Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout051415 CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF MAY 14, 2015 CALL TO ORDER The Port Townsend Planning Commission met in regular session on May 14, 2015, in the Port of Port Townsend Commission Building at 333 Benedict Street. Chair Mick-Hager called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. ROLL CALL Commissioners present at roll call were Kirit Bhansali, Nan Evans, Douglas Frick, Rick Jahnke, Monica Mick-Hager, and Dwight Nicholson with Jack Range excused. Staff members present were Planning Director Lance Bailey, Planning Manager/Senior Planner Judy Surber, City Clerk Joanna Sanders, and Deputy Clerk Amber Long. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA Commissioners agreed to change the wording of the line item under VII.B. from "refine" to "discuss and refine." Staff clarified that the intention is to determine topics for the breakout tables at the Town Meeting, not to recommend a scope of work. Motion: Kirit Bhansali moved to approve the agenda as amended. Dwight Nicholson seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 6-0 by voice vote. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -APRIL 23, 2015 Motion: Douglas Frick moved to approve the minutes of April 23, 2015, with modifications as follows: - Page 2, 1st paragraph: "memorandum by Eric Toews would beseme provide a background for the Commission's assessment" - Page 2, 3rd paragraph: "Mr. Frick left the meeting at 8:11"moved to the next page before "At 8:15 p.m., the meeting resumed." - Page 2, 6th paragraph: for Q 1 and Q2, "(top three five)."Dwight Nicholson seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 6-0 by voice vote. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA There was no public comment. Planning Commission Meeting May 14, 2015 Page 1 of 6 PUBLIC HEARING Amendments to PTMC Chapter 17.32 Chair Mick-Hager read the public hearing script. No Commissioners had a financial or property interest to disclose. Planning Director Lance Bailey gave the staff presentation. On April 9th, the Planning Commission directed staff to bring back specific code language. Mr. Bailey provided a revised Exhibit 2 at the meeting, correcting the chapter designation in the heading and making language more consistent regarding the additional commercial/manufacturing uses. On page 2 ("17.32.020 Scope"), staff changed formatting and added language regarding permitted uses. The goal is to allow the PUD process to expand the uses within certain parameters. Mr. Bailey clarified that split-zone properties would have to be under single ownership. He gave background information for the addition on page 3, allowing a modification to maximum floor area ratios. Design must be consistent with surrounding area, and staff would have some discretion in allowing the modification. Discussion of staffs findings and conclusions was deferred until after public testimony and discussion by Commission. The Commission had the following suggestions and questions regarding Exhibit 2: - Page 1, Purpose, "City's economic strategy" and "City's economic development strategy" should be made consistent with what is used in the Comprehensive Plan. - Page 1, D, change first word ("permit") to "allow." - Page 1, D (2), make the following change: "which are seppartive Of consistent with and supported by the City's economic development strategy." - Page 1, D (3), there was general agreement that the statement is confusing. After discussion, it was agreed to delete (3) entirely. - Page 1, D, suggestion that "and" between (1) and (2) should be changed to "and/or." It was ultimately decided to retain "and," because the statement is about what is allowed, not what is required. - Page 2, B (1), "Planned uwa+p unit development" - Page 2, B, staff clarified that residential use would be allowed in a commercial zone only if the building is mixed-use. - Page 2, C, staff clarified that "development" generally means there is some kind of structure. There was no public testimony following the staff presentation. The following public comment was made after the Commission's discussion of the proposed language and before the discussion of the findings and conclusions: Margaret Lee, who lives in a C-II/MU area, spoke about the proposed changes to maximum floor area ratio standards. She is Planning Commission Meeting May 14, 2015 Page 2 of 6 concerned that the changes will alter the whole intent of the C-II/MU area and the desires of the people in the past. Staff response to public testimony was requested. Staff clarified that the maximum floor area ratio is not a ratio of commercial to residential use, but rather of lot size to square footage of development. The proposed change would potentially allow for more flexibility in larger-scale commercial development, as long as all requirements of the PUD process are met. The change would not preclude anyone from doing residential/commercial development. The Commission discussed other areas of the city, besides Howard Street, that could be affected by the proposed changes. In response to a question from the Commission, staff stated that the environmental review process is not yet completed; the comment period closes on May 24th or 25th. The Commission discussed staffs proposed findings and conclusions. It was suggested that staff amend the document to direct City Council to address the other areas, besides Howard Street, that will be affected by the proposed changes. At the bottom of page 1, the parenthesis at the start of the last line should be moved before "Mixed" on the second-to-last line. Under "Location," staff needs to add the C-II/MU zone. Staff stated that June 18th is likely the earliest that the issue would be on the City Council agenda for a public hearing. Motion: Nan Evans moved to approve the findings and conclusions as amended and to forward the proposed code language to City Council as amended. Douglas Frick seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 6-0 by voice vote. NEW BUSINESS 2016 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update - Summary of Workgroup and Advisory Committee Meetings Planning Manager/Senior Planner Judy Surber stated that the City is generally tracking quite well with the original timeline for the Comprehensive Plan update. The shading on Exhibit 6 (Milestones) should have gone further down on first page and onto second page; more work has been completed than it appears from the document. Staff has been trying to confirm population projections and will work with the County to set a date for the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee. An electronic survey and the City's SpeakUp site should be available in June. Staff will be providing information about SpeakUp and the Comprehensive Plan webpage in business card format for distribution to the community. Ms. Surber recapped what happened at the workgroups. Common themes and comments brought up by the workgroups are outlined in her memorandum. In response to a question, staff stated that code enforcement Planning Commission Meeting May 14, 2015 Page 3 of 6 crosses a number of departments and is complaint-driven. The City is formulating a better overall policy and more consistent process for dealing with code enforcement, for example illegal rental housing and demolition by neglect of historical residences. The Community Development and Land Use (CDLU) subcommittee is currently discussing illegal vacation rentals; if CDLU decides there must be a Comprehensive Plan amendment, then it will have to be addressed before the scope of work is adopted. Commission members gave summaries of the workgroups they attended: Transportation: Policies in the transportation element are good, but the wording is too geared toward cars; it needs to be reworked to represent who we are as a community. Suggestions were made by the Commission to add transportation to key issues and to reword "alternative transportation" to "improved transportation options." A minor change to the transportation workgroup minutes was requested. Housing: So many people want to live in the City, but cannot afford or cannot find housing here. The issue is related to jobs and transportation. In the next version of themes, the Commission suggested leaving out what is not legal or what the City cannot affect. Land Use. There was general agreement that Howard Street and mixed-use centers are not key themes. The workgroup had discussions about climate change, moving toward being more local, and how the policies of the Comprehensive Plan may be clear and laudable, but the leadership role of the City is not. Capital Facilities & Utilities: The City is in good shape, because growth is pretty flat and not what was anticipated There was discussion about how to pay for street upkeep and for water pipeline repair. Economic Development: The biggest outcome of the workgroup was a new optional theme--simplifying code (streamline policies and processes so people know what they can do without having to guess). The workgroup discussed providing infrastructure to promote economic development (e.g., broadband) and more public/private partnerships. The Commission made the following suggestions regarding the staff memorandum: Page 5, first bullet under (2) Jobs-Housing Balance: "eenversatie conversion of large homes. . ." Page 3, italicized section should be reformatted to clarify that it is a quotation from Rick Sepler's memorandum. 2016 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update - Refine Key Issues for Town Meeting Ms. Surber described the structure of the Town Meeting. She stated that what actually gets in the scope of work has a lot to do with public input, trends, and resources available. Commissioners agreed with staff that "key issues" should be the terminology used at the Town Meeting, rather than "optional themes." The Commission decided on the following key issues Planning Commission Meeting May 14, 2015 Page 4 of 6 (and subsets) for the breakout tables: - Jobs (mixed-use centers, Howard Street, code audit, business-friendly) - Housing (code audit, barriers to affordable housing) - Quality of life for all ages (park &rec, vibrant community, spaces to meet and mingle) - Improve transportation options - Resilience It was suggested that a reminder for the public about mandatory updates should either be included in the staff presentation at the Town Meeting or made into a poster. Staff noted that the City has looked into providing childcare for the Town Meeting, but insurance requirements would not allow it. The City also looked into the issue of transit, but buses to all locations that could accommodate a Town Meeting stop running around 6:30 p.m. Individual Commissioners volunteered to "man" tables during the Town Meeting. Staff proposed creating a color-coordinated chart, showing Councilmembers and listing all the committees they are involved in to encourage public awareness and involvement. In response to a question, staff stated that the City is hoping that attendance at the Town Meeting will be at least equal to prior Town Meetings (average 70-100 people). Motion: Kirit Bhansali moved to approve and recommend to City Council key issues for upcoming Town Meeting. Rick Jahnke seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 6-0 by voice vote. 2016 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update - Draft Scope of Work - Mandatory Updates. Planning Manager/Senior Planner Judy Surber described the draft scope of work matrix. Staff was asked if a "bookmarking" process could be established for items that the City does not have time to address for the 2016 update, but would like to address in the next few years. Staff responded that there are two ways: (1) include new goals or policies in the Comprehensive Plan, worded to indicate future work (for example, "explore increased flexibility in land use tables"), or (2) list items in the work program for 2017, 2018, etc. or list by priority level with no specific date. OLD BUSINESS - NONE OTHER BUSINESS - NONE UPCOMING MEETINGS The next scheduled meeting is May 28, 2015. COMMUNICATIONS Planning Commission Meeting May 14, 2015 Page 5 of 6 There was no discussion of the public comment report included in the packet. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:44 p.m. Attest: Pladhing--Commi si pair ty Clerk's Office Planning Commission Meeting May 14, 2015 Page 6 of 6