Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 07/08/2009')ORT s NGELES W A S H I N G T O N U S A COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION 321 East Fifth Street July 8, 2009 6 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge Of Allegiance Led by the Chair II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting of June 24, 2009 IV. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONE REQUEST REZ 09 -01 HANKINS Lots 11 and 12, Block 260, TPA, southeast corner of 8 and B Streets: Request for rezone from RS -7 Residential Single Family to CO Commercial Office. (Continued from June 24, 2009 V. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC VI. STAFF REPORTS VII. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS VIII ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMM (SSIONERS. John Matthews lClrair; Doc Reiss (Vice Chatr), Werner Beier, Mike Caudill; Tun Boyle, Carla Sue, Nancy Powers PLANNING STAFF Nathan West, Director, Sue Robeui• Planning Munger, Scott Johns, Associate Planner, Robe; t K.,mz, Assistant Planner. ROLL CALL Members Present: John Matthews, Mike Caudill, Doc Reiss, Tim Boyle, Nancy Powers, Carla Sue Members Excused: Werner Beier Staff Present: Scott Johns, Nathan West Public Present: Sean Hankins, Margaret Womack APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Boyle moved to approve the June 24, 2009, regular meeting minutes as presented. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Matthews and passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington 98362 July 8, 2009 6:00 p.m. REZONE REQUEST REZ 09 -02 HANKINS Lots 9 and 10, Block 260, TPA, southeast corner of 8 and B Streets: Request for rezone from RS -7 Residential Single Family to CO Commercial Office. Associate Planner Scott Johns reviewed the Department Report recommending approval of the rezone proposal, and identified the site location, Comprehensive Plan designation, and current zoning through the use of a Power Point presentation. Staff discussed the inclusion of Lots 10 and 11, Block 239 in the rezone proposal and emphasized that several contacts with the property owner had been made. It was pointed out that the property owner was in agreement that their property should be included in the rezone and that they had no objections to inclusion. Commissioner Powers asked why the Commercial Office zone was being recommended rather than the nearby Community Shopping District zone. Planner Johns indicated that staff had determined that the CO zone was most appropriate due to its intent to be a low intensity use zone and a transition between low density residential and more intense commercial uses. Director West added that the existing uses would remain as conforming uses in the CO zone but would become non conforming uses in any other commercial zone. Chair Reiss asked for clarification regarding the areas located between Comprehensive Plan use designations on the Land Use Map. Planner Johns explained the reason for leaving an 'imprecise margin' between the land use designations is for flexibility in applying zoning classifications. Chair Reiss then questioned Finding #4 of the staff report which indicated the potential of additional lots being rezoned similar to the subject lots. Planner Johns concurred that the finding was inaccurate, and that staff would make changes to correct the finding. Commissioner Boyle questioned the reasoning of applying Commercial Office to the site and whether the proposed zoning would encourage extension of the zone to the east, creating a strip character of commercial zoning along 8 Street. Planner Johns indicated that the application was non specific to which commercial zone was being applied for and that staff felt that the CO zone is the most appropriate for the area. He further discussed the process that would be required to result in further extension of the commercial zoning to the east, including further amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, and specific application for such zoning changes. Commissioner Matthews asked for further clarification of Finding #4 and specifically which lots were being recommended for rezone. Planner Johns pointed out the specific lots on the map projected on the screen and discussed the corrections that staff would make to Finding #4 Commissioner Matthews then asked as to staff contact with the subject property owners. Staff suggested opening the public hearing to allow the audience to speak before the Commissioners asked more questions. Chair Reiss reviewed the quasi judicial public hearing guidelines and qualifying statements. Following review of the questions, all Commissioners responded for the record that they had no appearance of fairness or conflict of interest issues with regard to the pending application. Chair Reiss opened the public hearing. Chair Reiss indicated that those who testify must sign the "Sign In" log and affirm that their testimony will be truthful to the best of their knowledge. Sean Hankins, 1371 Three Crabs, Sequim, stated that he owns Lots 9 and 10 of Block 260, and that he is aware that staff had spoken to the owner of Lots 11 12, Block 239 regarding rezoning that property as well as his. He then stated that he had begun the rezone process several months prior and has had several conversations with staff over that period of time. He further stated that he is aware of the proposed CO zoning and understands the rationale of using the CO as a buffer between commercial and residential uses. Mr Hankins stated that he has no intention of converting the property to multi family residential. He felt that if the Commission believes that to be the best use of the property they should apply a zone that would be most appropriate to allow that use. Planning Comm,ss,on Minutes July 8, 2009 Page 2 Planner Johns pointed out that the proposed CO zone would allow for multi- family residential use as a conditional use. There being no further comment, Chair Reiss closed the public hearing. Commissioner Matthews asked staff about the recommendation in the staff report and if the Commission should include Lots 11 12, Block 239 to the recommendation for rezone. Planner Johns indicated that staff would like the Commission to make that recommendation. Commissioner Matthews continued the discussion of spot zoning and strip commercial. He questioned what could be done to avoid a strip commercial configuration along that vicinity of the 8 Street corridor Planner Johns pointed out that recent Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendments to the commercial designated area along 8' Street specifically limited the eastern extension of commercial uses and that amendments to existing policy language encouraged commercial nodes rather than a strip pattern. It was also pointed out by Director West that the use of the CO zone acts as a step down in intensity of use, essentially marking an edge to commercial development to the east. Chair Reiss asked how the issue of spot zoning had come about, and about the contact with the Planning Commission Minutes July 8, 2009 Page 3 owner of Lots 11 and 12. Director West indicated that typically, the applicant would be required to include all parties in the application, however, in this case staff had taken the initiative to contact the property owner after the application was submitted. Mr West specifically clarified that by including the lots north of 8 Street the rezone would be in the best interest of the public and that it would be the first step toward creating a commercial node in the vicinity of the Lincoln Center Chair Reiss then asked if the property owners to the south of the proposed rezone had been approached regarding rezoning their property Planner Johns stated that he had an extensive conversation with that property owner and they had not been interested in having their property rezoned at this time, however, they were not opposed to the subject property being rezoned, and indicated that in the future they would not be opposed to their property being rezoned. Following the discussion, Commissioner Matthews moved to approve rezone REZ 09 -02 for Lots 9 10, Block 260 and adding Lots 11 12, Block 239 to the rezone proposal, with the following amended findings, and conclusions. Findings 1 An application to rezone 2 lots from Residential Single Family RS -7 to Commercial was received by applicant Sean Hankins on January 20, 2009 2. The City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map is the guiding document in determining the consistency of the City's zoning and establishing an expected framework for land use e decisions within the City 3 The City's 2009 review of its Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map culminated on June 16, 2009 Amendments to the Land Use Map included designation of the subject area from Low Density Residential to Commercial. 4 Properties in the subject area that could potentially be zoned as commercial given their designation on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map include Lots 11 and 12, Block 239, and Lots 9 and 10, Block 260 These properties are currently zoned RS -7 Residential Single Family and are developed with single family residences and ancillary structures. Lots 11 and 12, Block 239, and Lots 9 and 10, Block 260, are currently vacant and are located along the 8` Street corridor 5 During analysis of the rezone proposal, staff spoke with all adjacent and neighboring property owners whose properties are designated Commercial on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map regarding the rezone proposal. By phone, property owner Dorothy Mangano (Lots 11 and 12, Block 239) agreed that a commercial designation is logical given the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation and historic zoning in the area. A grocery story was previously operated between `B" and "C" Streets north of 8th Street in the area. Mrs. Mangano agreed to include her property in the rezone on July 6, 2009 6. An inventory of vacant land within the City done in 2008 identified 2.89 available acres of Commercial Office zoned property and 87 acres of Residential Single Family (RS -7) zoned property 7 The Commercial Office zone is intended for those business, office, administrative or professional uses which do not involve the retail sale of goods, but rather provides a Planning Commission Minutes July 8, 2009 Page 4 service to clients, and do not create high traffic volumes, have extended hours of operation, or are detrimental to adjacent residential areas". 7. A rezone proposal must pass the following tests to avoid being considered a spot zone: 1) the parcel of land has not been singled out for special and privileged treatment; 2) the action is considered to be in the public interest and not only for the benefit of the land owner; and 3) the action is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. 8. The Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map were reviewed in its entirety with respect to the proposal. The following elements, goals, and policies were found to be most relevant to the proposal: Land Use Element Goal A, Policy A.1 2, and Objective A.1: Commercial Goal D and Policy D.1; Policy E.1, 2, 3 5; Transportation Element Policy B.14 and Objective B.1. The Land Use Map designation is Commercial. 9. The SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of Non Significance on July 2, 2009. This satisfies the City's State Environmental Policy Act review. 10. Notice of the rezone application was placed in the Peninsula Daily News on May 12, 2009. Mailing labels were provided by the applicant, and surrounding property owners were notified by mail on May 10, 2009. Written comment was taken on the proposal until June 22, 2009. One letter was received during the written comment period from Mr. Higdon. Mr. Larry Higdon's concern, as expressed to staff, is regarding development that would cause additional traffic issues. This is an issue to be addressed when, and if, there is a development proposal for the property. 11. The City's Public Works and Utilities Department commented that available utilities to the area include: City power, sewer, and water. The Fire Department had no objection to the rezone proposal. All emergency services are available to the area. 12. Future development proposals will require specific project review including issues such as access, noise, lighting, and landscaping. The City's Public Works and Utilities Department commented that any commercial use of the site will require off street parking to address all parking needs. Conclusions 1. The proposal is in accordance with the City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. 2. To avoid any potential claim of spot zoning, a rezone should be comprised of Lots 11 and 12, Block 239, and Lots 9 and 10, Block 260, TPA. The action rezones all of the lots within the immediate area along the 8 Street corridor that are vacant and that are eligible for rezone per the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map in accordance with the Map's Commercial designation for the area. The action cannot then be considered a spot zone. 3. As approved the rezone is compatible with surrounding zoning and land uses and will encourage development of the area as is expected by the City's Comprehensive Plan as implemented by the City's zoning regulations. The rezone is therefore in the public interest. 4. It is in the best interests of the City to designate additional property as Commercial Office. Commissioner Caudill seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Planning Commission AGmues July 8, 2009 Page 5 COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None STAFF REPORTS Planner Johns informed the Commission that the Assistant Planner position has been filled. Director West briefly mentioned ongoing projects. The AIA SDAT team has provided staff with a preliminary draft of their report. Mr West indicated that several of the suggestions have already been added to the Capital Facilities Plan, the Comprehensive Plan, or have been included in other planning actions. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS None ADJOURNMENT The meeting djourned at 5 p.m 'Scott Johns, Sec PREPARED BY S. Johns Doc Reiss, Chair A S H I N G T O N, U S A PLANNING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE ROSTER AND TESTIMONY SIGN -UP SHEET PLEASE SIGN IN Meeting Agenda of Ll B, J To help us provide an accurate record of those in attendance, please sign in. If you plan to testify, by your signature below, you certify that the testimony given is true and correct under penalty of perjury by the laws of the State of Washington. Signature below DOES NOT REQUIRE you to testify. NAME ADDRESS: SNRw R, PNJ4 /frA Harrel 1 /49 t /3Z Tµ2P.P CRAes ,f// 4/eg/A /6 ore7 A 4. Agenda Item No.