Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12/10/1997 . . . HEARING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR THOSE NEEDING ASSISTANCE. AGENDA CITY OF PORT ANGELES PLANNING COMMISSION 321 East Fifth Street Port Angeles, W A 98362 December 10, 1997 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL In. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of November 12, 1997 IV. PUBLIC HEARING: 1. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT - MCA 97-04 - MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS - City wide' Various minor Municipal Code amendments to the City's land use ordinances by increasing the Zoning Code height limitation for certain commercial zones, providing and amending area and dimensional standards in the PBP zone, adding a subdivision identification sign standard, and adopting recent SEP A guidelines by reference. PUBLIC MEETING: REZONE REQUEST - REZ 97-02 - CL.A.LLAM COUNTY YMCA\VETERAN'S CENTER- Northw.es1 and southwest comers 0[3 rd .and...ErancisBtred: Request to rezone property from RS-7, Residential Single Family to PBP, Public Buildings and Parks. PLANNING COMMISSION; Tim Genna", (Chair), Dean Reed (Vice), Bob King, Ciody Souders. Linda Nuller, Mary Craver, Fredric Hewins STAFF: Brad Collins. Director. Sue Roberds Planning Spedalist. David Sawyer. Senior Planner. . . . PUBLIC HEARINGS: 2. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEYELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA 97- 14 ~ CITY OF PORT ANGELES - 640 Ediz Hook Rd A proposal to place approximately 75' of rip rap along the shoreline in the ill, Industrial Heavy zone to protect the shoreline area. (Continued from November 12, 1997.) 3. MUNICIPAL CUDE AMENDMENT - MeA 97-0hCITY OF PORT ~GELES - Environmentally Se.n.sitiY.ekea (ESA): Amendment of the City's Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) Ordinance, to further define what areas are classified as ESAs and how applications are processed. V. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC VI. STAFF REPORTS Vll. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS VIII. ADJOURNMENT SEASON'S GREETINGS!! All correspondence pertaining to a meeting or hearing item received by the Planning Department at least one day prior to the scheduled meeting/ hearing will be provided to Commission members at the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE: Spokesmen for the proponents and opponents will be given an opportunity to speak to the request. Information submitted should be factual, relevant and not merely duplication of a previous presentation. A reasonable time (10 minutes) shall be allowed the spokesman; others shall be limited to short supporting remarks (5 minutes). Other interested parties will be allowed to comment briefly (5 minutes each) or make inquiries. The Chair may allow additional public testimony if the issue warrants it. Brief rebuttal (5 minutes) for proponents and opponents will be heard separately and consecutively with presentation limited to their spokesman. Rebuttal shall be limited to factual statements pertaining to previous testimony. Comments should be directed to the Board, not the City Staff representatives present, unless directed to do so by the Chair. . . . MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington 98362 December 10,1997 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Linda Nutter, Fredric Hewins, Dean Reed, Bob King, Cindy Souders, Mary Craver, Tim German Member Absent: None Staff Present: Brad Collins, David Sawyer, Sue Roberds, Mike Brown Public Present: Brooke Taylor, Joe Michalczik, Mary Raymond, Jane Ahlvers, Jay Peterson, Jim Rumpeltes, Michell Roberts, Christine Chang, E. Ahlvers, Michael Balsh, Dan Maguire, Norma McCormack APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Hewins noted corrections to the November 12, 1997, minutes to the vote on page 3, and there was a clarification as to the abstentions for Commissioners Reed and Nutter in approval of the October minutes. Commissioner Reed moved to approve the October 22,1997, minutes with the previously noted corrections. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Nutter, and passed 6 - 0, with Commissioner Souders abstaining. PUBLIC HEARINGS: MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT - MCA 97-04 - MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS - Citv wide: Various administrative Municipal Code amendments to the City's land use ordinances by increasing the Zoning Code height limitation for certain commercial ~ones, providing and amending area and dimensional standards in the PBP zone, adding a subdivision identification sign standard, and adopting recent SEP A guidelines by reference. Planning Specialist Sue Roberds reviewed the Planning Department's staff report and answered questions regarding the Department's recommended amendments to the Municipal Code. Chair German opened the public hearing. Commissioner Craver questioned why staffhas proposed an increase in the height limitation in the Commercial Arterial (CA) and Community Shopping District (CSD) zones. Planning Director Collins responded that it makes sense to raise the height limitation in the Planning Commission Minutes December 10,1997 Page 2 . CA zone to 35' from 30', Multiple family dwelling units are permmitted in the CA and CSD zones as well as the less intensive RHD and RMD zones; however, as the CA and CSD zones have height limits ofJO', multiple family structures are restricted to 30' in those more intensive commercial zones. He added that this request was brought to the Planning Department by a member of the public who questioned the height restriction. There was discussion as to why the staff is proposing to increase the height liitation in the PBP. Staff responded that there are uses that are allowed in the PBP such as radio stations, public utility service buildings and some government uses which frequently need to be taller than 30' to function. The amendment would elimInate the need to approach the City to request that increase in each instance. The need for parking for those uses which are allowed in the PBP zone will determine the maximum lot coverage possibilities for proposed properties, and the proposed development standards will cause the scale of proposed structures to be in line with adjacent neighborhood developments. Previously there were no height and lot coverage limitations due to the large setback requirements assuming large scale public buildings. Chair German opened the public hearing. There being no one in the audience to testify, he closed the public hearing. . The Commission began a detailed discussion regarding the proposal to provide standards for subdivision signage Planning Director Collins responded that the reason for allowing sign age for subdivisions is to establish a sense of place in those neighborhoods. A subdivision developer has one chance to identify his development with a tasteful sign as opposed to those developed areas that are not necessarily planned as subdivisions with individual identities. Although a sign is somewhat commercial in nature, the proposed amendment only allows for identification of the subdivision. To date, staff has dealt with subdivision identification signs as aesthetic features because there is no current sign standard that allows them. Port Angeles does not contain too many properties that are large enough to be developed as subdivisions as the City was platted in a straightforward manner one hundred years ago. However, it is not uncommon in cities where large subdivisions regularly occur to find signs identifYing the developments. Staff is asking for direction from the Commission as to the permissibility of such signs at this time. Commissioner Craver found no problem with allowing an identification sign within limits for subdivisions. Commissioner German agreed that identification signs can be done tastefully and allow for identification of specific developments. The sign size should be controlled. . Commissioner Souders didn't have a concern with the concept of a neighborhood identification sign but disagreed with signage only being allowed in subdivisions and not City- wide. Staff responded to Commissioner Craver that no minimum lot size or width is proposed in the PBP amendment. In some situations, a small public structure such as a street end park or utility vault may be placed on smaller parcels of land. The use of the property, setbacks . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 10.1997 Page 3 relative to the adjacent zone, and parking requirements will determine the extent of the permitted use. Commissioner King moved to approve the Municipal Code Amendment as proposed by staff citing the findings and conclusions as follows: Findings: I. The City Planning Department's policy is to note areas of concern, inconsistency, or error contained in the City's development regulations within the City of Port Angeles and bring these issues to the attention of the City Council through the Planning Commission for review and possible amendment in a timely manner. 2. Situations have occurred where areas of concern or inconsistency have been noted including a lack of permitted subdivision identification signage, inconsistent height limitations for multi family developments, ineffective setback regulations in the PBP zone, and out of date SEP A regulations. 3. The City does not provide for subdivision identification signs in residential zones. 4. The Port Angeles Municipal Code requires that property identification signs be no larger than one (1) square foot in size, unlighted, and displaying only the name of the occupant in residential areas. 5. The State Department of Ecology revised the State Environmental Policy Act ( SEP A) regulations on November 10, 1997. The City has 180 days in which to revise its SEP A regulations for compliance with those amendments. 6. Structures in multi family residential districts may be 35' in height. Commercial zones currently restrict height to 30'. Multi family residential uses are permitted in commercial districts. 7. The majority ofPBP zoned public properties are not developed in a campus-like manner. Conclusions: A. An increase in height limitations within the Commercial Arterial and Community Shopping District will provide consistency with multi family zoning development standards. B. The SEPA amendments are consistent with the State's revised regulations. c. The amendment to the City's subdivision regulations provides for adequate identification of approved residential subdivision developments. D. The amended PBP development standards will result in improved buffering between Planning Commission Minutes December 10, 1997 Page 4 . PBP uses and adjacent non-PBP zones properties and increased design flexibility of PBP properties. E. The proposed amendments are in the public's interest. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hewins and passed 4 - 3. Commissioners Reed, Nutter, and Souders voted against the amendments. They collectively disagreed only with the proposal to establish a sign standard for subdivisions as they did not feel there is a need for subdivisions to be identified independently of the surrounding neighborhoods. There was no objection to any of the remaining amendments. REZONE REQUEST - REZ 97-02 - CLALLAM COUNTY YMCA\VETERAN'S CENTER- Northwest and southwest corners on rd and Francis Street: Request to rezone property from RS-7, Residential Single Family to PBP, Public Buildings and Parks. Commissioner King noted that he is a member of the Clallam County YMCA but does not serve on the Board. He offered to stand down from the proceedings if there was any objection from the Commissioners or any member of the audience. No objection was raised. . Chair German asked Planning Director Collins to explain the public meeting procedure. Mr. Collins stated that, due to the passage of Senate House Bill (SHB) 1724, the City needed to determine which board would be the official hearing body. In cases of site specific hearings, which the YMCNClallam County request is, the Planning Commission conducts a public "meeting" based on written public testimony received during the published comment period and makes a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will then conduct a public hearing and take action. He added that two letters of public testimony were received during the comment period which were included in the review materials and staff report. Senior Planner David Sawyer reviewed the Planning Department's staff report and referred to two attachments that identified the allowable building envelopes should the properties be rezoned to PBP as requested. He reminded the Commission that the action previously taken (MCA 97-04) would allow the previously permitted PBP envelope to be dependent on the adjacent property's (RS-7 in this case) zoning. . Commissioner Reed asked for clarification that what is being considered is the rezone of the YMCA property and the Veteran's Center properties and those existing uses. He had no objection to the Veteran's Center being rezoned to PBP as it is owned and operated by Clallam County. He expressed concern that the YMCA is not truly a public use but is a quasi public recreational operation that is being proposed to be rezoned to a "Public Buildings and Parks" use where uses are to be publicly owned. He asked if another quasipublic recreational use such as the Sequim Boys and Girls Club made the same request if the same recommendation would be made. Planning Director Collins responded that a precedent for other quasipublic uses could be set. Planning Commission Minutes December 10, 1997 Page 5 . Senior Planner Sawyer explained that the YMCA's operation can be likened to a public use as it is largely public in its operation. Although it is funded through memberships it does qualify and depend on public grants. Planning Director Collins responded to Commissioner German that the YMCA use is nonconforming because of the residential zoning designation of the property. The rezone application is the V's attempt to bring the property into conformance with the zoning. The proposed YMCA rezone is a continuation of the PBP zone for Erickson Playfield, a City park, and Civic stadium, not oriented toward the residential neighborhood to the west. The YMCA site is developed nearly to its full potential whereas the Veteran's Center property is only partially developed and has much more potential for development options. The fundamental issue at hand in this application is to recognize the existing historical uses of the properties and to allow those uses to continue in a conforming manner consistent with other public and quasipublic uses in the City. Commissioner Reed asked if the PBP zoning designation would allow development of the properties that a residential zoning classification would prohibit outside of a conditional use or variance process and whether a commercial entity would be able to ask for a PBP designation or whether all such uses must be public. . Planner Sawyer responded that the City's Board of Adjustment has permitted development of the residentially zoned YMCA site by the approval of variances for the past several years but did not feel that further development of the nonconforming use could be justified and denied the YMCA's request for further expansion in October, 1997. Director Collins noted those uses that are permitted in the PBP zone and that the zone's purpose statement indicates that uses are to be "publicly owned". In general, commercial uses are not located in a PBP district. Recent expansions to the YMCA facility have been by conditional use permit in the RS-7 zone. The Veteran's Center use could not be changed other than to a permitted use under its current RS- 7 designation, nor would it be allowed to expand under its current nonconforming use status. Commissioner Nutter drew attention to the letter received from Mr. and Mrs. John Raymond, who were concerned with the ramifications to the neighborhood if the PBP designation is placed on the YMCA property, as (although the YMCA has been a good neighbor) another PBP use may not be. At the request of the Commission, Jim RumpeItes, County Administrator, 223 East Fourth Street, confirmed that the County is a part of this rezone request. . Commissioner Souders pointed out that as the site is heavily developed with YMCA use, it is unlikely that a different use that is permitted under the PBP zone would be any more impactive, and therefore she moved to recommend that the City Council approve the rezone as requested citing the following findings and conclusions in support of that decision: Planning Commission Minutes December 10, 1997 Page 6 . 5. 6. 7_ 8. . 9_ . Findings: 1. The proposed rezone request is to change the subject area zoning from RS-7, Residential Single Family, to Public Buildings and Parks. (See Attachment A to the December 10,1997 Staff Report for REZ 97-02.) 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential 3. The subject area is presently zoned RS-7. 4. The subject area is presently developed with the Clallam County YMCA and the Clallam County Veterans Center. The YMCA property has been utilized by the YMCA since 1952. The Veterans Center property is owned by Clallam County. Civic buildings and recreation facilities are not permitted uses in the RS-7 zone. Civic buildings and recreation facilities are permitted uses in the PBP zone. The use of the PBP zoning is to identify either environmentally sensitive areas such as streams, ravines, marine bluffs; or wetlands and public buildings and uses. Due to the nature, size and desired scattered distribution of public facilities throughout the City, PBP zoned properties are found in a variety of Comprehensive Plan land use designations, including the Low Density Residential designation. 10. Comprehensive Plan policies which relate to the proposed rezone include: Land Use Element Policies Al and 2, C1, and J3, and Utilities and Public Services Element Policies Al and B3. 11. The SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the proposal on December 8, 1997 (See Attachment B of the December 10, 1997 Staff Report for REZ 97-02). 12. The posted public comment period for this application ran from November 10 to November 25, 1997. During that time, the Planning Department received two letters of comment - one from Jon and Mary Raymond, 719 E. Third Street, Port Angeles requesting that the Veterans Center property not be rezoned, and from Ernie and Jane Alvers, 708 E. Third Street, Port Angeles requested that the YMCA property not be rezoned. The letters of comment are attached as Attachment D to the December 10, 1997 Staff Report forREZ 97-02.) Conclusions: A. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Policies Al and 2, CI, and 13, and Utilities and Public Services Element Policies Al and B3 as listed in the December 10, 1997 Staff Report for REZ 97-02. . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 10, 1997 Page 7 B. The proposed rezone recognizes the existing and historic use of the property as public facilities. C. The rezone is in the public use and interest and the properties' locations on Francis Street are compatible with the surrounding zoning and land uses. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Reed and passed 6 - 1, with Commissioner Hewins voting in the negative. Commissioner Hewim; stated that his negative vote was due to the quasi-public nature of the YMCA in a zone that is designated for public use facilities. He had no concern regarding the Veterans Center property being rezoned to PBP. The Commission took a ten minute break at 8:30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS: SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA 97- 14 - CITY OF PORT ANGELES - 640 Ediz Hook Rd. A proposal to place approximately 75' of rip rap along the shoreline in the ill, Industrial Heavy zone to protect the shoreline area. (Continued from November 12, 1997.) Planner David Sawyer reviewed the Planning Department's staff report recommending approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. He explained that due to time requirements regarding the State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A) procedure the Commission may not take an action on the issue until December 26, 1997. Staff is suggesting that the public hearing be opened and continued to January 7, 1998, which would be a special meeting date. Chair German opened the public hearing. Mike Brown, City Public Works Department, 223 East Fifth Street, agreed with staff's recommendation and course of action and was available for questions. Following discussion as to the continuance to an irregular meeting date in January, the Planning Commission agreed to schedule a meeting for January 7, 1998, 7 p.rn., City Hall, in lieu of the regular January 14, 1998, meeting. Commissioner Nutter moved to continue the public hearing to January 7, 1998. The motion was seconded by Commissioner King and passed unanimously. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT - MeA 97-03 - CITY OF PORT ANGELES - Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA): Amendment of the City's Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) Ordinance, to further define what areas are classified as ESAs and how applications are processed. Planning Director Collins reviewed the changes recommended by the ad hoc advisory committee and the City Attorney to the City's Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) Ordinance. He explained that the ad hoc committee was comprised of two Planning . . . Planning Commission Minures December J O. J 997 Page 8 Commissioners, three field experts in engineering and critical areas and a citizen at large position. The Ordinance was adopted in 1991 largely as a model ordinance from the Department of Ecology and has been analyzed by the committee for approximately one year in an attempt to mold it into a working document that is flexible yet meets the State and City's standard requirements. Chair German opened the public hearing. Jay Peterson, 619 S. Chase Street, spoke as a member of the ESA ad hoc advisory committee. The Committee was formed of users who have worked with the existing ordinance in an attempt to make it more user friendly and locally achieveable. The proposed amendments will ensure the requirements and development standards and not discriminitively prohibitive. A map is included which identifies sensitive areas and a matrix has been added for quick reference. He encouraged the Planning Commission to recommend the changes as proposed to be approved by the City Council. Commissioner Hewins noted that the term <<functions and values" appears in the amended ordinance, but there is no definition to describe the intent of the wording. He asked that a definition be included. Planner Sawyer noted that the map earlier described is not flawless, but it is as near perfect as is known as present. Changes and additions may be necessary. Commissioner Craver asked that a more definitive time period be included in the test wherin the Planning Director may "postpone" a decision to a time certain. There being no further testimony, Chair German closed the public hearing. Commissioner Hewins moved to continue discussion to January 7, 1998,7 p.m., and directed staff to provide the definitions requested by the Commission in its discussion. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Nutter and passed unanimously. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None. STAFF REPORTS Director Collins thanked Commissioner Souders for the extra time she spent in her service on the ESA ad hoc advisory committee meetings. Merry Christmas was wished to all. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS None. . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 10,1997 Page 9 ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9: 55p.m. -J:: se~::~ /~ Tim German, Chair PREPARED BY: S. Roberds PLANNING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE ROSTER AND TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET For the subject of items listed on the meeting Agenda Of0-~P--1~ /0, L 997 (Date) Note: IE I plan on testifying by signature below I certify that my testimony is true and correct under penaliy of perjury by the laws of the State of Washington. PLEASE SIGN IN . '1? ,4 . ~~1k NAME: ADDRESS: '( '~cJ1 p -t!-, . .