Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12/12/2001 ~ , o~ , ~~ . . FORT ANGEL,ES WAS H I N G TON, U. S. A. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION 321 East Fifth Street December 12,2001 I. CALL TO ORDER 7 p.m. II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: IV. PUBLIC HEARING: 1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 01-10 - SERENITY HOUSE. 2321 West Eighteenth Street: Request for a conditional use permit to allow a social service agency providing 24-hour care for a 50 - 70 resident emergency single adult shelter in the RMD, Residential Medium Density zone. (This item is continued from November 14,2001. The applicant has requested continuation until February 13, 2002.) 2. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA 01-07 - DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES. Approximately 4.5 miles northeast of Ediz Hook: A shoreline substantial development permit to allow an unconfined dredged material disposal site placed according to Puget Sound Dredge Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) Program criteria. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 01-12 - FOX. 616 East Fourth Street: Request for a conditional use permit to allow an accessory residential unt on property located in the RS- 7, Residential Single Family zone. 4. PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTERS 2 (Board of Adjustment). 15 (Environment). 16 (Subdivision). and 17(Zoning) of the PORT ANGELES MUNICIPAL CODE: Proposed amendments intended for clarification, correction, and streamlining of certain procedures in the PAM C. V. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC VI. STAFF REPORTS vn. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS VIII. ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Linda Nutter (Chair), Chuck Schramm (Vice), Fred Hewins, Fred Norton, Bob Philpott, Mary Craver, Rick Porter PLANNING STAFF: Brad Collins, Director; Sue Roberds, Planning Specialist. . . . MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington 98362 December 12,2001 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Bob Philpott, Fred Norton, Fred Hewins, Linda Nutter, Mary Craver, Chuck Schramm Members Excused: Rick Porter Staff Present: Brad Collins, Sue Roberds Public Present: Leigh Espry, Ken Fox, Dorothy Phillips, Marge Upham, Del Price, Ken and Marge Hansen, Kathe Smith APPROVAL OF MINUTES There were no minutes to approve. PUBLIC HEARINGS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 01-10 - SERENITY HOUSE. 2321 West Eighteenth Street: Request for a conditional use permit to allow a social service agency providing 24-hour care for a 50 - 70 resident emergency single adult shelter in the RMD, Residential Medium Density zone. (This item is continued from November 14,2001. The applicant has requested continuation until February 13,2002.) Chair Nutter opened the continued public hearing. Staff indicated that the applicant has asked for a continuation to February 13,2002. However, staff is recommending the item be continued until March, 2002, The rezone/conditional use permit process anticipated by the applicant will not be resolved by February 13,2002. Commissioner Philpott moved to continue the public hearing to March 12, 20oJ:- The motion was seconded by Commissioner Craver and passed unanimously. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA 01- 07 - DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES. Approximately 4.5 miles northeast of Ediz Hook: A shoreline substantial development permit to allow an unconfined dredged material disposal site placed according to Puget Sound Dredge Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) Program criteria. . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 12,200/ Page 2 Staff noted that a representative from the DNR was due from Olympia, and asked that the item be continued to later in the evening. Commissioner Hewins moved to place the item at the end ofthe agenda. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Norton and failed 4 ~ 2 with Commissioners Philpott, Craver, Schramm, and Nutter voting in the negative. Commissioner Philpott then moved to continue the item to following the next item on the agenda or soon after the applicant arrives. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Schramm and passed unanimously. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CUP 01-12 - FOX. 616 East Fourth Street: Request for a conditional use permit to allow an accessory residential unit on property located in the RS~7, Residential Single Family zone. Chair Nutter read the oathe that is required to be affirmed to by those wishing to testify that the information presented will be truthful to the best of their knowledge, and opened the public hearing. Ken Fox, 616 East Fourth Street, provided background information regarding the purchase of his property and the circumstance that required that he apply for an accessory residential unit. He purchased the property with the accessory residential unit established, and was shocked to find that the previous owner had remodeled the unit in conflict with zoning requirements. In response to Commissioner Norton, Mr. Fox stated that he is aware that such a use requires separate electric meters, separate sewer service, and possibly building modifications, as the remodel/modifications had not been done under a building permit. In response to Commissioner Nutter, Mr. Fox indicated that there is sufficient area for parking for the two residential uses (4 spaces) on site. Dorothy Phillips, 610 East Fourth Street, resides next door. She expressed strong concern that there is not sufficient parking on site for two residential uses. She added that she has never seen Mr. Fox's renters park on the property. They park in the street and it is her belief that no accommodation has been made on site for them to park. She read a letter to the Commission into the record stating objection to the conditional use permit based on the lack of established parking for the two uses and the lack of required setbacks for the second residential unit in the residential single family zone. Katlle Smitll, 607 East Fourth Street, lives across Fourth Street from the site. She expressed concern that the permissibility of accessory residential uses are not relative to the purpose of the single family zones. She did not have a concern with uses that house a family member or are used as an extension ofthe primary residence; however, she did not agree that the use of such structures to enable rentals is not in compliance with the RS-7, Residential . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 12.2001 Page 3 Single Family zone. She expressed concern that this situation has advanced to this stage without proper processing. Marge Upham, 623 East Fifth Street, owns the properties at 617 and 623 East Fifth Street. She was in favor of approval of the conditional use permit for the second residential unit. She was aware that the previous owner, Mr. Merriwether, was making changes to the accessory structure prior to the sale to Mr: Fox, and did not know that it was in violation of the single family residential zone standards. Ken Hansen, 607 East Fifth Street, lives across the alley from Mr. Fox. He stated that he and his wife have no objection to the second residential use. They have lived in the same home for many years. His wife was born in the residence. People have lived in the accessory unit off and on over the years. In response to Commissioner Norton, Mr. Fox responded that he did not know when the plumbing was installed or who installed it. He added that a building inspection service inspected the property prior to his purchase and deemed it to be up to proper code requirements. Dorothy Phillips, closed by saying that she would be very concerned if someone misled her regarding a sale, and would seek satisfaction from the seller. She believed Mr. Fox could sue Mr. Merriwether. She would. There being no further testimony, Chair Nutter closed the public hearing. Commissioner Schramm had no problem with the accessory residential unit if it can meet all required codes and development standards. Commissioner Hewins commented that accessory residential structures are not intended to be temporary. When time passes and the use to which the structure is constructed is not needed anymore, say for a "mother-in-law" use, the structure remains. Commissioner Craver was not concerned with the activity, but did not believe that accessory structures were meant to be converted to dwelling units. Setbacks and other standards are not necessarily the same. Commissioner Norton noted that there is an RV hookup at the rear next to the driveway area. He realized that Mr. Fox indicated that he is aware the site may not be used for residential RV occupancy, and, knowing that parking is required for the two residential uses, will keep the area available for parking and not residential RV occupancy. Commissioner Philpott said that, as a former realtor, some realtors don't always ask if proper permits have been obtained for development. Commissioner Nutter would not favor the conditional use pennit due to the size of the unit and the irregularity of the setbacks. . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 12. 2001 Page 4 Commissioner Craver moved to approve the conditional use permit for the accessory residential unit as proposed with the following conditions, findings, and conclusions: Conditions: 1. The applicant shall meet all permitting and utility requirements, including the provision of four (4) off-street parking spaces, two (2) for the principal residence and two (2) for the accessory residential unit. 2. The applicant shall obtain a variance for the accessory residential unit from the required side and rear yard setbacks. Findings: Based on the information provided in the Planning Department Staff Report for CUP 01-12 dated December 12, 2001, including all information in the public record file, comments and testimony presented during the public hearing, the Planning Commission discussion and deliberation, and the above listed condition of approval, the City of Port Angeles Planning Commission hereby finds that: 1. The applicant Kenneth E. Fox submitted a Conditional Use Pennit application for an accessory residential unit on October 23, 2001. 2. The application is for a conditional use permit to use a portion of a detached garage for an accessory residential unit on an RS-7 Residential Single Family zoned property. 3. The applicant proposes to use the upper portion of an existing, two-story garage located in the rear portion of one Townsite-sized lot located at 616 East 4th Street for an accessory residential unit. The existing garage has a total footprint of approximately 400 square feet and is setback 2.5 feet from the easterly side property line and 10 feet from the rear property line and alley. The accessory residential unit includes one bedroom, one bathroom, a kitchen, and a living room. 4. The principal residential unit contains approximately 898 square feet of total floor area. The second story accessory residential unit is 400 square feet in size, which is less than 50% of the size of the main residence. 5. Section 17.08.01 OB of the Port Angeles Municipal Code defines "an accessory residential unit as a dwelling unit which is incidental to a detached single family residence, is subordinate in space (i.e., fifty percent or less space than the single family residential use), is located on the same zoning lot as the single family residence, and is served by separate water and electrical services, in addition to a separate address. Planning Commission Minutes December 12. 200! Page 5 . . 6. Section 17.08.025(1) of the Port Angeles Municipal Code defines a dwelling unit as "one or more rooms which are arranged, designed or used as living quarters for one family only. Individual bathrooms are not necessarily provided, but complete single kitchen facilities, permanently installed, shall always be included for each dwelling unit. " 7. Section 310.7.1 of the 1997 Unifonn Building Code states that an Efficiency Dwelling Unit "...shall have a living room of not less than 220 square feet of superficial floor area. An additional 100 square feet of superficial floor area shall be provided for each occupant of such unit in excess of two." 8. The proposal is on the same zoning lot as the main dwelling. 9. The subject property is located in the 600 block of East 4111 Street between Albert and Eunice Streets. The property is legally described as Lot 6, Block 173, Townsite of Port Angeles and is the standard 50 x 140 feet (7,000 square feet) in size.. 1 O. The subject property contains an existing, one-story single family residence that has approximately 898 square feet of floor area and an existing two-story garage that has a footprint of approximately 400 square feet. In total, the lot coverage is 1,298 square feet, or 18.5% and well below the maximum of 30%. 11. PAMC 14.40.060(D) requires 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit. The subject property has a two car garage and areas around the structures where parking could be provided. 12. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential (LDR). Adjacent designations include LDR to the west, east, and south and Open Space to the north and southwest near Albert and 5th Streets. 13. The property is zoned RS-7, as well as properties to the west, east, and south. To the north and southwest, Jesse Webster Park and Peabody Creek Ravine are zoned PBP Public Buildings and Parks. Further to the east are more PBP zones (Erickson Playfield and Civic Field). Further to the north near First and 2nd Streets, the area is zoned Commercial Arterial, Commercial Office and Residential High Density. 14. There appears to be several other accessory dwelling units located in the zone and vicinity, including another unit approved earlier this year at 719 E. 3rd Street. 15. The City's Parking Ordinance requires parking spaces to be a minimum of8.5 by 18 feet in length and that two off-street parking spaces be provided for each unit of a single, two, or three family structure under PAMC 14.40.060. . 16. The Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element Policies A2 and CI, Housing Element Policies A6 and B6 state, "Accessory residential units should be allowed in certain residential zones, upon approval of a Conditional Use Permit. "and "Adequate low and moderate income housing opportunities should be provided within the Port Angeles Planning Area. " . 17. The subject property is located in the 600 block of East 4th Street between Albert and Eunice Streets. The property is legally described as Lot 6, Block 173, Townsite of Port Angeles and is the standard 50 x 140 feet in size. 18. A Determination of Non-Significance was issued for this proposed action on December 7, 2001. 19. No building permit was issued for the accessory residential unit remodel. 20. The Public Works and Utilities Department commented, "There has not been any applications submitted nor issuance of Public Works permits for this address. The second living structure should have had a sewer alteration connection permit and a request for inspection. Both structures can be served by one water meter. No request for an electrical permit on record. Electrical load information and electrical permit required. " 21. . Two written comments were received on the proposal by December 4,2001, the end of the public comment period provided for in the legal notice. The applicant provided a letter from a neighbor testifying to the prior use of the second story ofthe garage as an apartment. A second neighbor also provided a letter (Exhibit #3), which identifies the storage area over the garage as possibly an occasional extra sleeping space for family members living in the principal residence on the subject property. This second letter also testifies to problems with parking in the area and the lack of proper permits for work that has taken place in the last few years on the subject property. Staff did talk with the family who owned the house for over 20 years and sold it in 1996 or 1997, and they stated that during that entire time the garage was only used for storage and never as an apartment. Conclusions: Based on the information provided in the Department Staff Report for CUP 01-12 dated December 12, 2001, including all of the information in the public record file, comments, and testimony presented during the public hearing, the Planning Commission's discussion and deliberation, and the above listed condition of approval and the above listed findings, the City of Port Angeles Planning Commission hereby concludes that: 1. Only the second story (approximately 400 square feet) is proposed for the accessory residential unit, which was remodeled without a building permit apparently several years ago after which the utility bill significantly increased in 1998. 2. . A second dwelling unit at 616 E. 4th Street has not been established as a legally nonconforming use, since there was never an apartment in the garage that was a fully functioning dwelling unit or the apartment use was abandoned in the 1970's and not reestablished until after 1996 and without the necessary permits. 3. The definition of an accessory residential unit does not define or limit whether or not the accessory dwelling unit is occupied full or part time, nor who resides in the unit . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 12. 200 J Page 7 such as the property owner residing in the accessory unit and renting the main dwelling. 4. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan's Low Density Residential Land Use Designation, the Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element Policies A2 and Cl, Housing Element Policies A6 and B6. 5. The Comprehensive Pl~ allows for subordinate and compatible uses within different zones, including residential zones. It also specifies that accessory residential units should be allowed in certain zones by conditional use approval in order to provide adequate, affordable housing. 6. The proposed use, an accessory residential unit, is consistent with the purpose ofRS7 zone, as it is compatible with adjacent residential uses. Ifthe proposed use complies with certain definitions and the design and performance standards set forth by the Zoning Code, then it can be deemed consistent with the Zoning Code. 7. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the definition of accessory residential unit under PAMC 17.08.110(B) and the purpose of the RS7 zone. 8. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the requirements for approval of a conditional use permit as specified in P AMC 17.96.050. 9. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the Parking Ordinance, P AMC 14.40. 10. Minimum standards set forth by the Uniform Building Code normally would be addressed through the building pennit and plan review process prior to construction. However, since the dwelling unit has been built already, these requirements, such as minimum square footage for rooms and fire separation between the residential and garage uses of the building, are noted generally as conditions of approval. 11. As conditioned, the proposal is in the public use and interest. Commissioner Schramm seconded the motion which passed 5 - 1, with Commissioner Nutter voting in the negative for the reason earlier stated. At this point the Department of Natural Resources representative arrived and Item No. 2 was reopened. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - SMA 01- 07 - DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES. Approximately 4.5 miles northeast ofEdiz Hook: Planning Specialist Sue Roberds read the Department's staff report recommending approval of the shoreline substantial development permit as proposed. Chair Nutter opened the public hearing. . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 12.2001 Page 8 Leigll Esprey, 1111 Washington Street SE, Olympia, WA 98501, represented the Department of Natural Resources Aquatic Division. The site is proposed to be of use to local agencies that perfOITIl maintenance dredging in the near vicinity such as the Port and City of Port Angeles. The dredge disposal material is absolutely clean and having been carefully tested prior to dispersa1. She asked that the permit be approved for a 1 O-year period of time. In response to the Commission, Planning Specialist Roberds answered that there is no time limitation to the permit once the activity for which the permit has been authorized has begun. In this instance, the Department of Natural Resources has been informed ofthis but they are apparently asking for a time limitation of their own accord. There is no problem with this ifthat is what they desire. Commissioner Schramm expressed smprise that the material is not used to reseed Ediz Hook Spit locations. Commissioner Craver asked where specifically the material comes from? Ms. Esprey responded that when local agencies need or are required to perform dredging, for instance, in Port Angeles Harbor, the material needs to be disposed of somewhere that will not encumber normal upland locations. The site is perfect for such disposal due to its depth and the manner of dispersal is easier to accomplish by barge than by truck to an upland location. Other aquatic project activities in and around the Straits, such as Dungeness Spit, could provide material. The material must be tested as clean, and may not come from sites such as the Rayonier Mill. There being no further testimony, Chair Nutter closed the public hearing. Commissioner Schramm moved to approve Shoreline Substantial Development Permit SMA 01-07 with the following conditions, findings, and conclusions: Conditions: 1. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources shall, within ten (10) days of disposal, notify the City of Port Angeles Department of Community Development of any violations of the Department of Natural Resources Dredged Material Disposal Requirements. 2. Necessary permits from agencies with jurisdiction (WDFW, Army Corps, Ecology, DNR) shall remain valid during the life of the use. Planning Commission Minutes December 12. 2001 Page 9 . Findings: Based on the infonnation provided in the December 12, 2001, Staff Report for SMA 01-07 (including all of its attachments), comments and infonnation 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 pennit was submitted by the Department of Natural Resources Aquatic Division on October 1, 2001 to allow a dispersive open water dredge disposal site within the shoreline waters of the City of Port Angeles jurisdiction. The application is a renewal of a 1994 shoreline substantial development pennit (SMA 94(05)142) for the same activity and same applicant. 2. The subject property is owned by the State of Washington and managed by the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources Aquatic Division, Olympia, Washington. 3. Recognized dredge disposal sites in water areas have been identified through the Puget Sound Dredge Disposal Analysis(PSDDA). The Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) Management Plan was prepared through a cooperative effort between the Washington State Departments of Natural Resources, Ecology, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and the United Environmental Protection Agency. Sites are proposed in Bellingham Bay, Anderson Island/Ketron Island, Port Angeles, Port Townsend, and Rosario Strait. . 4. The Port Angeles site is proposed to be a dispersive, unconfined, open-water dredged material disposal site located approximately 4.5 miles north of Ediz Hook, at 48 degrees 11.68 minutes North Latitude, 122 degrees 24.94 minutes West Longitude North American Datum 1983. 5. No more than three disposal events are planned to occur on a particular day; however, the site is capable of receiving more visits. It is anticipated that the site will operate indefinitely, year round, with the exception of those time periods restricted through the hydraulic pennit process by the Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife including a seasonal closure from March 15th to June 14th each year. The site has been available since 1997 with 2300 cubic yards placed to date. 6. The dredged material disposal site covers 884 acres at an average depth of 435 feet. The site dispersive site requires additional testing of dredged materials prior to disposal and additional monitoring to ensure that dispersion is occurring and excessive mounding is not. . Planning Commission MinlJ/es December 12.200/ Page /0 . 7. The site location is designated as Aquatic Conservancy (A-C) on the City's Shoreline Master Program Map. All water bodies and submerged land in the City of Port Angeles jurisdiction which are not subjected to intense water-dependent uses are designated as being in the A-C environment. All submerged lands which lie below the ordinary high water mark of shorelines and which fall under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, excluding areas designated Aquatic Harbor, are identified as being Aquatic-Conservancy which includes marine waters outside the Ediz Hook Harbor. The purpose of the A-C designation is to protect and enhance the natural characteristics and functions of the resource. Dredge material disposal in PSDDA sites is an approved activity in the AC. 8. The potential environmental impacts of the dredged material disposal site have been reviewed through a 1989 Environmental Impact Statement prepared by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. A Determination of Non significance and adoption of an existing environmental document was issued by the Department of Natural Resources, acting as the SEPA lead agency, on September 6, 2001. 9. Public notice was given, as required by the Shoreline Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RCW, and the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, Chapter 15.08 P AMC by publication in the Peninsula Daily News on October 31, 2001. Pennitting agencies with jurisdiction were notified on October 29,2001, of the proposed action. . 11. The site will comply with the Management Plan for unconfined open-water disposal prepared by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Only dredged material that has passed rigorous testing criteria established by the Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Ecology, and Army Corps of Engineers for dispersive, unconfined, open-water disposal will be placed at the subject site. 12. The disposal activity is not considered fill, because it does not raise the elevation of the site, but is clean dredged material disposal. 13. Dredge material disposal is the depositing of dredged materials on land or into water bodies for the purpose of either creating new or additional lands for other uses or disposing of the by-products of dredging. Dredging activities are specifically addressed in Chapter 7 of the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program. Dredge material disposal in PSDDA sites is an approved activity under the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program Chapter 5, and Chapter 7, Section I. . Conclusions: Based on the information provided in the December 12,2001 Staff Report for SMA 01-07 including all of its attachments, comments and information presented during the public . . . Planning CommissiolT Mint/les l)ecelnber11,lOOl Page 11 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 proposal is consistent with the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, specifically Chapter 5 and Chapter 7, Section 1. B. The activity is consistent with the procedural requirements as contained in Chapter 173-14 WAC, the State of Washington Shoreline Management Act. C. The proposal will not be detrimental to other shoreline activities and is consistent with the Aquatic Conservancy Environment including the protection and enhancement of the natural characteristics and functions of the resource. D. The project will not be detrimental to the shoreline and will not interfere with public use of lands or waters. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Norton and passed unanimously. PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTERS 2 (Board of Adjustment). 15 (Environment). 16 (Subdivision). and 17(Zoning) of the PORT ANGELES MUNICIPAL CODE: Proposed amendments intended for clarification, correction, and streamlining of certain procedures in the P AMC. Planning Specialist Sue Roberds presented the Department's staff report recommending specific administrative amendments to the Municipal Code including a rezone of the City's and County's eastern parking lots to correspond with other government uses throughout the City. Commissioners Schramm and Hewins indicated their preference to deal with the rezone issue(s) separately and to follow the same process as for other applicants regarding public notification of the action. The general consensus was that this issue should be scheduled for an individual public hearing in January, 2002. Community Development Director Brad Collins reviewed a second staff report from an advisory committee that had been appointed this past spring to review the Municipal Code for clarity. In the course of that review, the advisory committee raised other issues as well. The committee's suggested changes were outlined in the staff report. Commissioner Hewins moved to continue the public hearing to February 13, 2002, 7 p.m. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Schramm and passed unanimously. Due to the detail, mainly ofthe advisory committee's suggestions, it was agreed to set a work session to be held on January 30, 2002, 5:30 p.m. Commissioner Craver left the meetingfor personal reasons at this point (9:45 p.m.) . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2001 Page 12 COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None. STAFF REPORTS Director Collins indicated that he had spoken with the Public Worksl1Jtilities Director and the Parks and Recreation Director as to the possible navigational hazards pointed out earlier in the summer by Commissioner Schramm. Staffwill be working toward trying to discover whose property the possible hazards are on, who would be responsible for their removal, and how they would be removed if found to be navigational hazards. Mr. Collins reminded the Commissioners of the Comprehensive Plan review schedule on January 23 and Februmy 27,2002, He also noted that Gary Parks, the planner intended to be hired for the Associate Planner's position, would not be accepting the position. The position is being readvertised. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS Bob Philpott noted that his position is coming up for reappointment in February as is Linda Nutter's. Linda is not eligible for reappointment at this time. He wondered ifhe was. Staff answered that it was assumed that he wished to be reappointed and asked him to confirm that assumption. Linda Nutter informed others present that Director Collins had received the Mike Wolfe Award presented by the American Institute of Certified Planners in September, 2002. Commissioner Schramm was concerned that although a great deal of time was spent on November 28th discussing the impending Comprehensive Plan review, not a word was said about the Lower Elwha S'Klallam Tribe Marina proposal discussed at the City Council meeting of December 3rd. Since the Planning Commission is the body charged with review of these types of land use decisions, he was very surprised that the Commission had been totally left out of the loop in this discussion, particularly since the November 28th Planning Commission had been pretty detailed and Tim Smith, Economic Development Director, had been present. Commissioner Philpott expressed disappointment and smprise that the Commission had not been informed of the proposal since the Commission spends many hours listening and in consideration of these types of activities for the City Council. Commissioner Nutter agreed with the previous concerns and further elaborated on the fact that the Commission has worked very hard for many years to ensure the public that their concerns are important and will be heard in their entirety prior to actions being taken. The action by Council took place after only a few minutes briefing by staff. No one knew about Planning Commission Minutes December 12.2001 Page 13 . it so no one could comment or ask questions about the 99-year lease proposal for additional public property. She felt it was an insult to the Commission's diligence on the part of the City Council as the hearing body and was concerned that the trust building that the Commission is so proud of will be tom down by such actions. Director Collins responded that these types of actions are not atypical of private projects when you don't want to provide enough information such that things change in an area because of the infonnation that is detrimental to the process. He likened the process to the confidences that must be kept in the private sector when a purchase is pending such that property prices do not escalate because of a potential proposal. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10: 15 p.m. . .~ ~~ nda Nutter, Ch ir . PREPARED BY; S. Roberds .