Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 07/22/2015 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Port Angeles, Washington 98362 July 22, 2015 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Duane Morris, David Miller, Scott Headrick, Brian Hunter, Chad Aubin Members Absent: Nancy Powers, One vacancy Staff Present: Nathan West, Scott Johns Public Present: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Hunter opened the regular meeting at 6:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Morris moved to decide upon approval of the April 22, 2015 and June 10, 2015 Minutes after the reports from Commission Members were heard. PUBLIC HEARING: None COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC None STAFF REPORTS Associate Planner Scott Johns gave a presentation on the growing"Tiny House Movement". Commissioner Morris opened the discussion by asking how many manufactured homes could currently be placed on a 21,000 RS7 lot. Director Nathan West responded that according to current code, at least two units could be placed on a single RS-7 lot. Associate Planner Johns added that the way our code is written, there can only be one, because there can only be a primary unit and an accessory unit. The accessory unit must remain less than 50% of the primary unit's living area. If you use a micro-unit of 500 square feet, an accessory residential unit(ARU) will have to be 250 square feet. There will have to be some modifications to code if two micro units were to be allow on an RS-7 zoned lot. Commissioner Morris asked if it was possible for lots to be small enough that each park model could own their own lot. Associate Planner Scott responded that a"Binding Site Plan", much like what has been developed by the Port of Port Angeles at the Airport Industrial Park, could be created. It would take Municipal Code changes as well. Director West mentioned that currently under an infrll overlay zone, if you have 21,000 square feet, as long as you are not exceeding the underlying zone's density requirement a property owner could reduce individual lot sizes below the 7,000 square foot lot minimum. Commissioner Morris made comment about the value to certain demographics that these small housing units can have. Micro-housing communities should not feel or look like a mobile home �` park. You cannot build a community with wheeled housing. It should be permanent and owner Planning Commission Minutes 2015 Page 2 occupied. Commissioner Miller agreed that accommodating tiny housing is a great idea. Park units and tiny housing should be differentiated from each other. There might be a creative way to provide for ownership. Providing active/passive recreation space is an important consideration when allowing for multiple units on a smaller lot. A homeowners association for each of these possible developments would be a good idea. Commissioner Headrick stated that park models are not governed by the building code the same way that stick-built homes are. They are governed by the Department of Labor and Industries. Minimum room sizes and ceiling heights are not regulated in the same way. There are some issues there. Most jurisdictions will not allow a park model's wheels to be taken off and be fixed to a foundation because of differences in regulation. He did not think that shipping container housing would work. He was concerned about tiny housing clustered on lots being rented. Chair Hunter commented on and asked about the hardship of financing with the Conditional Use Permit Process for an ARU and how often it was an issue. Director West responded that it may be an issue 25% of the time. Chair Hunter inquired if ARU's could be attached to the primary dwelling unit. Associate Planner Johns responded that this they in fact could. Chair Hunter questioned if vacation rentals were regulated within the City. Director West responded that the City restricts the use of residences as vacation rentals and has controls on them,but that they are not actively being enforced or identified. In some cases they register themselves and pay lodging taxes. They would be allowed in residential high density and medium density zones, but there are rentals occurring under the radar without regulation. If there are complaints it is from adjacent property owners concerned about the constant turnover. Chair Hunter discussed the state of his own neighborhood at 5th and"K" Streets and the transient nature of the residents in the neighborhood due to seasonal residency, late shift work, single person occupancy, and empty lots. He is used to the transient nature around in his neighborhood, although also understands all the issues with the potential for transient populations changing the nature of a neighborhood. He stated that, for the record, he is fully I support of allowing accessory dwelling units as a right, with continued restriction to size. Director West finished the discussion by stating that what was important to him was that as changes begin to be made, Staff and the Planning Commission realize what is already allowable according to City Code. There is no reason why you couldn't build many of the examples in Staff's presentation. One of the key changes that will need to be made are rational setbacks to the residential single family areas, garage workshops as a nuisance or not. Currently a residence requires a 20 foot setback, whereas a garages require a 10 foot setback. Many of our RS-7 zoned properties abut an alley. There is certainly merit to changing the setbacks in some of these zones. Currently there are not a lot of ARU applications being submitted. Some changes to the code could facilitate more of these types of ARU's being built. Entertaining the notion of park models could happen if the units are able to meet code and be tied down to a foundation. The Commission may not want to explore park models due to their current inability to meet the City's building code. Director West explained that this concluded Staffs presentation on the topic. The next time this topic is brought before the Commission there it will be in the form of an outline or draft ordinance for the Planning Commission to consider. Commissioner Miller asked if Staff wanted to get a consensus on Park Models from the Planning Commission Minutes 2015 Page 3 Commission. Director West responded that it didn't need to happen immediately, but that it could be good to have thoughts prepared by the next meeting that"Tiny Housing" is brought up. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS Commissioner Morris asked to discuss what happened at the June 10th meeting. He stated that he would try to not do this judge negatively, but that some things happened that he was not comfortable with. He stated that he arrived at the meeting a few minutes early, as he usually does. Staff asked at 6:00 for the meeting to start. Commissioner Miller, having the gavel in front of him, proceeded to open the meeting. As the meeting started he wondered if he had gotten there a little late and that's why Commissioner Miller was chairing the meeting. As Vice Chair, his understanding was that he should have stood if Chair if Chair Headrick was absent. He stated that he wanted to know what prompted Commissioner Miller to assume the role of lead in the meeting. A day after the meeting he had a conversation with Associate Planner Johns in which he told him that if there was not a conflict of interest that he should be running the meeting if Chair Headrick was not present. When the meeting was opened, there was no pledge of allegiance and the minutes could not be accepted because of a lack of quorum. Commissioner Morris then stated that after looking at a proposal for a mural change for a fagade grant, the Commission went on to consider the election of a new Chair and Vice Chair. There were several nominations from absent Commissioners read by Mr. West and from those present. He felt that things didn't run smoothly. There were no seconds on the nominations. He didn't want to have to attend a meeting run that way again. A fourteen minute meeting does not represent quality, which is more important the speed. He wanted to know what transpired, and why Commissioner Miller chaired the meeting. Commissioner Miller responded by stating that the gavel and meeting minutes books were placed next to his seat and he understood that as an invitation for him to run the meeting. He forgot about the co-chair position and its duties. He mentioned that he requested the elections be delayed, but that Staff stated the already late election process meant they should occur as soon as possible. He would have preferred that they had waited to nominate until there was a full quorum. Commissioner Morris replied that he didn't see it as an affront to him, but that there is a certain procedure that is used when there is an election. There is also procedures used during the course of a meeting. They are called Robert's Rules of Order. It's standard procedure to use those when conducting a meeting. It's up to staff to know who should be leading a meeting. The Commissioners should also know. He realized now that he could have taken point of order. He wants the process to be better; that it can be better. There are a lot of things that he would like to see the Commission do that would make the process better. For instance, calling for a second before taking an action, or taking a moment for those on the Commission to make a definitive decision before making a motion or second. If there is any differences of opinion those should be aired. Associate Planner Johns made it clear that according to Robert's Rules of Order that discussion could only occur after a motion has been made. He stated that although the Commission is run by Robert's Rules of Order, but that it has typically been done so loosely. Director West responded that it is very important that staff provide apologies, and that he takes full responsibility for any mistakes that were made during the meeting. Staff should have been aware of who the Co-Chair was that evening. It might come back to the provision of more Planning Commission Minutes 2015 Page 4 structure during the meeting. Robert's Rules are a guideline for the Commission, but there is something to be said for providing more structure during the meeting. It's important that we have more detail in this meeting. There is clarification on how Staff legally defined what transpired in the minutes for June 10th. However there are alternatives to providing clarity to what transpired at the last meeting. One of them is elaboration of the quorum that was in fact there at the last meeting. Additionally, if there are concerns about procedures such as a lack of a second during nominations for the election, it would not be of any harm to have the Commissioners ratify the election related decisions that were made at the last meeting. These are the suggestions from Staff. Chair Hunter asked if there was discussion from the Commission. He asked if there needs to be a ratification process. Commissioner Morris stated that there were four Commissioners present at the last meeting. Director West responded that four Commissioners present at a meeting represent a legal quorum. Associate Johns made it clear that those that were here that could vote of the June 10, 2015 Meeting Minutes represent a quorum. Chair Hunter moved to consider the June 10 minutes. Commissioner Miller moved to accept the minutes. Commissioner Hedrick Seconded the Motion. All were in favor. Chair Hunter Closed the meeting. Commissioner Morris asked if they could in fact ratify the elections from June 10. Director West replied that the meeting would have to be reopened before it was considered. Chair Hunter reopened the meeting to discuss the validity of the elections on June 10. He recommended that they wait until all Commissioners who were present for the election were present to discussion its validity. Commissioner Hedrick made a motion that the Commissioners ratify the election at a later date when all Commissioners are present who voted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Aubin. All were in favor. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:1 .m. en , Secretary Brian Hunter, Chair PREPARED BY: Ben Braudrick