Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 07/13/2011ROLL CALL Members Present: John Matthews, Doc Reiss, Nancy Powers, Sissi Bruch, David Miller Members Excused. Tim Boyle, Amanda Anderson Staff Present: Sue Roberds, Scott Johns, Nathan West, Heidi Greenwood Public Present: Loran Olsen, Steve Zenovic, John Ralston, Penny Miller, Ken McInnes, Penny Hall, Monte Lannoye PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Reiss opened the meeting and led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Miller moved to approve the June 22, 2011, minutes as presented. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Matthews and passed 4 0 with Commissioner Bruch abstaining due to absence at that meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: Associate Planner Scott Johns reviewed the Department Report recommending denial of the rezone proposal. Chair Reiss read the qualifying questions for Commissioners regarding Appearance of Fairness matters. All Commissioners responded for the record that they had no Appearance of Fairness issues to report. The Chair then reviewed the quasi judicial public hearing procedures for audience members. No issues were noted. Planner Johns explained the distinction between Comprehensive Plan designations and Zoning and provided a brief history of the zoning and rezoning of the subject property to Residential Medium Density (RMD). Mr Johns noted that if rezoned to Residential High Density (RHD), any use permitted in the RHD would be permitted for the property Chair Reiss opened the public hearing. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington 98362 July 13, 2011 6:00 p.m. REZONE REQUEST REZ 11 -01 RALSTON Southwest corner of Park Avenue and Porter Street: Request to rezone approximately 1.87 acres from Residential Medium Density to Residential High Density Planning Commmssmn Afmutes Judy 13, 2011 Page 2 Steve Zenovic, Zenovic Engineering, 301 East 6`" Street, agreed that application materials were in error in reference to zoning in the area being RHD It was a simple mistake and not intended to be misleading. He believes that the site location near the Bonneville Power Administration property and Peninsula College, the site location on arterials and that a portion of the site is in the imprecise margin on the Comprehensive Plan between Low Density Residential and High Density Residential qualifies the property for flexibility in upzoning. Commissioner Brach noted that previous rezone of the site (2006) to Residential Medium Density did not result in development of the site. She asked if there is any surety that if rezoned to a higher density, development would occur at the higher density Why not wait, if there are no particular development plans, to consider rezone until such time when such an action will provide some results? Mr. Zenovic responded that the applicant simply wants to be prepared. Commissioner Powers asked if the applicant had considered a Comprehensive Plan Amendment that would more distinctly define intended development in the area rather than relying on the fact that a small portion of the site is within the imprecise margin? Mr. Zenovic does not agree with staff regarding the implications of the existence of an imprecise margin on a property He believes that the existence of an imprecise margin allows for an either /or zoning decision rather than staff's statement that a more intensive zoning needs to be justified by supporting need documentation. Loran Olsen, 1132 Highland Avenue read a prepared statement in opposition to the rezone. He presented a letter from Laurel Park Assisted Living Concepts (dated July 12, 2011) in opposition to the rezone due to a reduction of views and increased volume of use and traffic in the area. Penny Hall, 1107 Grant Avenue appreciated staff's analysis and agreed with staff's recommendation to deny the rezone. She did not see the value of a rezone to high density residential in the area and was concerned over an increase in negative activities in the area that are often a result of high density living accommodations. She noted that in area where she is familiar, an increase in high density results in additional police calls, vehicular traffic, drugs, disturbance of the peace, trespass to surrounding properties, burglaries, and she was concerned with no supervision resulting from potential dormitory use in association with Peninsula College that could result from upzoning of this property Penny Miller, 1130 E. Park Avenue lives immediately west of the subject property She absolutely opposed the rezone and supported staffs position on the matter by asking that the rezone be denied. There being no further comment, Chair Reiss closed the public hearing. Commissioner Brach indicated that the rezone seems speculative and was not supported by any real expressed need. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 3 Commissioner Miller asked who determined the action would constitute a spot zone? Director West said that ultimately that decision was his, based on legal research from Municipal Research Services Center and staff's analysis. Following discussion, Commissioner Bruch moved to recommend denial of the rezone proposal citing 12 findings and 4 conclusions in support of the action as follows: Findings: An application to rezone 5 parcels (approximately 1.87 acres) was submitted by Zenovic and Associates on behalf of property owner John Ralston to the Department of Community and Economic Development on May 12, 2011 The application was deemed to be complete on May 24, 2011 2. The entire City Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map were reviewed with respect to the proposal. The following elements, goals, policies were found to be most relevant to the proposal. Land Use Element Goal A, Policies A.1 2, and Objective A.1, Land Use Element Goals B C and Policies C.1 and C4 3 The City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map is the guiding document in determining the consistency of the City's zoning and establishes an expected framework for land use decisions within the City The zoning of any property must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map 4 Changes to the Zoning Map must be in the public interest and must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with Section 17 03 020 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code. 5 The area proposed for rezone is designated Low Density Residential (LDR) on the City of Port Angeles' Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map with a small area of the site located in the imprecise margin between the High Density Residential (HDR) designation to the north and the site designation of LDR. 6. A rezone is considered a spot zone if it meets any of the following three criteria. 1 The rezone primarily serves a private interest, 2.) The rezone is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan or surrounding territory, or 3 The rezone constitutes an arbitrary or capricious action. 7 Other properties in the area that are designated to be considered for upzoning to High Density Residential (north of Park Avenue) are located in the HDR area land use designated on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and either have not been developed or remain zoned Residential Medium Density 8. No other parcels in the vicinity are zoned RHD 9 The vicinity is largely developed with low density residential uses south of Park Avenue. Planning Compassion Minutes Julv 13. 2011 Page 4 10 No other landowners in the area are requesting any upzoning. Several comment letters were received from surrounding property owners indicating that they do not believe high density development is appropriate for the area south of Park Avenue. 11 The SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of Non- Significance on July 7, 2011 This satisfies the City's State Environmental Policy Act review Future development actions will require individual review dependent on the action. 12. Notice of the rezone application was placed in the Peninsula Daily News on June 24, 2011 Mailing labels were provided by the applicant, and surrounding property owners were notified by mail on May 24, 2011 The site was posted on June 21, 2011 Written comment was taken on the proposal until July 6, 2011 Several comment letters in opposition to the proposal were received from neighbors as a result of the legal notification and site posting. Conclusions: A. Other areas exist within the neighborhood that could develop to a high intensity land use but that development has not occurred. As presented, the proposal is a single proposal that appears to serve a single private interest. No supporting documentation was submitted to indicate a need for additional high density residential zoning in the City or in this particular neighborhood. B Most of the site is designated Low Density Residential on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map with only a small portion of the site along Park Avenue in the imprecise margin between the High Density Residential and Low Density Residential designations. C. Development trends in the area and in the City do not indicate a recognized need for higher density housing. Such a need would need to be documented and an amendment made to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map in order to approve the rezone. Currently, the rezone is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. D As proposed the rezone would constitute an illegal spot zone because the rezone primarily serves a private interest and is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan or the surrounding territory and, as such, constitutes an arbitrary or capricious action. Commissioner Powers seconded the motion that passed 5 0. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None STAFF REPORTS Director Nathan West provided an update on recent Council actions by informing Commissioners that the City Council approved the Mt. Angeles View PRD preliminary proposal. He added that Council did not support the Port Angeles Municipal Code requirements for Planning Commission Minutes July13, 2011 Page 5 development of the interior streets or require that right of way be provided for utilities along Eunice Street. Council will allow utilities to be placed in an easement in that location. Mr West noted that the City Council will continue to consider a Hearing Examiner at its July 19 meeting. The Waterfront Transportation Improvement Plan (WTIP) is near 30% design stage which is expected by the end of this month. Prototype wayfinding signs are currently being installed in six Downtown areas. Associate Planner Scott Johns noted that the amended Shoreline Master Program product is nearly ready for action. The Program is on the City's web site and he encouraged members to review and provide comment on the draft product at this stage. He also discussed the requirements for obtaining Tree City USA status. Commissioners supported staff pursuing the status as proposed. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS Commissioner Miller noted that he will be away from the area until after the August 10 meeting. ADJOURNMENT The regular meeting adjourned at 7 15 p.m. *RECONVENED MEETING* Director West noted that an item scheduled for hearing had not been included in the meeting agenda. Director West and Planning Manager moved to Director's West's office where phone communication was established with Commissioners Reiss, Miller, Matthews, and Powers to discuss the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit SMA 11 -03 PORT OF PORT ANGELES International Ferry Terminal, 100 Railroad Avenue. Chair Reiss reconvened the meeting at 8:00 p.m. (Note: Although Commissioner Bruch was not reachable by phone, she was not in attendance at the June 22 meeting so she could not act on the subject item.) Commissioners Reiss, Miller, Matthews, and Powers constituted a quorum of those members present at the June 22, 2011, regular meeting, where a premature public hearing was conducted regarding expansion and improvement to the Blackball Ferry Terminal. Commissioners agreed that, although the public hearing was conducted prematurely, nothing had occurred to change their minds, no public information was received in the interim, and they continue to support the shoreline permit. Commissioner Miller moved to approve SMA 11- 03, citing the following conditions, findings, and conclusions cited in the June 22, 2011, staff report as follows: Conditions The applicant is responsible for obtaining all necessary permits from local, state and federal agencies. Verification of permit issuance shall be supplied to the city prior to beginning any site alteration or construction. Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 6 2. At no time during reconstruction of the pier facility shall work barges be allowed to ground out on the Harbor bedlands. 3 All new or reconstructed structures shall be in compliance with zoning regulations in existence on the date the permit was accepted as complete (May 16, 2011). 4 No construction or demolition materials shall be allowed to remain in waters of the Port Angeles Harbor All necessary best management practices to avoid deposition of any material into the Port Angeles Harbor shall be employed during all construction/demolition activities. 5 The Port of Port Angeles and the selected contractor shall supply the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe with a c schedule of construction activities. 6. If closure of the Waterfront Trail is required for safe passage, the applicant shall be responsible to provide adequate and accurate signage directing users of the Waterfront Trail to any established Trail detour Findings Based on the information provided in the June 22, 2011, Staff Report for SMA 11 -03 including all of its attachments, comments and information presented during the public hearing, and the Planning Commission's discussion and deliberation, the City of Port Angeles Planning Commission hereby finds that: 1 An application for a shoreline substantial development permit was submitted by the Port of Port Angeles, on May 16, 2011, for the repair and reconstruction of portions of the Blackball Ferry landing pier (Terminal 1). 2. A Determination of Non Significance was issued by the Port of Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official for the proposal on September 22, 2010 The environmental materials included an extensive Biological Evaluation (Sea -Run Consulting 2010) of the site and possible project impacts. Acceptance of the document satisfies the City's response under SEPA regulations of the State. 3 The Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance and critical areas ordinances have been reviewed with respect to this application. 4 The site is designated Commercial in the City's Comprehensive Plan, Central Business District (CBD) in the City's Zoning Ordinance, and Urban Harbor /Aquatic Harbor in the City's Shoreline Master Program. 5 The following adopted City policies are most relevant to the proposed project: Comprehensive Plan Growth Management Element Goal A Policy 1.c., Land Use Element Policies A -2, and Transportation Element Goal A, Policy 6, the City's Shoreline Master Program's Urban Harbor designation and Chapter 3 Goals, A. Shoreline Use Element Goals 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, B Economic Development Element, Goals 1 3, C. Circulation Element Goals 1, 2, 4, D Conservation Element Goals 3 6, E. Public Access Element Goals 1 2; G. Historical /Cultural Element Goal 1, Chapter 4, General Policies and Regulations: A. Universally Applicable Regulations 1, 2, 4, 5, B. Archaeological and Historic Resources Policy 2, D Environmental Impacts Policy -1, I. Salmon and Steelhead Habitats, Policies 1 4, J Parking Policy 1, K. Public Access Policies 1 -3 5, 0 Water Quality Policies 1 2; Chapter 5, Policies D -1 and 2, and Chapter 6, Policies C -3 4, H. Transportation Facilities Policy 3, all associated regulations. 6. The City's Waterfront Trail runs east and west along the north side of Railroad Avenue abutting the project's south side. Use of the Trail should not be disrupted as a result of the proposed construction activities. 7 Notice of the project was published in the Peninsula Daily News on May 19, 2011 Notice of the proposal was mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on May 17, 2011 The site was posted on May 19, 2011 8. One public comment letter was received from the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe in support of the project. 9 Structures that extend into the public right -of -way are non conforming and are required to be moved to become conforming upon reconstruction. The rebuilt canopy cover will be required to be located onto the applicant's property, which is approximately 9.5 feet north of its existing location. 10 The site is located entirely within the V5 flood zone (Flood Insurance Rate Map), described as areas of 100 -year coastal flooding with velocity In accordance with Section 15 12.240 PAMC, the Shoreline Substantial Development acts as the necessary floodplain permit. Planning Co nnuss,on Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 7 Conclusions Based on the information provided in the June 22, 2011 Staff Report for SMA 11 -03 including all of its attachments, comments and information presented during the public hearing, the Planning Commission's discussion and deliberation. and the above listed findings, the City of Port Angeles Planning Commission hereby concludes that: A. The proposed project as conditioned, is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Environmentally Sensitive Areas Ordinance, and Shoreline Master Program. B. The project will not be detrimental to the shoreline. C. The project is primarily repair and improvement to an existing water dependent use. D As conditioned, the proposed project will not interfere with public use of lands or waters. E. The project has been thoroughly reviewed through a Biological Evaluation provided with the application materials that indicated no adverse impacts would result from the proposal. F The project will result in the relocation of structures to within the property boundaries. G. The proposal is consistent with requirements of Section 15 12.240 PAMC The Shoreline Substantial Development permit acts as the necessary floodplain review The motion was seconded by Commissioner Matthews and passed 4 0. S49-/ c Sue Roberds, S PREPARED BY S. Rober s etary Doc Reiss, Chair