Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout021188 Min Packet PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98 EB14 } #L + Port To send, Plannmg Co ssion " CITY OF P O IRT-T O N E Iii D y t MINUTES OF-FEBRUARY.11, 1988. a i 1. opening Business and Roll Call. L Chairman Carman called the. meeting to order at 730 PO'M. Members present were Don McLarne ,:Ron l osec,. Bob GrimM Nancy Slater, Don n Hoglund, .Jinn Ta ernakis, and Chairman Alan Carman. . Chairman Carman declared a quorum. Also present-eras City planner Michael Hildt. . .s Mr. McLarney moved the minutes of January 27, 1988'., be approved-as distributed. Ms. Slater seconded, and the motion passed -o. t II, Communications Chairman Carman gave information on the current 'status of the budget' to the treasurer., There was a letter- from TAAS Survey,-reg rding the Monte Matthews Short Flat application. .; III. old Business F a. Application No. 8801-01 Richard' Glauban Variance 4 Mr, Hildt presented the staff report and went over the draft -findings and draft conclusions. (attached) The applicant proposes to add a"bedroom to a single family dwelling. The a is i g building has a legal,nonconforming setback of 12 feet, This is not uncommon in the neighborhood; in fact, -other properties have lesser front setbacks. The proposed addition could be set .back 14 feet. Chairman Carman opened the- public hearing. Mr, Gl aubman said he would attempt to have-the proposed addition conform with the existing architecture. k; Mr. Harry pollard had no objections. �; + " r. Chaff man Carman closed the publicbearing. 3 mittee Report: Mr. McL rne r said he was in favor of the request. He asked that maps provided al with applications ha a proper notation of all streets and alleys, all buildings on the property, and Indicate,'compass points. `Mr.. McLarney roved to recommend approval of variance Application No. 8801-01 and adoption of the findings and conclusions as submitted by staff. Mr. Tavernakis seconded. The motion passed 7-0. The accompanying map will be improved for the City Council's use. Application No. 8801-03 Parker Buck Conditional Use Mr. Hildt presented the staff report. (attached) The applicant proposes to establish a clothing manufacturing business on the third floor of the mit. Baker Block, This is a legal nonconforming structure with respect to parking; however, a parking requirement may be imposed as a condition of approval. The City Council will review the environmental check list 2/16/88. Mr. Hildt reviewed the draft findings and draft conclusions as well as the draft conditions of approval. As the conditional use is not a primary use in the -ill zone, #4' requires that employees of the business park outside of the downtown business district during the peak tourist season. Mr. Hildt reported that Bart Phillips, EDA, advised against including draft conditions numbers l and 2 as the concerns to which they refer are already covered by existing laws and ordinances. Their inclusion casts doubt concerning aspects of those laws and ordinances not specifically included as conditions of approval. Mr. Grimm asked homer the conditions and specifications set forth for a --III zone related to the building code. Mr. l iildt said you could not obtain a bullding permit without meeting the requirements of the Unified Building Code. Mr. Hildt compared fire code requirements for the storage of flammable materials and zoning code requirements regarding permissible noise levels to the draft conditions. The city is concerned with the amount of noise that will reach outside of the building. It is up to the building orner to deal with conflicts among tenants. The proposed use is not likely to generate a great deal of noise nor to use flammable material to an extent greater than an average home. Each machin creates to decibels of noise, however the effect is not a - iti e, six machines will not create 60 decibels. Druce Tipton clarified that the sound level doubles for every three decibels. Paula Amell thought that the sound would not carry outside of the building. Mr. McLarn y thought perhaps the commission needed an expert opinion -on the amount of noise that would be generated. Ms. Slater suggested thought it would be sufficient to refer to the fire code and the nuisance code under findings of fact, indicating that the commission sion eras aware that the business should meet these requirements. The finding could also refer to the Washington Administrative Code and local zoning code. Mr. Kosec asked how the parking restriction would be enforced. • r�, Mr, Hildt said that if complaints were received, the conditional use permit could be revoked and an order to vacate issued. Ms. dater Mould like the prohibition on parking to apply year round. Chairman Carman opened the public hearing. Mimi Henley stated that she would personally see that her employees did not park downtown all year round if that was what the commission desired. She wishes t locate in this particular space because of the natural light and hopes to have 5 employees by the end of the year. The equipment is new and designed to be quiet. She asked if she would need to reapply yearly for a conditional use permit. Mr. Hildt said that as the ordinance was currently drafted, she would not. Ms. Henley said she might in the future wish to operate two shifts, and wishes to be able to offer flexible hours. A wide span of permissible hours is desirable. Ms. Ancell asked what right the commission had to regulate the hours of a business. she asked if anything definite had been done on the parking ordinance. Chairman Carman responded that the reason for the regulation of hours was so as not to infringe on the rights of neighbors. Renters have certain expectations, having rented under certain zoning criteria, and have a right to expect protection under the zoning code. Ms. Amell asked if such restrictions would apply to all businesses requesting a conditional use permit. Chairman Carman explained that each application is subject to a review and is looked at individually. The use is tailored to the specific situation by means of the conditional use permit Mr. Hildt clarified that the parking ordinance was passed in September 1987 and i now law. The "fee-in-lieu" is an option open to the developer. There is no parking requirement for this particular building because it was legally established prior to the effective date of the zoning code. The city may lay impose a► parking requirement; however, he has suggested that the employees park elsewhere instead. Jonathan Dudley, Hastings Estate Co., was strongly in favor of the proposal. Bruce Tipton thought the noise issue would take care of itself depending on whether or not there were any complaints. He questioned where the employees were going to park outside of the downtown district. He questioned the ability of the applicant to meet the fire safety regulations. He thought $20,000 for a fire escape was not unreasonable if it would save lives. He thought the conditional use permit superfluous, the real issue being the meeting of the code requirements. Chairman Carman clarified that the conditional use permit was necessitated by the zoning code. He assumed that the applicant would comply fully with all applicable saf ety codes. 0%!.0 !et a -I_ 1i . lildt pointed out that a conditional use permit did not grant permission to occupy the building. He assured Mr. Tipton that the commission took fire safety very seriously. Chairman Carman closed the public hearing. Committee Report: Mr. Ta ernakis suggested that condition 2 could refer to the OSHA requirements. #3 should offer a wide spread of hours as accommodating part time employment is a valid concern. , the parking restriction, should be year round. Fire safety will need to be addressed. He recommended approval of the application. Mr.. Grimm thought permissible noise level needed to be clarified. He was in favor of the parking restriction and had no problem with hours ranging from :00 i. I.- 1 :00 P.M. Mr. Hildt said that the noise level might be addressed from a zoning standpoint by siting the state regulations which corms closest to zoning concerns. The nuisance ordinance sets no specific level of permitted noise and is therefore judgmental. It applies, however, whether or not it is cited. This is also true for the state regulations, He suggested the following wording: "Noise levels shall comply with all applicable local, state. and federal laps and regulations." The applicability of the UBC and UFC codes could be made a finding of fact rather than a condition, since it refers to codes with which the applicant must comply in any case. Draft condition #1 will be deleted and a finding of fact #8 added. i ir. Grimm moved to recommend approval of Conditional Use application No. 8801-03 based on the findings of fact as amended and conclusions as prepared by staff. lair. 'Ta erna is seconded. Chairman Carman suggested the following wording for finding of fact : "It is understood that the. Uniform Fire Code and the Uniform Building Code apply and must be met by this project prior to occupancy.'" Chairman Carman read the five conditions of approval as amended: 1. Noise levels will comply with all local, state and federal statutes. . operations shall not commence earlier than 7:00 A.M. or continue later than io,00 P.M. 3. During working hours each employee or lessee shall be required by the lessee or applicant to park outside of the Downtown parking District. . No change. . No change. The motion passed 7-0. c. Application No. 387-01 Union Wharf Variance The Attorney General's notion for summary judgement was denied. A public hearing is scheduled for March 1st and 2nd in port Townsend. As the applicant was not present, leis. Slater moved to postpone the hearing to February 2 , 1988, Mr. Grimm seconded and the motion passed -o. 01141 100 o--%b- w di , Application No. 987-01 Moate Matthews Short Subdivision Chairman Carman read into the record a letter from James Pearson, TAAS Survey Assoc., indicating that lir. Matthews is pursuing discussions with the City of Port Townsend Fire Department and Public forks Department regarding the possibility of purchase of the property by the City. He requested a continuance not to exceed six months. Mr. Grimm moved to continue the hearing for six months from the date of the letter, February 9, 1988. lair. Kosec seconded arid` the motion passed -o. Chairman Carman did not Grote. The application will be brought back by request of the applicant and will be readver is d at that time. IV. New Business a. Application leo. 8802-01 John Sudlo n & Juelan a Dalzell Short Subdivision The committee will be lair. Kosec and Mr. Tavernakis. The hearing was scheduled for March lo, 1988. This was necessary dine to the requirement of publishing the application in the Leader. b. Application No. 8802-02 First Presbyterian Church Variance The committee will be Ms. Slater and heir. Tavernakis. The hearing was scheduled for March lo, 1988. iV Announcements The next scheduled business meeting is February 25, 1988. Hearings are scheduled on Street Vacation Applications No. 8801-02, Sharon Barrea, and No. 8801-04, Peter Albrecht and Mary Lynn Anderson s well as for the Uhion Wharf Variance Application No. 387-01. vl. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9: 0 P. I. i Alice King, Secret yv TOAs . . SUR RY ASSOCIATES (206_)385-0633 2132 LAWRENCE STREET~PORT TOWNS Dip WASBINGTON 98368-7925r February 9 , 1988 Mr. Michael Hildt City of Port Townsend Port Townsendp Washington Dear Michael : Be: Matthews Short Plat application At this time, Mr. Monte Matthews is interested in persuing further discussions with the City of Port Townsend Fire Department and Public Works Department concerninq the possiblity f purchase of the subject property by the City. Since such action would not require short plat approval, I am requesting a continuence of not to exceed six months on action by the City Planning Commission reqardinq the proposed Matthews Short Plat. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me, Ss i erely, name Pearson, MPA TAAS Survey Associates Lawrence Street Port Townsend, Wshnqton (206 ) 385-0633 y y DRAFT VTNDTNaS nw PACT ANM CONCT.&TIRTOUR (19 THR PLANNTHt3 (ICINNTSFIT F Date: February 11, 1985 - e= Conditional Use APPI. 8801-03, Parker Buck After respectful conBiderat on of the above referenced appli- cation includingon-site inspection of the property, and after timely notification and hearing, the fort Townsend Planning Commission hereby submits to the City Council the following f indings and cone lus ions Findinas of Fact- 1 Applicant proposes to establish a clothing manufacturing �. business on the third floor of the Mt. Baker Block at 910 Water Street. Although light manufacturing uses are - not permitted in _ the C­ I I I' zone in which the building iB located,- a draft ordinance expanding the uses permitted in the C-III zoning district has been recommended by the Planning Commission and is scheduled for hearing before the City Council on March 16, 1988. Inasmuch as the draft -ordinance would allow clothing manufacturing as a conditional use in certain historic buildings, including the Mt. Baker Block, the above-referenced application s in anticipation of its passage. 2. The Mt. Baker Block i fou r-s ort' masonry building which was completed in I890. It was classified as a primary historic structure in the designation of the fort Townsend Historic District. Although the building is almost one hundred years old, the upper two floors have never been finished aid occupied. Several retail shops occupy the street-level floor of the building and the second floor houses a feu apartments and offices _ Built prior to the enactment of the zoning code, the Mt. Baker block is a legal, nonconforming structure with respect to parking ing requirements, although parking requirements may be ., imposed as a condition to a proposed use which requires a conditional use permit. . 5. The applicant proposes to occupy approxiLmately 1,600 square feet of the third floor with a small, specialty clothing manufacturing operation. The entire floor is approximately 10, 000 square feet in gross floor area. The proposed business, Scream in" Mimi Enterprises expects to employ five to ten persons and will produce limited runs of specialized garments, The portion of the third flor to occupy the business is to be renovated and improved to meet the needs of the business and building code requirements. The renovations will not alter any i i F I ■ w Planning Commission, 8801-03 Page 2 of the architecturally or historically significant features of the building. . The applicant states that the business intends to use six industrial sewing machines, each of which is powered by a► one- horsepower, ,e .ectric motor with an operating noise level of lees than ten decibels. vibration is to be dampened by rubber coaster mountings. The work space is to be insulated to reduce noise transmission t.o other areas of the building. . The applicant states that the Mt. Barrer floc is a highly desirable location for the business because of the pleasant surroundings in which to work in contrast to the typical industrial setting. The natural light available within the building is also required. Although other commercial and industrial facilities were sought, none were found to have the qualities or characteristics required by the company. Cong 112 Ft l_ The City Council found at its meeting of that the proposal would not have any significant adverse environmental impacts. 2. The proposed clothing manufacturing use of the subject property will not endanger the public health or safety, nor will a nuisance be created. . The proposed use will be required to meet! all of the condi- tions and specifications set forth in the C-ill zone in which the property is located except for those legal, nonconforming condi- tions which were in existence prior to the enactment of the Port Townsend zoning code in 1971. 1. 4 The proposed use will not be .inurious or detrimental to adjoining or abutting property. + 5. Because the proposed use will provide a necessary economic use within an historic building without altering the historically or architecturally significant features of the building, the location and character of the use will be in harmony with the area in which it is located and will be in general conformity with the Comprehensive Plan. . The proposed use will not occupy street level space which is better suited for retail sales or services 7. As evidenced by nearly a century of vacancy, as is the case generally in upper floors within the fort Townsend Historic District, the uses permitted in the -Ill zoning district do not i Planning Commission, 8801-03 Page provide sufficient financial return to make use of the upper floors of the Mt. Baker Block. In con5ideration of the aforementioned findings and conclusions, the Planning commission recommends that the application be GRANTED AS coNDI o K 1. No flammable materials shall be stored In unsafe containers or in quantities in excess of one gallon. 2. operating noise levels shall not exceed 20 decibels. . 3. Operations shall not commence earlier than 7:30 AM or continue Later than 10: 00 PM. . Each employee shall be required by the applicant or les see to park outside of the Downtown Parking District during the months of May through September. . The proposed use shall not occupy more area than the - third floor of the building without express approval b amendment of the conditional use permit by the Board of Adjustment. . The proposed ordinance allowing the proposed use as a i conditional use in the e--III zoning district must first e passed by the city council and become effective in the time and manner provided by law before the conditional use permit is granted. Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Fort Townsend Planning - Commission, James Tai erna. is, Chr. , review committee '_ i DRAFT PTHDTHOS nF FACT AND -CONCLUSIONS.-M THR PLANNTNO CQMTSRIQH i Date: February 1 , 1988 r f Ike: variance Appl. 8301- 1, Richard Glaubman After respectful consideration of the above referenced appli- cation including on-site inspection of the prop rt y, and after timely notification and hearing, the Port Townsend Planning Commission hereby submits to the City Council the following findings and conclusions:Findings of Fant i a 1. Applicant proposes to add a 348 Bq. ft. bedroom to an existing 1350 Bq. ft. single-family dwelling at 819Cass Street. With the proposed addition the structure would cover approximately 21% of this 811250 sq. ft. lot. The existing dwelling has a legal, nonconforming front setback of twelve fMet. Because the proposed addition would be fourteen feet from the front property line, extending the nonconforming setback, a , variance is required. 2. The subject property is zoned -1 and is surrounded on all . sides by single-family development. It is on the corner of Cass and Lincoln Streets. . Although the existing residence is eight feet closer to the front property line than the twenty feet required by the Port Townsend Municipal code, it is setback deeper than the other two houses on the block which face Casa Street. Nonconforming f ont setbacks are not uncommon throughout the surrounding neighborhood. .y . The proposed addition, though proposed to be constructed with leas than the required front' setback, will have a greater front setback than the front of the existing dwelling. I. The proposed variance would not amount to a rezone nor , constitute change in the district boundaries shown on the official zoning map. 2. Because of the legal, nonconforming front setback of the existing dwelling, special circumstancesexist' Crich do not result from actions of the applicant. +ecause other properties adjacent to the subject properties have Iesser.' front setbacks than would occur if the variance is granted, literal I t qk t Plann in commission, 1-0 . Page 2 R interpretation of the provisions of Title 17 Port Townsend � Municipal bode would deprive the applicant of the rights commonly enoyed by other properties similarly situated in the district. . 3. The variance requested would not confer a special privilege to the subject property that is denied to other lands in the same district. 4. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. . The reasons set forth in the above. referenced application justifythe granting of the variance and the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land. . Because the granting of the variance would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of Title 17 zoning of the Port Townsend Municipal Code, the Port Townsend Planning Commission recommends the above referenced variance be GRANTIM. Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Port Townsend Planning Commission, Donald F. Mohrney, chr. , Review committee P Gust 1_ ist 1 2�1I � I�j Do you wish to • NAME (please print) ADDRESS present testimony? YES NO � �d4C� � gz � c„��o �,� ❑ a J F 5S/r PCCf_gf�p �fT'f'p ❑ ❑ MIM 1 (-VE:*1J L ENI t,§J 4M tP-ca..� �Ic%a� G'--��.�,n `205' �.e � . ❑ /7/'.In, Ile, O C�- El 1:1 c5/t( � �l ✓ S i 0 0 • o a i El D