved were at the lympic Motel on East First St.
and tne Sound Auto Rebuild on Eunice Sto north of First streeto Both
Mro Claude Jarvis of the Olympic Motel and Mr. Walter Mason of the Sound
Auto Rebuild were presento A general discussion followed pertaining to
both areaso Several ideas were advanced with both parties claiming extreme
hardship should they be required to discontinue their present practice
of using the parking strips for the parking of carBo After 8 lengthy
discussion, without reaching any conclusions, it was agreed both men
would meet with the Planning Commission at our next meeting May 19th.
No further business appearing, meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M~
Respectfully submitted,
~re l1A~
~e . strafige, c- a ~en
,l-
H. H. Hankins, Seoretary
..
+c
...
.'
LAND USE
Single family, two & three family
dwellings, apartment buildings
Hotels 5. Motels
Day nurseries, preschool and
kindergarden
Telephone exchange
Trai ler park
Rooming 5. lodging houses
Hospitals
Sanitariums, convalescent homes,
nursing homes and rest homes, homes
for the elderly
'. Churches, mortuaries, funeral homes
Stadiums, sports areas, auditoriums,
and other places of assembly
Dance halls, clubs, fraternal
societies, places of assembly,
exhibition halls, without fixed
seats
Public and private golf clubs
Outdoor sports area or parks with-
out fixed seats
Libraries
Bowling alleys
NUMBER OF :REQUIRED PARKING SPACES
2 spaces p~r dwelling unit
1 for each, sleeping unit
I
Minimum of 10 spaces
I for each employee, minimum of 6
spaces
2 tor each trailer space
I tor each sleeping unit
i
1 for each bed
1 for each; 3 beds
1 for each 6 seats in the chapel "
1 for eachi 3 sea ts "
1 for eachl 50 square feet of gros,
floor area of the building t
f.
,"
Minimum of 40 spaces
Subject to, review by Planning
Commission"
1 for each 200 sq.ft. of gross
floor area, minimum of 10
I
6 for each alley
Laboratories, research, bio-chemica1, 1 for each 200 sq.tt. of gross
X-ray, dental floor area
!
e
Skating rink and other commercial
recreation places
Medical, optemetrical and dental
clinics and/or offices
1 for each 100 sq.ft. of gross
floor area of the building
6 for each, doctor
-2-
-.
.
LAND USE
Dormitories, Apartment Dormitories
Museums
Banks, business, professional and
governmental offices
Drug Stores
Theaters
Public swimming pools
Schools Elementary
Junior High
Senior High
Junior College
.' Restaurants, taverns, any establish-
".. ment for the sale and consumption
on the premises of food, alcholic
beverages or refreshments
Food stores, markets and shopping
centers
Parks, playgrounds
Other retail establishments, such
as furniture, appliance, hardware
stores, household equipment, ser-
vice shops, clothing or shoe
repair shops
Riding academies
Wholesale stores, warehouses,
storage buildinJs, motor vehicles
or machinery sales
e
Manufacturing uses including
creameries, soft drink bottling
establishments, bakeries, canneries,
printing and engraving shops
Trucking & transportation terminals
NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES
i
2 for each: sleeping unit
1 for each 300 sq.ft. gross floor
area
1 for each" 200 sq.ft. gross floor
area of the building
1 tor each 200 sq.ft. gross floor
area
1 for each 3 theater seats
I
10 for each 1,000 sq.ft. of pool
surface area
2 for each' classroom
3 for each classroom
6 for each classroom
8 for each! classroom
1 for each 100 sq.ft. of gross floor
area of the buildin~, minimum of 10
spaces.
1 for each 200 sq.ft. of gross floor
area of the building, minimum of 10
Subject to review of Planning
Commission
1 for each 200 sq.ft. of gross floor
area of the building, minimum of (5
spaces
1 for eac~ 100 sq.ft.gross floor
stable are"a
1 space for each 2 employees,
minimum of lO spaces
1 for each 3 employees, minimum of
10 spaces
Minimum of 10 spaces C ...... odJ..h'~ .../-.:;
IOt(J/VlJ de>qf.c..)
-3-
I
I
'""
.... . -....
'.section 6. IMPROVElIIENT OF PARKING SPACES
for single family residences shall
the following requirements:
(a) Offstreet parking facilities shall be graded and drained so a"
to dispose of surface water to the satisfaction of the City ;
Engineer, and shall be maintained in good condition free of
weeds, dust, trash and debris. :
Any parking facility other than
be improved in accordance with '0
(b) The location and design of all spaces, entraces, exits and
aisles shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
(c) Any lighting used to illuminate any offstreet parking facilit~
shall be 50 arranged as to reflect light away from any adjoin~
lng residential premises and street rights-of-way. :
(d) Each individual parking space shall have a minimum dimension
of nine feet wide by eighteen feet deep.
Section 7. UNSPECIFIED USES In the case of a use not specifically
I '
mentioned in this ordinance, the requiremerts for offstreet parkin~
facilities shall be the same as the above mentioned use which in t.
the opinion of the Commission shall be deemed most similar.
.
Section 8. MIXED OCCUPANCIES In the case of mixed uses, the total
requirements for offstreet parking facilities shall be the sum of
the requirements for the various uses computed separately. Off-
street parking facilities for one use shall not be considered as
providing required parking facilities for any other use, except
as hereinafter specified for cooperative use.
e
Section 9. COOPERATIVE PROVISIONS Nothing of this ordinance shall be
construed to prevent cooperative provi sian of off-street parking
facilities for two or more buildings or uSies, provided that the
total of such off-street parking spaces supplied cooperatively
shall not be less than the sum of the requirements for the various
uses computed separately. None of the above provisions shall
prevent the overlapping cooperative use of parking facilities when
the times during which such facilities are used are not conflictin~!
Section 10. BUILDING PERMITS Before the granting of a building permi~
for any new building or structure, or for ~ny enlargement thereof,{
or change of use in any building hereafter constructed involved int
any of the aforementioned uses, the applicant for said building l
permit shall present evidence in writing that:
(a) A permanent off street parking area th~t provides required
parking spaces is and will continue ~o be established on
the specific zoning lot, or on an app:roved offstreet parking
lot situated within lOO feet of the specific land use.
(b) The applicant is a participant in a parking association that
provides a total number of offstreet parking spaces for each .
of the i nd i vi du a 1 pa rt i c i p an ts . (Pv-es vi "'" e S {' ()t.t f.."I1//"'V!. fct-"'*C.'f~+:c...r)
-4-
...,. "~.-...
-~
It
.
I .
Section 11. CONDITIONAL USE A conditional use permlt for less restric-
tive requirements may be granted on written request to, and after
a public hearing by the Planning Commission, subject to all the
requirements inserted in said permit. Said hearing shall be
conducted as per regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance of
the City of Port Angeles.
Section 12. PENALTY CLAUSE Any person in charge of premises which
violate the provisions of this ordinance shall be prosectued for
the commission of a misdemeanor for each day he is in violation
thereof.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of ~ort Angeles and approved
by its Mayor at a regular meeting of the Council held on the 2nd day of .
June, 1966.
r: {fl'c!:V-L 4cd-t..- JVll1o€. q--H Jtr~r..:.
)
-5-
""'" ---
t_- DL~ ( (fff
/lvvt-f (A~ ut
....
~
- ~.,
..
fr:
... .-
oil
- ,~
~....... ;s,"
.~
/'
~ . n . ')_
<.;
(j}~~:r ~~
..,." fI
\ ''',.
RJ::SOLUTION NO.
..5--{/
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Port
^ngeles~ setting the terms of office for members of
city commissions and boards.
\VHEl<EAS, the terms of members of certain city commis-
sians and boards have not been definitely set out in one place
in the past; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of definitely es-
tablishing the terms of members of commissions and boards
appointed by the Mayor; now~ therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT
'-
'"
ANGELES that the terms of the members of the following named
boards and commissions shall expire on the 19t day of March
in the year following their names as set out below:
Planning Commission:
~rs ~, 1965" L,E.. D, /1/1'11' .:(/.t .", /-J .I"t~' ,,,....! />'1",.-1.(11
L -r + Ii fr' ~/l / l' ~ rJ.:....i- Jl1~..-t ,..{r
Herbert McGee, M.:J.!'ch 1~ 1966 n.(.J5S~)) '''"".., f
A .u j / /. 7 J I, L II IJ "'''f"'Y''' "~/(/J~
'f'4"J'ft.f'f Fred Strange, i'larch 1, 1967 Re.Jive 'tllrboY!., ,,,',,,,-,,, ,
. 1, 1968 re~(7,,-:..-f...jj' '0''-'1,.....'''> 3/f/lf
Rennle Anderson, March RjJ' r
Harry Hunt~ March 1, 1969
Hugh Hankins, March 1, 1970
John Driscoll, March 1, 1970
Library Board:
Helen Tradewell, March 1, 1964
".
Claude Johnson~ March 1, 1965
R. E. Timm, March 1, 1966
frank B. Platt, March l~ 1967
Dorothy Wagner~ March 1, 1968
'-.,.. "
~'t!!..... i( ~-.",;aP-er;---....... "'""""!'.-, o:;::"';~_~~_____ ....._~-,.-""
,-... r ~ '.~__ p.A "-LJ_'.-~~ ___~
~
Al Haley, March 1, 1965
Conrad Dyar, March 1, 1966
'II
Harold Widsteen~ March 1, 1967
.
..
e'
....,
....,.,- - '1-
Civil Service Commission:
George Wood, March 1, 1966
Don Judd, March 1, 1968
Rev. Robert Lieby, March 1, 1970
".
..;. -. ~
/
..
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Port Angeles
and approved by its. Mayor at a regular meeting of the Council
I"(I:.:-
held on the ~ day of March, 1964.
Attest:
/J /) ,
IF J) 0 )~:J;u /l.: -: <" p /'
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
It
G~
"':\(1_ '-.,_ ~ ,
\)
-2-
-C-.o \ /
c_ . \'" n y' t ... , -1.J1
Mayor
......
~ ----=-
1'.,.;.
,,--.
"_,,,': .0'
.. ~
-
MEMO: November 27, 1968
'.
TO:
!
City Planning Commission and City Council
I
FROM: .R. P. Willson, Building Inspector
RE:
Item
No.
y-l.
2.
-((
LlilltJ 4/1-1/7C
~
~
.:.K
Items relative to zoning, and related otdinances, which have
been suggested for inclusion in joint study sessions.
;t
page 53 I1corner lots" bottom of page; is inconsistent with re-
quirements elsewhere in the ordinance.
ACTION TAKEN - .
Delete this
'pgs. ~,l&:l~}If,K (also possibly pgs. ~2( & section 12 of
the mapped street ordinance) and approprl;ie fold-out pages.
This is relative to the setback requirements for corner lots
and setbacks along arterial streets. I
ACTION TAKEN - iRS-9 keep as is; RS-7 change 251 to 131' side 3ard: on
corner lot and make all zones coincide with setback requirements in mapped
street ord. along arterials. Corner on intersecting arterials to be hand-
led individually upon application. Submit new section in RTP (along lines 'of
RS-7) for individually owned si'tes in RTP Zone. o'
No page - should there be an item requir~ng fences around private
swimming pools? Also, it might be worth discussing fences on
property lines where buildi~gs are required to be setback 7 - 35'
(This mayor may not \1arrant any r,egulation.)o .
ACTION TAKEN -Contact Moffett reo Swimming pool fences.
I. Mf7!ftf{ .:5~r5 nc 1-t.'f""V't!"HI-t'Vt.fS I'~I 'i?C W 0
- I '
,//;/ ~/,/
Pgs. 25,2S,30,(3M),41,43 "Signs
This is virtually unenforceable.
ACTION TAKEN Delete this.
Permi +.te,dn One sign per structure.
"
Pg. 57 Section 10 nUsesl1 this may require' some modifications
although it does have some merit as it stands.
ACTION TAKEN - Reword _"_ not expre!3sly permitted are'. to be con-
siaered by the Planning Commission for approva1 or denial in light:of
the~ zoning intentionsTl, .{'."- t',,"d__ <iffl..u,,{,'o'I' I
Pg. 57 Section 7 "Dwelling Units in Commercial Areas" this item
might bear som~ discussion particularly as related to "Cn Street.
(This may oro maYonot warrant any changes) I
ACTION TAKEN - Allow in CSD-Cl along flC" 91:;h to Blvd.
- ~
~I& ~V'" l\c..t. 4/z.iJl1~
r€:
~'t'
.., ~
;-
~~
/d(
9.
.4)
.. 10.
No. page. How to spell out desirable and undesirable occupancies 0
in all zones, recognizing that it would ;be impossl~le to designate
each and every type.
ACTION TAKEN - Item 5 v'
Pg. 9. Some definition of)lspecialty sh'opst1 might be in order.
(This item is closely rel-ated to the pre,vious one)
ACTION TAKEN - Item 5 /
No page. An inqui ry about "yar9 lighting" in residential zones
was made for which I had no answer. The'PUD has a program for
installing mercury vapor luminars in the :yards out .in rural areas.
The question was asked if ~ne of these could be installe~ in a
yard in town, on a standard 50 x 140' lot.
ACTION TAKEN - Talk to Herrman - P.C. not in favor. DDH feels this
can be handled administratively; possibly by ,requiring an approval
from abutting property owners. ~
Pg.l2 foldout and pg24. "M~nimum Lot widt~" in the RB/RMF zones
certain lot widths are spet1ed out and finished off with "100'
all others". A question has been raised 'whether this is
"" ~. I
excessive or too broadly applied.
ACTION TAKEN - Leave as is. ~
11. Pg. 12 foldout and pgs. 17, 23 "Minimum L~t Area" for apartments.
It has been questioned whether a basic ar~a of 7000 sq.ft. plus
1000 sq.ft. for each additional unit is exessive.
ACT}ON TAKEN - Leave as is. V" Apply -fc 4.f,Ii,.J..oM<ult> ;1-'1" I( ~Cvto. f,''1~
1{ ~-11"N -f p::-r.- fr.... J 1 'L Ic... t ,,"',--{ N rV,'Y"'<S'"'f Wet ...tf~ i 6t:JO ~ ~ I~ Q....l?<'lf -1,-<<,
{(:o,-' S f2-f r "'ill:v...J ,';; YlC I cU" IL ~ ,:;, 'v-€ ~/,~",,- pJ,.y.;r I bv;//""J .....d wa.{/r. j~h'r ot~""<i. /y
~. /H-\.S,.J~v.." ,
.' .
l2. Pg.52 "Through Lots" if would be my interptetation that this
paragraph would answer the question about setbacks for detached
accessory buildings on lots with street fr9ntage at opposite
ends. I would appreciate a discussion as to the correctness of
this interpretation. /"
ACTION TAKEN - Yes
.
k h.t v.{...
(4...~u~
,t - (}/1d
C' 5( 4-1
~ .
J
v-
~ ...t;
~
..'
.
13.
14.
~ 15.
/
.i PSi
.
l7.
~
}4.
0<;&
Pg 19 I1Permi t Requi redll. $1.00 fee'f f perm! t issu ed to occupa nt
of site. This has both good and bad features. Transient parks,
occupant-owned sites?
ACTION TAKEN - Take off transient
to get owner in and familiarize with
I
sites~ leave on occupant owned,
set-back requirements, etc.
Pg. 20 Top of page II, no clo~er thari 10 feet to any other
property linell. I have been interpreting this as lOt from the
property line with conventional housing; the next paragraph sets
a minimum of 14' betw~en t~aiters and I have been i~rpreting
, this as7t each side a prop'erty line or limaginary line between
two trailers.
ACTION TAKEN - Interpretatlon correct (fdJre protection for thin
skinned mobil homes from heat of conventional house fire) ~
No. page. Construction of conventional frame additions to mobil
homes, other than detached accessory buildings such as garages,
carports, utility and storage sheds. '
ACTION TAKEN - Required to meet all building code requirements.
Pg.43 IIMinimum Yard Requirements"; ---- closer than 30 feet to any
public R/W line. What abou~ alleys? .
ACTION TAKEN - Leave as is', apply for variance As!9"lSI set-back on
side yar9-s:' ,./:. '
t
Pgs 25,27,30 IIMinimum Yard Requirements" 1St setback from alley.
, Off-street parking ordinance requires on,premises loading areas.
I . ,
ACTION TAKEN - Leave as is ~ gives control over openings onto alley.
Commercial zones abutting residental zones should not use cornman alley
for ingress and egress. ~
Pgs ~ W-;r;t;' ~Minimum Yard Requiremenhs", detached accessary
buildings on rear one-third of lot 1 foot from side property line
does not seem adequate.
ACTlON TAKEN - Change to 3 f~et. ./
Pgs. 32,43 "Signs Permitted" ,,----- as p~rmitted by city sign
codes". Is intermi ttent or flasing penni tted? All other zones.
prohibit them specifically. . .. //
ACTION TAKEN - IH-I-Cf,t.d~d ~ fN/t/6/f 'R~l(h}'rd -h ~J,/h..'-r ~ '/
,'&fI.Lvl41lt-l-T~f 1.;J14AI'~; S''/hS /'1. a#tYi J~"
SEe 4- ~ &: f't!e-l
.
ov~v
1.-::;-/ (
J d S v JeC I
7 (;' I
"t... ( .
f)
2-3
-
7
V'~ JU~ r/
"aflV'I....~/ by BI1J:I"-71 .rVh/4'./ -Ie Y'e~/~~;/
Pia kit. C~-... II I
...'
~, -
...
,"\>
\\<..
J
'.
, ,
! (
. ,
. ,
.,
I ,-\
;.
., !'
, .
. I'
; '~
"
. I "
. j. i .
I
. ,
."'1, d
I l' . r
~,
,
; .
). \.
. ,~ -~ .
, ,
;J ~-f.< . "" I s .fr:/, - } ""':'.5: r <" c ~H"': ,:"d -/4'1,. /: . '" ~ Y Md f l4C. V j.,."/
# I ' <?'>; r,(/'~;), 5 'I W, '4 -h'l 46(/ H."1 1 ~-7.1 ~/
+ cO V" c:: 0VY1 VM,...l........ 4 . R:_ f 1,,1 0 V < ~ :; (J' /
. , -/' / ' d'
V'-l'.s.' /~"""i-..t-. 1 ~-L/
. " t.. I
;it+-~5j"'..L~f ?Cv/r;''''''r t"1>vdJpu?-z..u::.e.. - .~1C' ,.r:'l~":'1-(.I-'t.?Vl~ .-f1cor
('~.,~ ) '" ~~,,: js s j, cu';" , Pc -fJ", if /A1 ;fA"m", h, ;pi S d ule, 5
I
o fh 1""",.-1 ,~'-:-'if. ~.< j"'Y.,',,!',":' ~ - /1;':.-:" 5 4... kl ,64 JdH cdJ.'-;J , C c
-!tL<-. C'~...,,(.. 6........<'--<- .-'/...e~,~ fc.-..l-1-f h R~.::L ~_~'I.-l/i""<-.,!s -/J'1<-c~..1 t?CC?c,,~('
lb. I. I ,. (I, . . (j- I cI /'
Ct..... u",- V;'tf,-''''lJ '" C"CV,P~~. "C hd.L.J.
5.<cl..- I Z,. : " LVI,,,,~ OC<-'F""':::!.i: "- ~ta;; cJ,~d~5, -/I ~J-
, 'r" ' ~J..I.~ 4~-<-;~d .L:j>4b,~"L/ .1 {~
'1! . "', ",rz-e r...-t.Lc-/ 1:7 /~ n~~ 0 ~ C.,(A./~7- ' ____
S:ee/."'" 13" ' P.,~. 0 el,:,,',u " I .
P;j 'Z- l' "~'r,' -. Pro 'H (' "....,;#,:.. ;.}~ ,t' ~ .,~ ,~'&"'~/, It.'; b~ "~Q'rd
j'tf, 7-(.)0" ~ r<J foE- Y'~:-I . Ix /j!b~dVo/s., ' 1 '
d.... I
. I : ~
t , .
d'yt,..........(l "'-I L-l .
, I'
n..-f t.r~l V./t:<fP1-,,<l6/..
, .
"
,.~ . I .j,
... "~ i 1 ..'~
.: ~ ~
..
.".
,
.
.
.
_ -.... ___ ..., "If-.-.. __"'- _-..._
.--
I
...,. ~.....__.
,.1'
-w .\::-- . .~\lll
e. e,/) ecr~
~~ ~ \~~ ~ .
I
R~commendations on Zoning Ordinance Changes
1.. On the foldout opposite page 25, a 15t'set back is called for
Y'" on the alley in these commercial zones. Tpe original thought was
to provide off-alley loading zones. However, this is taken care
of in the off-street parking ordinance.
I would recommend that this restr~ctio~ on the foldout, also
on pgs. 25,27 and 30, be entirely deleted..
2. On .pgs. 26,28 and 30, there is a restriction under "Signs
~ Permitted" of one sign per structure. We do not believe this to
be realistic or practical, hence recommend this phrase be deleted.
~3. On page 43, under Minimum Yard Requirements, construction
closer than 30 feet to a~y right-of-way li~e is prohibited. This
is for an Industrial District. We do not believe this should
apply to alleys. We further recommend that a minimum side
clearanc~ of 15 feet be specified.
4.. On page 53, the section l1Corner Lotsl1 i:s redundant and con-
tradictory. Each zoning district specifies its corner lot
restrictions. We recommend this section be deletedo
5.. On pgs. 15, 16 and 24, under Minimum Yard Requirements there
is a 35 foot front setback required on arterials. We recommend
this be deleted.
/6. Also on pgs 15,16 and 24 under the same section there is
provided an allowable side.clearance of 1 foot for detached
accessory buildings on.~the rear one third of the lot.. 'lie don't
'believe this to be sufficient, and recommend this be increased
to') feet.
/. 7. On page 57, Section 10 USES. Deleting this section would
allow the building Inspector and Planning Commission to pass on
or approve uses similar to those~specified, : though not specifically
itemized in the various district uses. We so recommend.
8. There have been considerable rp.quests for setback variances
on corner lots in the original Townsite - 50 foot lots. We .
recomMend an addition .t~ the ordinance that would allow a 13
foot side clearance on a 50 foot corner lot, to be increased
at the rate of 0.25' feet per foot of additional width - hence
two 50 foot lots would require the normal 25 feet on the front
and(l3 + 50 x 0.25), or 13 + l2.5, say 25 feet on the side
street. 1:
. ~la 1?~
J n B. Ward e r
Director' of Public Works
I
pc I SUj:'jJ.$-fs /17'1<:<-(1 rl1K"'1 S'j.L ./c",-S'J"J ,....I(B/r...L)
,
.
-..
-......
r..::::t-
-- -
0,:~ wJ /lL<-.~ ~L,~ 'T~ r.eS-/~/
:: (}7~~~ -4- C'$~ ~ e.---c~A:u./
~_ / t-. j",. ,,' - r ""-D -c 1._ r-<-'--~c= -~0- / 1 ~ --
. ti .CA1.-t pVLe~~ J..~' R--G~~.J' ~ ~
~ ~ I~ ~. 72Il1F l~ . . . - .
.,sf} ~ (j" I"J~"7 'f?~~.u~ ;.
.e
:4IIt
."-
- - - --+--
.'
,
,.
/0; W-U~~~ _~.~~L~~
~ /~ ~ ~~_~I'" . _n_. ~
"
1/: D~~-~~pL~/h- ~~~.k~
~~d~ 'f~r;- ~-~4~':"'L
;,.o<;-!~~~.&6'U~1:~\./'~~~~~
~~C#VVl~".~L-~~~'-~-P~
.."~. .~~.A.._.'..\' ~-t~.
-:-r.-............- ----..,.--- --+'""'?" ."i- -~""~--"'-;----'r"""""- _. ._-
/2:~ d5cw-:;.:;...~ J ,.~prd~~ - '.,,_.-+-- \....--"!"~ - .--\- ..._. _ . L ~ \
i (7""- / <: '.. ... '= ~ ::. ... '. .
,t:;-. -.... -- t' ....... ~ .0:;-.. --
+!..- ~-~--........ ~ -+--r .....,........- .-- ~-r- ...- ----- '''t 0 ~.,...,.- :-~~~ ~- . . --- ...~.
13; p~*~ h-.4~~~L./~_}JJ~-
'i. J!. . "1"'-j~.6AH~~~L..-
I~ -;_L :;;;..~ - ___u ~ - _---"-_-.. - -~~-~- . "..~" _
.! '''''7
+. -" - ....... - . ~ ~. -~ - -~ - - - ,
.(~. -iLt~ ~ C~u/~'~~rT ./t/~4
J cL,~-tv7fi.pc\.._-? ~ - ., - - - - - -
. - \' .'
'l. - ~~ \ ~
-+" ~ ~ _ . ~ - ~- . ?" 'rl_ - - ~ - ~. i'- ~ l" --to- '\ ~. ~
. 1(;..1 K.e..c-~. ~/Lr~":::A-~-w~.;(;.n~.~
: ~>/, . '\ "> " ~. ~,: /~
;w1~'l ~ ~-I' }~~~~ ~. ~. -
, ,~" (I . . -
1" -... - - --~. . - . ~ "- . , "~ -",. '\ . -I- - ~ - - . ,.,.. -, . .
1)1 vJ.-~T~fiL.:2- R,_./u~~7"J/,:,
., 1\, \ .. ~... ~ . "-
,i ..' \ ",-' '\", " " ~ '
1~~,~...J3-/J~r/ >~.. .. .~
- - ~jr . :- . ' 1
. Jr. _.D",b../nll wI~,,~J~~--,/J7
, .~....Jte.. ;".~......~Ih~2--- .( CI3D.-le~,
!j) {' ",?'/./'
(\ . . _~_ u4-~-r- .;.....~- ~~, '9-~
\ (;7.' , ,. (7; --- /
.._ _.'. .,'4\-- T', ,r?'___,_, ..~~.~ .~.~..,-.,:...c,-~
, 1/"''''' '. ., / '\,' . / . ." ' ~
\\ ~/J/l~~cA~~,,~ ~+ ~- ~r~ -=--~)-<
~.~-~. -(4/d-r-l: .~, ~
i .. .. ..' \"
.." ' . ~
..'\T' .,c...-___.. -r ,T"1"-~,--"~..---:.....,,~... -. ..-~ ,- - '.', .'
>ZO, _ jl,.d~ d;~. ;5:~'oL-e~~A:';.;,.?- ~
," ~~:~ 1:-/7~ ~'l~ ~>
f-/U-M MY J --.-.-<..- .. -c~, .. .
, ,
I '---~'-~~-'~~\.~.T '11- "',~' lor ~~' 1: '\.(,..1.....- '."..,~"T""~"ll-........ ...._C'".--
I .
. "\ }i j-J"""'/..- ~ ~~. "'\T~ .\<--.- ,. - '"'~ :"'-;-- - -- ~T~-\
. __ _ tI ( q11~~""':!'14~ (}.;J:"..~-.teP:''V_~I'~ ,J"",~.k_
,_ ___JL.. Y'~;;t-~_~WV:;-~'t:.Jd. _PCh - :l!f'~.~~,~. -/
\'I.!' '.' ,-.... ~- v'"
_~.~ ]~ .::~~~~T~"~-' .--.'
"J.'Z(~ ~~~ .Y~/'J~ _ -:;.t.~. /Lr- ~_OC~~
\I \1 J '.rT;,... \' V' I (/
--- ., ~~i"~'~7:" ~,:~~Af~7;..~
7.~-~..-~_,CI~. _ .~~~-4{,.;(4,~
i~, '. ~ ',(/' ~ .4 - - ,~
~ _ . . _, ~",Qv:~~~,~.. 4--...:-~~"",L./ ,~ft'~.. .. ~ ..- .
\ \ ~... .'.... ." '-
~ ,
-~--~ ~_., -~~- -..-.- - -+- ~
-\ ~ - \,' , ~,. ...,. -..- -~'""'" ~ ( - T-.' ~. --<-..
'.. ' ...,. ,
"
\~ -\', ~T"'~"'''''''' +-.'"I"'.~ -
"
-.---". --- ~
" '"' .. L
, .... ..',
- .....
"
'~-'
.... "
· -- . OJ - - - ---
. i,t ~ ~- --- - _.
...~.-~.--=---.~---- - .
it - . - --, ..
- 1
-.. - ~
i,
~
'I
'\
,,', - \;"-~ . ~ .,...
.,,~ >>
~
c _~ ~
. ... ___ .. ... .r-__._
, .
Ass~ciation of Washington Cities !'J 3935 University Way N.E, :J Seftt/e, 'I(ashington 98105 !J 543-018~ :.~'.
..' ~ . . . .......
.~ . :
~ . ..... c_.-~... -.-- _ _ ... ...,............. _ . .......
To Municipal Officials:
'.
.
..
I
~
1.'1 I' t I .' I t I
, '. ~..~. \ ..\~ ~ 1 1 r.
t '. I J 1 01 , ) J_.' ~ ~.
EXCLUSION OF MOBILE HOMES
J .1
I I
I I
FRO:\1 RESIDEJ.'lTIAL AREAS
.
'. ,
,',
/1 ~::~--'~ "--- . ~=--=--
( I \'~\\ ,~;J March 17, 1969
\J \.' :,\\(, / / !\) 'IJ1,I, i tV( Jib I j /tl}ttl r
In State v. Hork, 75 w. D \'o~d' 2~2, (1969), the state Supreme Court held
that since the King County Zoning. Code did not defin~ "vehicle," a mobile
home under the common and accepted meaning of a "vehicle" is not a vehicle
when all of its mobile characteristics were removed, and it was placed upon
a foundation. Therefore the judgment of the Superior Court entered upon the
conviction of-a crime of unlawful habitation of a mobile home in violation of
I .
the K:ing County Zoning Code was reversed, the Court holding that it was a pre-
fabricated one-family unit vlhich was not prohibited in a residential single-
family district.
In the light of this decision, we suggest that pities and towns that
have zoning ordinances vlhich define "building" as did section 2.03 of the
Ki.ng County zoning ordinance considered in the above decision in State v.
Hork, may desire to avoid the result reached with respect to lImobile homes"
under the King County resolution by defining the term "vehiclel1 in their
zoning ordinance to read substantially as follows:
. .
, .
..". .....
. ,
....IIIIa., .
I "
(. ,J,f-I"-:"
CO '.J "..: ,.
~""""i .:,' :.'
f \;1" .
~.'..~.
, .
.":...~ .
',.
~. .. .
. ..~. ' f .
I1The term 'vehicle' as used herein shall mean all instru-
mentalities capable of movement by means 9f circular
wheels, skids or runners of any kind, along roadways or
paths or other ways of any kind, specific~11y including,
but not limited to, all forms of automotive vehicles,
buses, trucks, cars and vans, all forms ot trailers or
mobile homes of any size whether capable of supplying
their own motive power or not, without regard to whether
the primary purpose of which instrumentality is or is not
the conveyance of persons or objects, and ,specifically
including all such automobiles, buses, trucks, cars, vans,
trailers and mobile homes even though they may be at any
time immobilized in any way and for any period of time
of ,",'hatever duration."
. ...;
.... ,~
, ."
Apart from the above court decision~ city zoning ordinances should re-
quire that all single family dwelling units located on individual lots shall
meet the minimum requirements of the city.s bu~ing and housing codes.
I
~"
'/ /' .---,..-;
/j~O~"~,;,'.
l......~-..L /Co-;.
,
Chester Biesen '
Executive Director
"'
-;;;7 .."
I -~. /:? __ ,,"; __. __
.'---,...:..-'~"
f>
..
UIHVERSITY OF HASHINGTON
.
Association of Wbshington Cities
:
Bureau of Governmental Research and Services
Seattle, Washington
Vol. 75 2d ~ No. 7 -- HASHINGTON DECISIONS - - January 31,1969 -- pages 212 - 216
THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. CHRISTI}ffi l~ORK, Appellant
(1) Zoning -- Constitutional Standards -- Vagueness.. Criminal statutes,
inclusive of those contained in a municipal zoning code, should be
clear and unambiguous so that men of ordinary r~ason and intelligence
need not guess at their meaning.
(2) Zoning -- Mobile Home -- Nature -- Vehicle or Building. A mobile
home is not a "vehicle': under the common and accepted meaning of the
word; consequently, a mobile home from which all characteristics of
mobility have been removed is not an "immobilized vehicle" ,.:ithin
the meaning of a zoning ordinance which excludes immobil~zed
vehicles from the definition of "building1" but does not define
"vehicle."
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 45468,
Story Birdseye, J.) entered April 28, 1967) Reversed.
... Prosecution for violation of zoning ordinances. Defendant appeals from a
conviction and sentence.
Rutherford, Kargianis & Austin, for appellant.
. ~
Charles O. Carroll and. Herbert L. Onstad, for respondent.
~ . . -:-
, .
'. .. ~.
., ..
'.+..
..'
'-
"
'. ~ ..' .
'- .
. ~ t .
~ '.
loJEAVER, J. -- Defendant appeals her conviction of "tne crime of unla''l'ful
habitation of a mobile home" in violation of the King County Zoning Code, Resolutio!1 ' ,
No. 18801, as amended. . . _ _
The court sustained the criminal and constitutional validity of the particu-
lar portions of the zoning ordinance under attack; found defendant guilty; and
fined her $1,250, with $1,000 suspended if she removed her mobile home within 60
days from date of judgment and sentence.l
In 1963, defendant purchased a lot, zoned "R-9.6 Residential Single Family
I
District," generally the same as the zoning restrictions of "R_6," uith the excep-
tion of a small deviation not here involved.
Defendant placed a "mobile" home, 8 x 46 feet, on the lot. The tongue, axles,
and wheels were removed, thus eliminating all characteristics of mobility; it was
placed upon a permanent concrete-block ~oundation; the builCing was attached to
.-----.-----.~----------.. --___ ___~1-__ .__
lDefendant had previously been found guilty in justice
411fsentenced .~o 10 days in jail, suspended. She'apP~~led
court. fined ~lOO, and
I . ,
to the superior court.
.. "
;
1
....
"". .
, -'
, .
'. . ~ .
, . .
, '.
-,.
. . 4. ~
..:.....
. ,
r.
".
,,-
.
.
.'~
.
wate~ and electric service and connected to a septic ~ank -- newly installed und
accepted under permit from Seattle-King County Department of Public Health. The
essential facts are that it was built for hwnan habit~tion, has all the attri~utee
of a dwelling, has been so used, has lost the possibility of potential mobility,
and has become fixed to the realty by its foundation and utility connections. No
argument is advanced that it does not contain the essential living space of many
one-family dwellings, as defined by the zoning ordinance, infra. Its sole curse
seems to be that it was moved to its present location 'and not built there.
Defendant m~~es two-contentions: (1) the zoning code does not prohibit the
maintenance of the present structure upon the real prbperty o\vned by her; or (2)
if it does, the prohibitory portions of the zoning code alledgedly applicable to
.her are unconstitutional. It is not necessary for us ~to reach the second question; ...
our ans....,er,to tri: first is dispos i ti ve. We reverse defendant I s conviction and
remand the case, with instructions to dismiss the charges against her.
[lJ We examine the zoning code mindful that cri~inal statutes should be
clear and unambiguous so that men of ordinary reason ahd intelligence need not
guess at their meaning. See Seattle v. Drew, 70 Wo. 20 405, 423 P. 2d 522 (1967).
We also point out that in the instant case, as in State ex rel. Meany Hotel, Inc.
v. Seattle, 66 Wn. 2d 329, 331, 402 P. 2d 486 (1965): :
. . "
,:. .
.". ..
. ,
/
Each party enters the legalistic maze of the zoning ordinance at
different places, follows different routes, and arrives at a
different enclosure.
oP- .
',.
With this background, we examine the zoning code~
I
'.0
. .'...,
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS:
. .
D\iELLING, O~~~F~~ILY: A building containing but one kitchen, designed
and/or used to house not more than one family, including all necessary
household employees of such family. (ItaliCS outs.)
.'
.. ,
. .,
- .
, .'
SECTION 4. R-6 RESIDENTIP~ SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.
PERMITTED:
1.
4.01 USES
..
'.'
Single family dwelling unit.
[The remainder of the section is not relevant.]
It is apparent that defendant's place of habitation is a single family
dwelling unit. Is it a building as defined by the zoning code?
+ .~
. ....
52.03
Building means any structure having a roof but ex~luding all
forms or vehicles even thouRh immobilized. Where this resolution
reCluires, or 1'lhere special autho:ri ty granted pUrs uant to this
resolution reCluires that a use shall be entirely enclosed 'vi thin
a building, this definition shall be qualified by,adding land
enclosed on all sides.' (Italics ours.)
. '.~'
" '
, , . I
Again, it is apparent that defendant. 's. place of habitation :is a-~ single' , - ...,
family d~."ell.ing building, ltlhich is permitted upon the la>t in, question by the coop.. >->...
'. ..... .. ~.-
2
(.,
..., . .
"It. ..
.
.
....
..
"Is it an "immobilized vehicle" prohibited by the code?
[2J The state contends that defendant lives
vehicle and not in a single family dwelling unit.
The z'oning code does not define "vehicle" so
accepted meaning. Generally, a vehicle is defined
runners used to convey persons or objects. A more
in 91 C.J.S. Vehicle p. 805:
in a proh~bited irr~obilized
He .do not agree.
it must be given its common and
as any device on wheels or
legalistic definition is found
. l
The word "vehiclelt is variously defined as meaning that in or
on which any person or thing is or may he carried from one place to _
another, especially along the ground, also through the air; everything
in or on which anything may be carried; an instrumentality for .trans-
porting persons or things from place to place; acoDveyance, as a
carriage, wagon, or sled; a means of conveyance; ,that which is used as
an instrument of conveyance, transmiss~ori, or communication; any moving
support or container fitted or used for the conv~yance of bulky objects.
" ..
.. ." .
i'Jhatever features of mobility the home had origiI'ilally, the mobi.lity was of
the home itself. It was not a vehicle, and it did not become a proscribed, im-
mo'oilized vehicle ;.lhen its mobile characteristics were removed and it was placed
upon a foundation. It was a prefabricated I-family-dwelling unjt which was not
pro~ibited upon the land in question. As said in In re Willey, 120 vt. 359, 364" "
140 A. 2d 11 (1958):
It is COITll'non knm'1ledge that many homes todB;y are of the "rea9Y-
cut" variety. Small ones may be moved in a compJ:ete form to the lot
upon which they are to be situated. Others are brought to a site in
pre-fabricated sections which are then assembled together to make the
complete structure. ~Lesumably, they could be di?8ssembled and moved
to another location without too much difficulty or damage. But we
doubt that anyone would contend that they were mobile in nature and
not a house or building.
. ,
The zoning ordinance Clearly prohibits a discarded school bus being tUrned
into living quarters and immobilized, but it does not prohibit defendant's dwell-
ing unit upon the land o~med by her.
The state enters the maze at a larger and different entrance, and wanders ,.
through broader alleys of the labyrinth. The sections of the King County Zoning
Code (1) discussing the county's statutory zoning powers, (2) establishing residen- .
tial trai:Er p:>rks, anp (3) deI1ning a tra:i1er to include a mobile home are irrelevant an~
so vague they do not support the criminal conviction ofiaefendant for having
moved a si~gle-fmQily dwelling unit to her lot. Her heme is not a travel-trailer
coach.
The judgment and sentence is reversco, RDd tnF case r€manded with instructions
to dismiss the charge against Jcfendant.
It is so ordered.
.'
" .
P.LL CONCUR.
.;~ .
.~
. --
. ' .
<: ",..
'0
-e
3
~A'. .'~
...-~- ~-...-
-
.~
e
, t,
ANNEXATION POLICY
1. GEN ERAL POLICY: The City of Port Angeles realizes that the purpose of annexa-
.'
tion is to provide an ord'erly means by which the legal boundaries of the City can be
- '
extended and keep pace with the growth of.the actual Urban Community. The City
realizes also that annexation' procedure is not intended merely to serve the best
interests in the area proposed for annexation, nor is it ,_intended to serve alone the
interests of the people living within the existing _mt,lnicipality, but rather.it should
serve the long-t~rm interest of the entire community of which both groups are an
I
. important part. The City favors annexation for the following reasons:
(a) A City' s zoning and building ordinances caq be extended to
the adjacent area in a logical manner, insuring orderly future
growth.
(b) Suburban residents are given a voice in the 90v.ernment of the
I
larger community in which they live.
,
. (c) Costly duplication of municipal facilities arid services to
new areas can be avoided.
. (d) 'Annexation increases a city.s size and thereby its ability to
I
attract desirable residential and commercial development.
Therefore, the City is ready, willing and able to provide adjacent areas with water
supply and sewerage faciliti es, with zoning, police and fire .protection, and with
all the other municipal services, where such areas can be reasonably and economically
,
provided with City services. The City does hereby encourage such areas to annex
and rec'eive the benefits offered by the City, and shall facilitate the process whereby
. such areas become a .part of the City.
i
J'
/ ;' - Page 2
<ft"_ ." Annexation Policy
'."
...
e
.
2. CITY SERVICES OUTSIDE CITY UMITS: The City of port Angeles has acquired
and holds its vatious service facilities for the benefit of residents and taxpayers
within the. City and owes them a basic and primary duty to preserve the capacity
of the facilities for their benefit and to refrain from any' excess use which would
unnecessarily impose upon the residents and taxpayers Ithe financial burden of
increases in such capacity. Therefore, the City shall not extend or furnish
I
municipal services to areas beyond the City Limits.
3. TYPES OF ANNEXATION: Areas which may request annexation to the City of
Port Angeles are declared to be of two types. .
(a) An area described as primari ly developmental or promotional i!l
character which is largely unimproved and for which annexation
is requested in order to further a project of promotion and develop-
I
ment.
(b) An area described as not being primarily deviflopmental or pro-
motional, and which is partly or wholly improved physi cally,
and for which annexation is requested on the. basis of normal
and gradual development, rather than as a project of promotional
character.
Areas classified under Section 3(a) will be considered for annexa-
tion, and if approved, annexed upon compliance with State annexa-
. I
tion laws, City ordinances and regulations when the person or
persons requesting annexation enters into an :agreement with the
City of Port Angeles providing that all streets will be curbed and
paved to standards of the specifications as used by the City of
Port Angeles in its paving program and shall be approved by the
City Engineer. The person or persons seeking annexation shall
furnish the City of Port Angeles a bond, or other security satis- .
--';" "" 'iO- Page 3
.. ~
Annexation Policy" ,--: '
.
-
.
factory to the. City Council in pentalty amount equal to the City
I .
Engineer's estimate of the cost of paving and curbing and undertak-
'ing that the persons seeking annexation will pave and curb all
streets in the territory sought to be annexed before it is occupied
by al!yone in any new construction.
All new construction shall meet the req~irements of all applicable
City ordinances I including, but not limited to building, zoning
and plumbing.
All necessary street and alley rights-of-way shall be furnished
prior_ to annexation,
Areas classified by the Council under Section 3(b) will be considered for annexa-
tion, and if approved, annexed upon compliance with State annexation laws I City
ordinances and regulations.
4. SIZE OF ANNEXATIONS: The City prefers to considertlarge-area annexations.
The anI?-exation of a small, single-lot or parcel is usually of questionable value
to the property owner and results in administrative,engineering and financial
problems fo~ the city. Small-area annexations shall, therefore, be discouraged.
Areas of less than three acres or one block in size will g.enerally not be considered
favorably. Areas larger than six acres or two blocks are 'desirable. Small-area
annexations will, nevertheless, be consid~red where special circumstances warrant.
,Such circumstances would in elude:
(a) Where it is in the best interest of the public to annex in order to"
apply zoning and thereby direct growth and development of the
I
area;
(b) Where the annexation of the small area enables another area to be
annexed;
'./ ~- '
C .:'. Page 4
Annexation Policy
.
,e
.
~
(c) In any other circumstances where private necessity or public
interests must be served.
Annexation areas must be contiguous to the City and must contribute to the.
logical growth pattern of the City J thus reducing irregular boundaries to a minimum.
5. CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN ANNEXATION PROPOSALS: 'The City of Port Angeles
hereby declares that unles s a severe health hazard or other condition exists
that jeopardizes the welfare of the citizens of the City J the City will require that
residents of the area initiate and assume the task of promoting any annexation
proposal. However t the City administration shall cooperate by meeting with the
residents of the area and furnishing documents J forms and information necessary
to process the proposed annexation. In the formulation Of any annexation proposal,
the City Manager shall be consulted in order t6 establisH reasonable bounqaries.
6. EXISTING CITY INDEBTEDNESS: All newly annexed areas shall bear their pro
- .
rata share of the City's general obI igation indebtedness existing as of the date
of the annexation.
. I
Passed March 7 J 1972
.b-.-... :r~_
.'
ORDINANCE NO. 1588
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles providing for regulations
with reference to parking space requirements.
Section 1. DEFINITIONS
Parking Space: For the purpose of this ordinance two hundred (200)
.300J/:ttt'~rks f,.~H1 u'.eJl square !eet. of lot ?rea (or floor area), 10 ft. ~
kJv.e>s-l:;..'r'l4'.}:~.i 20 ft. In Slze, hav~ng adequate access to a publlC
{)d~~~ ~~YlJ.{ street, shall be deemed a parking space for one
Pd)., ~/,.(.1I1i~ automobile. No part of any street right-ot-way
IV . '- ( 'J. I shall be considered part of any parking space.
A pfruJ!. "2.... '1"4 \ ~ r~ 5"0 ~T
Loading Space: For the purpose of this ordinance, a loading space
is a space located adjacent to a building, and
large enough in area 50 that any truck-loading
or unloading will not project into a street
right-of-way. '
Section 2. RESIDENCE PARKING In all Residential Districts there shall
be two permanently maintained parking spaces on the same lot or
tract for each family unit on the lot or tract.
~~Section ). PARKING AREA LOCATION The maintained parking space shall
not occupy any part of the required front y~rd area except as here.
in provided:
a. Where the lot or tract abuts a street or highway and, due to
topographical conditions or excessive grade, said lot is not
accessible for automobiles.
b. Where the lot is of such shape or proportions that the required
parking space will work an unnecessary ~ardship upon the owner.
Section 4. LOADING SPACE RE UIREMENTS All Commercial and Industrial
usinesses sha provide an 0 street loading space, having access
to a public thoroughfare, and shall be loca~ed adjacent to each
building hereafter erected, enlarged, or altered. Such loading
space shall be of adequate size to accommodate the maximum number
and size of vehicles simultaneously loading or unloading in
connection with the business conducted in each building. No part
of any truck or van using the loading space 'may project into the
public thoroughfare.
Section 5. PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS For a new :bui ldi ng or structure,
or for the enlargement or increase in size of any existing build-
ing or structure there shall be established pnd maintained a
. permanent offstreet parking area within one hundred (100) feet of
, ~ -,~ the 'front or rear entrance thereof. The minimum number of parking
spaces within said area shall be as tollows:'
-1-