HomeMy WebLinkAbout022885 Min Packet PORT TOWNSE lD• WASHIPSIGT13ISI 98368
0
Port TownsendCommssion
i
CITY OF PORT TO SEND
MINUTES of RUARY 28., 1985
I, Opening Business
Chai an Mater called the meeting to order at :30 P-M-
Members
present were Nancy 61ater, Don Hoglund, Alan Carman, Jim Tavernakis.,
Bob Grimm, and Jim Campbell.
Jim Tavernakis moved that the minutes be approved as written. Bob Grimm
seconded the motion and the vote was-unanimous.
A letter was received from a Mr. Gieser which was read into the meeting. Mr.
Gieser was concerned that there should be an industrial development plan and
that the land south of 6ims Way on down to the mill be designated industrial
development area.
Bob Grimm agreed to be the Commission's representative concerning the Bu ardin
Planned Unit Development during the Council's review of it. It was decided
by the city attorney that the old ordinance stood for the street vacation part
of this development. Also it was discovered that developer presents the
contract to the city, then the city goes through and changes if need be.
He Application No. 18 am01 Peter Alb e ht
502 Reed Street
Fort Tavmsend
The applicant told the commission that this proposed eight Foot fence would
restore the privacy that was lost when the foliage in the adjoining lot was
destroyed. The style would be in keeping with Victorian home.
Mr. John Beard said that he obie cted to an eight foot fence as he felt the
height would tend to overpo er his property since his hose would have to be
much closer to the fence than Mr. Albrecht t . The vegetation that he removed
on the side he shares with Mr. Albrecht did not include any trees and iMroved
the appearance of the property. '
Mr. Albrecht said that when lie had talked with Mr. Beard the previous week he
said that he was in favor of the fence and liked the style of it.
Mr. Beard stated that at the time of their conversation he had not been aware of
what an impact an 8 foot fence would make on his property.
Mr. V. Keehn said that he was in favor of the fence. The eight foot weight was
fine with h . He could not see ghat difference between 8 and 6 feet would b
since the top portion of fence was to be lattice.
Commissioner Hoglund said that as a corod
Chai m an Slater-viewed the property and had the same problem with vacant lot
giving a tunnel view With fence that height. The applicant shcwed the commission
sketch of what the fence would look like.
The A .brechts did not want to reduce the height of the fence as it would not give
the privacy the had enjoyed with the noxi gone foliagee
111r. Campbell said that foliage can not be equated Tdth a board fence.
Mr. Carmen said that a 6 foot fence Mould be equally pleasing and within
the ordinance.
Mr. Tavernakis expo.aine d the reasoning b e hin the variance ord inanc to appli c ant.
He said that he would be more sympathetic if the Albrecht's home was closer to the
].i e.
Don Hoglund moved to recc r end to the City Council that variance Application No.
185-01 be denied as it does not comply with Ordinance 1625, liection 6.10.
JIM Tavernakis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous.
Don Hoglund agreed to write the report for the Council.
III. Application leo. 185-02 Service Activities Corp.
Street Vacation 938 Hater St.
Pt. Townsend
Chairman Slater read into the meeting a letter from Leona. and Cella Brown
and. Dorothy E. Calla'. They were in opposition to this vacation because
1. public access and use is lost, 2. open space view area is lost, 3e street
vacation can decrease property values., and4. the streets belong to the citizens
of Fort Townsend*
Mr. Needham had Mrs. 61ater read the letter from Ranier Bank which concurs with
his request for the street vacation.
Mr. Needham said that right away was used exclusively by the motel. Having it
vacated would benefit the city considerably by the sale, tax and if property i
expanded. The property would never be used as a street and the vacation would have
no negative effect.
J.J. Ki,rcher said that he was a 48 year resident and was against the vacation and
in agreement with the letter from Browns and Ms. Callaway. Ranier Bark is only
interested in money. Penny Saver side is a mess with litter and if area vacated
,t would be even a bigger mess. Port Tavmsend I'lotel is already overbuilt* btreet
is not in, but i part of my access. The streets belong to the people. Do not
want streets vacated.
Mr. Kircher said that she was in opposition as well. bhe said that you can't
tell what the future might bring and the street belonged to the people.
. Carman presented the co=ittee report to the commission and it is included
entirely on the next 3 pages.
CITY OP BORT TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION-COMMITTEE REPORT
APPLICATION N 1 BER_ 185-02
COMMISSION MEMBERS CAMPBELL AND CARMAN
MET' AND INSPECTED H SITE OBIT THE 27TH OF FEBRUARY �
1985.
APPLICANT: SERVICE ACTIVITIES CORPO RA ION
TYPE OF APPLICATION: ARIGHT- F-WAY VACATION
LOCATION F 1R P SA = AT THE INTERSECTION OF Sims
WAY, GAINES STREET AND WASHINGTON STREET'S THE PROPERTY IN
ES I N ETES BETWEEN THE PORT TWNS END MOTEL AND THE PEN-N-Y SAVER
MARKET PROPERTIES,
LEGAL DES RTP T ..7 GA I TLS' _ST._AI ._TO 1 -8 BLOCK(S)68
SUBDIVISION L. B. HASTINGS ADDITION SECTION 11 , T"WD. 30 N. p RANGE
I WEST, WILLAMETTE TE MERIDIAN.
CORRESPONDENCE ]R N V
A LETTER FROM H.D. 01NEIL, .B. f. , ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT,,
RAINIER NATIONAL BANK-SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE ADJACENT BLOCK 69 ,
N FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSED VACATION (ALONG WITH MR. ROBERT B.
F F EDRF E D -OWNER) . THERE WAS NO MENTION OF AN INTEREST TO
BAY COMPENSATION FOR THE APPROXIMATELY 1 6 SQUARE FEET (0.33
ACRES) OF LAND THAT WOULD BE ANNEXED TO EACH OF THE ADJACENT
BLOCKS,f AS WELL AS NO INFORMATION THAT MR. OPNEIL OR MR.
PORTERFIELD HAD BEEN INFORMED OF THIS ITY'S REQUIREMENT F O R
COMPENSATION.
PINDXNGS of FACT:
CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER(S) : 12.20. 000
AND [ (ORDINANCE NUMBER 802 AND 1992 APPLY(S)I .
COMMENTS FROM CITY DEPARTMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS S DI'I E E FAVORABLE X NO
CITY STREET DEFT. FAVORABLE X N
CITY SEWER DEFT. FAVORABLE X N
CITY WATER DEPT, FAVORABLE X N
CITY POLICE DEET , FAVORABLE X NO
CITY FIFE DEPT,, FAVORABLE X N
EMEF. MED. SERV. FAVORABLE X N
COMMENTS ROM PRIVATE UTILITY PURVEYORS:(NOT REQUIRED BY STATUTE):
PUGET POWER FAVORABLE N
PACIFIC NW BELL FAVORABLE N
F. T, T'E E AB E FAVORABLE N
NOTE: THESE COMPANIES ETES WENN NOT CONTACTED FOR INPU p BUT BAVE
FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS WITH THE CXTY OF PORT T WNSEND AND E T TTN
UTILITIES IES AR APPARENT WITHIN VIEW ON THE SITE OF THE PROPOSED
VACATIONS
5
EXISTING SITE ZONING.
USES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND COMPLIANCE WITH EXISTING ZONING
DESIGNATIONS:
01
BLOCK 68-PORT TO TNSEND MOT EL, A NON-CONFORMING GRANDFATHERED
ACTIVITY (MOTELS ARE CONSIDERED'D A CONDITIONAL DISE IN THE -II
ONE) AND BLOCK 69-THE PENNY SAVER-IS A CONFORMING USE WITHIN
THE ZONE,, AS WAS AS THE FORMER INSURANCE OFFICE ON BLOCK 69 ,
APPLICABLE AREAS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
COMMERCIAL: X HOUSING AND RE'SIDENT'IAL DEVELOPMENT:
TRANSPORTATION : x INDUSTRIAL: y SHORELINES:
CRITICAL AREAS . _ OPEN SPACE. RE: i� I ark and
recreation areas buffer zones , drainage
protection zones ENERGY; GOVER NMEN
T';��.�� •
CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 1 2.2 0.0 6 0 REVIEW
CRITERIA (CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND ORDINANCE 1802 , SECTION
5.20.
DOES REQUEST CONFORM TO "'GOALS AND POLICIES"' OF COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN? The request generally conforms to the Goals and Policies as
set forth in the .City of Port Townsend Comprehensive Pian a
regards the sections on Commercial Development and
Transportation. However, the policies portions of the above
referenced sections , raise concerns for further congestion that
may be brought about by the possible proliferation of
uncontrolled commercial access to Sims Way (State Road 2 a
this location without adequate controls either by covenant or
some other acceptable remedy.
7., IS THE AREA NE'E'D BY THE CITY FOR PRESENT OR PROJECTED OVERALL
CIRCULATION? The area surrounding this proposed vacation is
already congested at peak traffic periods; caused primari'lly by
the intersection of Sims Wag (Mate Road 2 , Washington Street,
and Gaines Street (constructed to the Southwest) converging
within the same small area. Without major relocation of Sims Way
(which is highly unlikely), -Tt would be unw-ise to attempt to
interdict any major increase in traffic volume at this location.
In light of this information , the right of way would not appear
to compliment , nor would it appear to be necessary for
anticipated circulation needs.
t
1.
WILL THE LOSS OF THE AREA TO THE CITY AFFECT THE DELIVERY OF
FIRE, .SAW ENFORCE ?ENTe MEDICAL OR OTHER EMERGENCY SERV `CES No
S THE PROPERTY NEEDED AS A UTILITY CORRIDOR The Public Works
s
Director indicates that there -i's n existing sewer main contained
within this right of way, z!1though a 6" diameter water main
appears to be located th in , as well as Power, (possibly)
Telephone, and Cable r. V. Because of the lacer off accurate
knowledge on the locations the utilities, the standard 12'
easement, ,located 6' on each side of the platted centerline would
i
f
undoubtedly prove of dubious value. With this in mind, i
Mr. Needham said there was serer, poorer and cable limes, but no water lines,
Mr. Tavern kis said that all easements were .important. He was concerned that
doi�m the road a traffic change would be needed and so would this street. He
felt that abutting water could be visual as inmll as factual. Through the easements
citizens can enjoy the view. With the traffic now coring off of Washington •street
onto bims Warr with no solutions bother him. He was not willing to give up
city street when down the road it may be needed. Where were potential changes
and street should not be given up.
Jim Campbell stated that maybe commission should hold off until the city gets
some goals and policies for traffic. In 25 years might be tr in to buy it
back.
Mr. Cannan said that it was not high enough priority with the city administration
to get a traffic is la ,,
Mr. Grimm asked Mro Carman how he addressed the buffer zone.
Mr. Carman said that inasmuch as it is going to be 2 pieces., the a fisting access
on one side could attempt to require more, but it could make more of a traffic
hazard*
i
Jim CamDball roved to continue Application No. 185--*02 until some information
on futiir& tr ffi -c ,rcul .t .on 71an could be obtained d reviewed again on Larch
, 1985. Alan Carman seconded the motion and the vote was 4 for and 2 against
(Tavernakisand SlaterY,
Tim Tavernakis said that the com=ssion should move on it and get it off the books.
Mr. Canaan would check With Public 1,Jorks Director.
ITo Application No,, 285-01 Jack Fields
Variance 636' Garfield St.
Port Townsend
Mr. Fields said that he wanted a woodworking shop because he liked to build toys
for his grandchildren. He said that he had built the house 27 years ago when
under the impression it had a 66 Foot street easement x.,Then it '.s a 73 foot street
easement. Lot in back could be left '.n lawn and fit trees.
Jia Tavernakis said that the committee warted to be sure it i-ras personal shop and
not commercial. Drainage could be taken care of by roof gutter and dry well.
Jim Tavex akis moved to reco=end approval. of Application No. 285-01 as it meets
all conditions of city ordinance..hint that consideration for a dry well so
shop does not drain on neighbors property. Bob Grp seconded the motion and the
vote was unanimous,
Alan Carman would do the report for the City Council.
v. Nei-,r Bus e s s
Workshop meeting would look over Alan's checklist.
. Adjourrment
Chairman plater adjourned the meeting t 9:15 . . _ le4,4� � �
Application No. 185-o2 Street vacation for Service Act.
Corp. Game S t. between Washington and Jefferson.
Port Townsend, February, 18 . 1985
TO ALL PORT TOWNSEND PLANNING MMI SSI ON MEMBERS
Application No. 185-o2 for street vacation of Gaines Street between F { • ..
Washington and Jefferson should be denied for the reasons following:
.
1. Public access and use is lost.
For example , Walken street from Washington to the edge of
the bluff is vacated. During special events, for example the fire- }.
works display this choice viewpoint is restricted from public use
by signs and barriers. This former public land is now reserved for
private usage . Sadly this is not an isolated instance of choice
public land vacated to private use and Lost to the general public ,
2 . Open space view area is lost.
Port Townsend' s open space and "View Areas, are pluses and
features in the attraction we have for tourists
3 . Street vacation can decrease property values. The assurance
of open space and/or a view is negated when a, street is vacated.
Land value could be reduced. The possibility for a tax loss could
be greaten than any gain generated by private ownership of a street,
. It should be kept in rind that the streets belong to the
citizens of pont Townsend. Vacation of any street should benefit
Port Townsend Citizens not an individual or a corporation. That
anyone . other than the applicant would benefit by the vacation f
Gaines Street seems extremely questionable .
Application No 185-02 should be denied else again Port Townsend
Citizens will be the losers,
Respectfully Yours,
k
100
I