The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About072679 Min Packet MINUTES FROM PORT TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 26, 1979 VICE CHAIRMAN CAMPBELL CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER . MEMBERS PRESENT : K I LHAM, SULLIVAN, DUDLEY*, CAMPBELL, HENDERSONY WILEY AND SPIITH. MINUTES FROM THE MAY 31, 1979 MEETING WERE4READ AND APPROVED . OLS BUSINESS : APPLICATION N4 . 7901-01 RUTH SHORT FIfVAI. PLAT 1158 VAN NESS PORT TOWNSEND MOTION BY KILHAM/DUDLEY MOVED TO ACCEPT THIS FINAL PLAT. VOTE 5/YDS 0/NO APPLICATION N0. 7903-03 SAM TAYLOR STREET VACATION RT. 1 BOX 5 PORT TOWNSEND STREET REQUESTED FOR VACATION, BAKER ST. BETWEEN 9TH AND 10TH S7. MOTION BY HENDERSON/ oil MOVE TO TABLE THIS APPLICATION UNTIL COMMENTS ARE RECEIVEQ FROM TME STREET AND SEWER SUPERINTENDENT . MOTION WITHDRAWN. MOTION BY KILHAM/WILEY MOVE TO RECOMMENr) TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 7903-03 AS IT COMPLIES WITH ITEMS 2 THRU 6 OF SECTION 5 . 20 OF ORDINANCE NO 1802 CONTINGENT UPON THE APPROVAL OF ED HAWLEY THE STREET AND SEWER SUPERINTEIVDENT AND ALSO CONTIfVGENT UPON THE QEDICATION OF A 30 FOOT PORTI0N OF THE LOT THAT ABUTS DISCOVERY ROAD FOR THE PURPOSE OF RIGHT OF WAY . VOTE 6/YES 0/NO APPLICATION N0. 7903-04 LAKESIDE INDUSTRIES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT VERN SCHACHT MOTIQiV BY DUDLEY/KILHAM MOVE TO TABLE THIS APPLICATIQN UNTIL AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT HAS BEEN MADE . VOTE 6/YES O/NO APPLICATION N0 . 7905-02 JEFFERSON COUNTY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT P LANN E D UN I T - DEVE LO PMENT P .O . BOX 553 PORT TOWNSEND LOCATION FOR THIS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IS BLOCK 224, E I S E N B E I S • ADDITION ON HANCOCK ST . PROJECT IS TO BE CALLED THE HANCOCK STREET SENIOR' S PROJECT. PROPOSED USE : TO PROVIDE 51 DWELLING UNITS FOR THS PLANNING COMMISSION JUDY 2b, X979 PAGE 2 AREA' S ELDERLY AND ALSO TO PROVIpE A NUTRITION SITE FOR RESIDENTS AND OTHER SENIOiZ CITIZENS . A LETTER WAS READ FROM JANET MOSHER OPPOSING THE PROJECT. GAIL STUART GAVE SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THIS PROJECT . NE TOLD TME C��DmMISSION THAT THEY HAVE HAD A SURVEY MADE OF 256 PEOPLE IN PORT TOWNSEND AND JEFFERSON COUNTY WHO SAID THAT THEY NEED HOUSING . HE HAS INFORMATION FROM THE INFORMATION ACTION GROUP THAT THERE IS 6 UNMET REQUESTS FOR HOUSING SROM SENIORS EACH MONTH. MR STUART REAP A LETTER FROM THE OLYMPIC AREA AGENCY ON AGING, (SEE ATTACHED) . MR STUART TOLD THE COMMISSION THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING PROJECT 3S THERE AS DEVELOPED A NEED FROM THE SENIORS THEM- SELVES BOTH TO THE OLYMPIC AREA AGENCY ON AGING AND THS COMMUNITY ACTION COUNCIL . CHAIRMAN SMITH THAN CALLED FOR PEOPLE T 0 SPEAK I N FAVOR OF THS APPLICATION. ALICE SALE, HADLOCK SAID SHE IS IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT THERE IS A REAL NEED FOR IT . PATTI WHIT5ETT, HADLOCK SHE WORKS WITH 5ENOIR CITIZENS AND AGREES THERE IS A NEED FOR THI5 PROJECT . BETTY ANDERSON, 5528 KUHNA SNE STATED THAT PMIS PROJECT IS BADLY NEEDED AND WE SHOULD HEED THE NEED. MARIE SHIRLEY, PORT TOWNSEND IS IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT BUT MAYBE IF THERE ARE ANY ALTERNATIVE LQCATIONS CLOSER IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO LOOK AT SOME- THING CLOSER IN. JEFFERY MASSEY 64Q ADAMS., HE FEELS THIS PROJECT DESERVES TME Ga AHEAD BECAUSE THERE IN A NEED. RENNIE BERGSTROMI THERE IS A NEED FOR THIS PROJECT . BUS O'MEARA JEFFERSON COUNTY CQMMISSIONER, HE IS A MEMBER 4F A COMMITTEE FORMED BY FOUR COUNTIES, ON THE AGING AND THERE IS A DEFINITE NEED FOR PHIS TYPE OF HOUSING PROJECT . HELEN RICKERTON KEARNEY ST . APARTMENTS., SHE IS TN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT BUT MAYBE IT SHOULD SE CLOSER IN. BOB HARPER, CdMMUNITY ACTION COUNCIL, HE STATED THERE IS DEFINITELY A NEED FOR THIS PROJECT . BERNIE ARTHUR PORT TOWNSENDI HE IS IIS FAVOR OF Th1I5 PROJECT BECAUSE OF THE HEED AHD BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE YT WOULD OFFER THOSE SENIOR CITIZENS WHO DON'T LIKE T4 LIVE DOWNTOWN . MARK KOSOLOFF HADLOCK,, WE CAN'T DELAY THIS TYPE OF PROJECT ANY LONGER. BILL MCINTIRE 72D MEMORY LANE,, HE IS FOR A PROJECT OF THIS TYPE BUT NOT IN THIS PARTICULAR NE I GHBORHOOD. PETER BADAME PORT TOWNSEND, HE FEELS THAT SERVICES NEED TO BE IMPRQVEp FOR SENIORS THROUGHOUT THE CITY . THERE WAS A TEN PdINUTE QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. THE QUESTIONS RAISEQ AND THE ANSWERS GIVEN WERE SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME AS IN THE REVIEW MATERIAL. SINCE THERE WAS NO FURTHER TESTIMQNY IN FAVOR ON TME PROJECT, CHAIRMAN SMITH CALLED FOR TESTIMONY AGAINST IT. RICK DENNISON, HE IS NOT AGAINST THE PROJECT BUT IS AGAINST THE LOCATION. FREDIA IMSLAND SHE FEELS WE SHOULD HAVE SOME TYPE OF BUS SERVICE. JANET MOSHER SHE FEELS THAT WE DON' T NEED THIS PROJECT WHAT WE NEED ARE REPAIR AND CHORE SERVICES TO KEEP THE SENIORS IN THEIR HOMES . STEVE HAYDEN HE IS BOTHERED BY TME FACT OF 51 UNITS ON ONE ACRE . HE ALSO WONDERS WHY THIS PROJECT CAN' T GO OUT FOR BID INSTEAD OF ALREADY BEING SET UP WITH THE BUILDER . LARRY DENNISON FEELS IT COULD SE LOCATED IN A BETTER LOCA7IQN. MARILYN ALBERT FEELS IS IS AN INCONVIEIVT LOCATION . KRIS DEWEESE WOULD LIKE TO EITHER HAVE THIS APPLICATION DENTED OR TABLED UNTIL WE GET MORE INFORMATION ON 7RA11SPQRTATIOH AND THE POSSIBLE HEALTH HAZARD, LOW DENSITY, SETTER LOCATION, MORE INPUT AND BETTER PLANNING. • JANEEN HAYDEN SHE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT QUESTIONS WERE ASKED THE SENIQR CITIZENS IN THE SURVEY, AND WHAT MR . STUART WOULD BE WILLING TO DO WITH ANY PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TQ LOOK FOR A BETTER LOCATION. BOB SWEETSO 23RD & HAINES ALSO SPOKE AGAINST . SINCE THERE WAS NO FURTHER TESTIMONY FRAM THE AUDIENCE THE MEETING WAS CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC. PLANNING CQMMISSION JULY 26, 1979 PAGE 3 MOTION BY CAMPBELL/KILHAM WHEREAS, THS PROPOSED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT YS IN THE BEST PUBLIC INTEREST AND WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE AFFECT UPON ADJACENT ROADSA UTILITIES OR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, AND, WHEREAS, THE PROPOSED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY OF. PORT TOWNSEND ZONING ORDINANCE PAGE 5, CHAPTER FOUR SECTION 4. 05 LETTER C ITEMS 1 THRU 3, AND; WHEREAS., THE PROPOSED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CAN AND MAY FULFILL A NEED FOR THS CITY QF PORT TOWNSEND AND SURROUNDING AREAS . NOW, THEREFORE; BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS TQ SHE CITY COUNCIL THAT APPLICATION N0. 7905-02 A REQUEST FOR A P LANNED E1NIT DEVELOPMENT BE APPRQVED. VOTE 4/YES 2/NO MINORITY OPINION UNDER THE COMPREhiENSIVE ZOiVING ORDINANCE N0. 1625 CHAPER IV, SECTION 4. 05, PARAGRAPH C "BASIS FOR APPROVAL"Y THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN MAKING ITS RECOMMENDATION T0 THE CITY COUNCIL MUST SATISFY THEMSELVES THAT THE APPLICANTS HAVE DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY CAN COMPLY WITH SUB- PARAGRAPH l-2-3(A, B, C, D,, E, F,G & I ) - THE MINpRITY OPINION IS THAT THE APPLICANTS HAVE NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY COMPLIEp WITH THESE REQUIRE- MENTS . I7 TS FELT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD GIVE SPECIAL ATTENTION . 1"0 THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS : UNDER SUB-PARAGRAPH - 1 STATE AND COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT IN A REASONABLE TIME HAS NOT BEAN SHOWN. RATHER, IT HAS SEEN LEFT TOTALLY OPEN-ENDED BASED ON POSSIBLE ADEQUATE FINANCING THROUGH HUD, ECT . UNDER SUB-PARAGRAPH -2 IT IS FELT THAT THS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS NOT CONSISTENT IN ALL RESPECTS TO THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER. RATHER, IT IS FELT THAT THE APPLICANTS ARE ATTEMPTING 70 TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER DUB TO THS SPECIAL NATURE OF THE PUD ( IE, LOW COST-ELDERLY HOUSING) . ALSO., THAT THE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLANS HAVE BEEN PREPARED WITH COMPETENT PROFESSIONAL ADVISE AND GUIDANCE HAS NOT BEEN CLEARLY SHOWN. TO THE CONTRAP.Y, IT APPEARS THAT THE PLANS WERE DEVELOPED BECAUSE THIS SITE WAS "THE ONLY ONE THAT WE COULD COME UP WITH". DUE TO COSTS ECT. UNDER SUB-PARAGRAPH -3-D THAT THE TOTAL AVERAGE DENSITY OF THE PROJECT WILL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE ALAN IS CLEARLY NOT SHOWN. THOUGH UNDER THIS SUB-PARAGRAPH IT IS ALLOWABLE TO INCREASE THE DENSITY . IT"-T$�FSLT THAT THIS. PROPOSAL PUSHES TH-E DENSITY FSR BEYOND WHAT CAN REASONALBY BE EXPECTED, PARTICULARLY W,HEN YOU CONSIDER THAT THE' POPULATraN 4F THE PROJECT ltlILL BE MADE UP OF ELDERLY PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT ABLE TO RESPOND QUICKLY IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION S.UCH AS FIRE ECT . , ESPECIALLY RESIDENCE OF THE TR. IRD FLOOR . ALSOI IT TS FEST THAT SERVICES DEMAND ISI- RELATION TO THS TOTAL PROJECT ANA LOCAL ARBA • HAS NOT BEEN ADEQUATELY COMPUTED OR RESOLVED FOR A POSITTVE DETERMINATION AT THIS TIME . JONATHAN DUDLEY FRANK SMITH JR. PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 26, 1979 PAGE 4 APPLICATION N0. 7905-01 JEFFERSON COUNTY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT STREET VACATION P .O. BOX 553 PORT TOWNSEND STREET REQUESTED FOR VACATION 7TH STREET BETWEEN HANCOCK AND SHERMAN STREETS . MOTION BY KILNAM/HENDERSON MOVE TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF APPLICATION 7906-01 AS IT COMPLIES WITH ITEMS 2 THRU 6 OF SECTION 5 . 20 4F ORDINANCE N0. 1802 WITH THE FOLLOWTiNG CONDITION THAT THS EASEMENT BE SHIFTED TO THS CENTER SPACE BETWEEN'THE. SOUTH 9WALL -OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING AND THE SOUTH RICHT OF WAY LINE . VOTE 4/YES 0/NO 2/ABSENTIONS APPLICATION N0. 7906-03 RAYMOND OLIVER VARIANCE 259 N.W. FIRWAY LN . BREMERTON VARIANCE REQUEST IS TO WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE OFF STREET PARKING FOR THE BUILDING PROPOSED BETWEEN 702 WATER AND 720 WATER ST . A LETTER WAS READ FROM ELEANOR SMITH OBJECTING 70 THIS REQUEST . MOTION BY HENDERSON/ MOVE TO RECOMMEND TO THE CI7Y COUNCIL DENIAL OF APPLICATION N0 . 790b-03 BECAUSE IN SECTION 6. 10 A OF ORDINANCE N0. X625 ITEM 27 THERE AREN 'T • SPECIAL CONDITIONS HERE WHICH ARE PECULIAP. TO THIS WHICH HAVEN 'T BEEN PECULIAR TO THIS BEFORE AND OTHER PEOPLES INTEREST Iii BUILDING AND ITEM 4), THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE REQUEST WOULD CONFER A SPACIAL PRIVLEGE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTYWERE CONDITIONS EXISTED PRIOR TO HIS PURCHASING THE PROPERTY AND HE WAS OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE OF THEM AT THAT TIME . THERE BEING NO SECOND TO THE MOTION IT WAS WITHDRAWN. MOTION BY CAMPBELL/KILHAM MOVE TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 7906-,,,03 AS IT COMPLIES WITH ITEMS 2,, 5,, 6& 7 OF SECTION 5 . 10 A OF ORDINANCE N0. 1525 . VOTE 4/YES 1/NO A MINORITY OPINION BASAD ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS THIS VARIANCE SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED. THE PUBLIC INTEREST WOULD NOT BE SERVED BY FURTHER AGGRAVATION OF PRESENT PARKING PROBLEM. NO SPECIAL. CONDITIONS OR CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LAND IN THE SAME AREA WHICH WOULD dEPRIVE THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE RIGHTS ENJOYED BY OTHER SIMILAR PROPERTIES . THE GRANTING OF A VARIANCE WOULD CONFER A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE TO THIS OWNER THAT WAS QENIED OTHER NEW COIVSTRUC7ION IN THE AREA EG. HOMER SMIFH AND SEA FIRST , FURTHER, THE PARKING REQUIREMENT HAD BEEN IN EXISTENCE WELL BEFORE PURCHASE OF THIS • PROPERTY BY THE PRESENT OWNER . WILLIAM HENDERSON pLANNIlVG COMMISSION JULY 261? 1979 PAGE 5 APPLICATION N0. 7907-01 GRANT ALLEN VARIANCE P .O. BOX 753 PORT TOWNSEND VARIANCE REQUEST IS FROM THE HEIGHT RESTRIGTION OF 30 FT TQ BUILD A NEW VIGTQRIAN SIiVGLE FAMILY RESIflENCE ON THS N .W . CORNER OF TAF AND ADAMS ST. MOTION BY DUDLEY/KILHAM MOVE TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF APPLICATION N0 . 7907-01 AS THE PROPOSED VARIANCE IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS SET FORTH IN SECTION 6 . 10 A 1, 5, 6, 7 & 8 OF ORDINANCE N0. 1625 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING C0NDITION : THAT MR. ALLEN SUBMIT IN WRITING THAT HE WILL FOLLOW A VIC70f2IAN DESIGN. VOTE 4/YES 0/NO APPLICATI0N N0 . 7907-02 JACK SCOTT S THELMA SCUDI CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 820 WATER ST PORT TOWNSEND REQUEST IS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 70 RENT FOUR ROOMS AT 731 PIERCE STREET FOR OVERNIGHT ACCOMODATIONS . MOTION BY DUDLEY/KILHAM MOVE 70 RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL QF APPLICATION N0. 7901-02 A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO REIT FOUR ROOMS IN THE HOME AT 731 PIERCE STREET FOR OVERNIGHT ACCOMODATIONS TN THE NAME OF THELMA • SCUDI AND JOHN M. SCOTT BE GRANTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SECTIdN 6 . 0$ 0F ZONING ORDINANCE N0. 1625 SECTION A,, B,, C & D AND THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC CONDITIONS THAT TME AFOREMENTIONED THELMA SCUDI AND JOHN SCOTT COMPLY WITH AND HAVE CLEARANCE OF THE STATE FIRE MARSHALL AND THE STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE RESCINDED IF THESE TWO AFOREMENTIONED PEOPLE DO NOT GET THAT CLEARANCE. VOTE 4/YES 0/NO THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED. r7p,% KATHLEEN M. MACDONALD PLANNING COMMISSI0N SECRETARY • O3A OLYMPIC AREA AGENCYon AGING I&IRA IgED P.O. BOX 31 - MONTESANO,, WA. 985b3 - PHONE 249,,,15736 CLALLAM o O BRANCH OFFICE.. JEFFERSON FIRST NATIONAL BANK BLDG., ROOM 208 GRAYS HARBOR PORT ANGELES, WA,, 98362 - PHONE 452,,3851 and PACIFIC COUNTIES Council of Governments July 26, 1979 Mr. Gael Stuart, Executive Director Clallam/Jefferson Community Action Council 802 Sheridan Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Mr. Stuart. The Olympic Area Agency on Aging has recently been informed of the proposed Senor Citizen Housing to be constructed an Hancock Street i*n Port Townsend. Our assessment of the needs of senior citizens conducted prior to the development of the 1979 Area Plan for Services to Older People established Law-Income Housing as a very definite need and was documented in the Plan. Thus far our preliminary research for the 1980 Plan has widened,, if anything, an even larger demand for Sow-income housing for Seniors ire Jefferson County. Our agency is prepared to offer any assistance and coordination necessary to increase the availability of . low cost housing for Seniors 1'n Jefferson County. The proposed Hancock Street Housing has our support given proper resoluti'on of two conditions that we feel seriously affect the normal lifestyle and health of Seniors. First, we feed that the location of the housing should be contingent upon the availability of access to other services necessary to enable Seniors to continue independent living. If Seniors are isolated from the center of the community and corresponding medical , nutritional , social and professional services., we have performed a disservice. Given the serious inflationary dangers that Seniors on fixed incomes .ace, we are concerned that any housing available to them does not ironically contribute to their premature institutionalization because they cannot reach those services necessary to remain independent. Second, being a resident of Port Townsend myself I am quite familiar with the irritation of the atmospheric emissions of the Crown Zellerbach mill . Our agency is seriously concerned about the effect of these emissions upon the health of Seniors and would question the housing of a large number of Seniors in close proximity to the source of this emission. Not bei ng familiar With the nature of these emissions only the discomfort, we could give our support to this housing proposal only after a responsible study has been conducted which established no potential of health hazard to the Seniors involved. Mr. Gael Stuart -2- July 26, 1979 In conclusion, our agency fully supports the proposed Hancock Street 40 housing for Seniors if these two above considerations, the potential loss of independence and the potential health hazards are satisfactorily addressed. If we can be of any further assistance please feel free to call on us.. Sincerely, 40,04 Peter Badame Planner Olympic Area Agency on Aging PB/ef Enclosure • i I 1 low AbL t • • � 1 .AL -RdL—Embm-mm P06 . � �. ' �. AL-ar-.miLg qp OIL lw ILP PF jr jr,f pr OFF IP df Opp -lid La b6 do rr j Pr PF L 4 X 1 f,1! or dr l®r I dr y r / � 1 � r Yr op Ar RW� pr dr Alt Ad lilt p If dL JAOl dr lip Imp lip AL Apr AP a ♦ , � �I� 1 � 1 t ��l% � '�i I� l 1 I � �� . � 1, �� . , 1 .. �• �, , 1 .. Emr � p rr '- - T i i fA /AAV bLLfF„"'� C�i.� w�l �9. tti�.�L.c'.t.�.-b....7J�+e...-b•� �'IC yJ�' �„�.-e�. t l 4Lrn a ��-..-.-c.. tard►�-`� �° a. •w-. sQ��t.`..�� i��. �D Vim+ 4�t. re�l , tLl6J L ` n �=ti �Q�S (� e��r�/�► �-:�., &d& r ar��. r • VIOL b aac V •