Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout082808CITY OF PORT' TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MEETING OF AUGUST 28. 2008 7:00 PM CI"1'Y HALL-CI"fY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Meeting Materials: EXH 1. Planning Commission Meeting Agenda for August 28, 2008 EXH. 2. Mid Cycle Assessment Scope of Work-Draft Matrix EXH. 3. R. Sepler and J. Surber, Memo to Planning Commission: Comprehensive Plan -- Mid- Cycle Assessment, August 2l, 2008 I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Steve Emery called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM lt. ROLL CALL Present: Steve Emery, Jerauld Fry, Bill LeMaster, Monica Mickhager (arrived 7:05 PM), Kristen Nelson Excused: Julian Ray, George Unterseher Staff_ Rick Sepler, Planning Director; Judy Surber, Senior Planner III. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA Commissioner Fry• moved for acceptance of the agenda, whidi was seconded by Commissioner Nelson, and approved all in favor. IV. APPROVALOFMINUTES Review and approval of the minutes of August ] 4, 2008 were deferred until the next meeting. V. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT-None VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS -None VII. NEW BUSINESS 1. Workshop: Comprehensive Plan Mid-cycle Assessment -Draft Scope of Work (Rick Sepler, Planning Director) Mr. Sepler provided a brief review of the Mid-Cycle Assessment process as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. City Council had deferred the 2007 mid-cycle assessment until 2008, Planning Commission Page 1 of7 August 18, 1008 primarily due to the large issues of Sims Way, completion of the Shoreline Master Plan and other pressing matters. City Council had chosen to reach out to the cotnmunity through a series of town meetings as a way of bridging between those who had been involved in the development of the plan and more recent arrivals in town. Demogn-aphics have changed in a number of ways. The percentage of second homes has risen from 10% to 20-30%. A greater proportion of the population is in the upper third age bracket. The meetings reviewed three of the four key assumptions, i.e. building blocks of the Comprehensive Plan. First, is the small town character of Port Townsend being preserved? Second, are services and amenities being provided (through a financial base fueled by incoming entrepreneurs and high tech businesses)? Third, are there sufficient living wage jobs and affordable housing? The town meetings postulated a number of suggestions, which had been summarized and provided to Planning Commissioners. There were then two meetings, one to discuss the Housing Action Plan and one to hear a status update from Team Jefferson. The materials for this meeting include a memorandum listing background, review criteria and process_ and a document presenting an initial "scorecard". Mr. Sepler suggested that that docwnent be fleshed out as the Commission makes recommendations on key areas of work and strategies. Obviously, scopes of work arc based on best assessment of current knowledge, and embed a number of assumptions. New ideas and approaches may emerge as discussion proceeds. The expectation is that the City Council and Planning Commission will meet together in early October to consider the direction and to refine the list. Mr. Sepler pointed out that the current list is a "first cut' prepared by Judy Surber and him. He reminded that the mid-cycle assessment has never been envisioned or intended to be a massive rewrite of the Plan. his more intended to be a course correction and policy correction. However, there are likely to be significant changes. He then walked through [he Topic Area Worksheet. Clrmmtc Action -Ensure an adeguare policy base is container? in the Plan to support efforts to reduce hydro-carbon emissions in Port Tou-rsend. 'hhere is little on point in the original Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Sepler said this is clearly a policy based issue. Housing Element - As noted at the last City Council meeting, the bonus density provisions of the PUD have never been exercised. The second issue was to look for opportunities in the City to upzone in order to increase housing diversity and affordability. The third is to consider mixed use developments. This is a long term issue. In ten years, not one of the designated mixed use centers has developed. Are there ways of incentivizing this into the future? Mr. Sepler said it would be necessary to decide ifthis will happen or if a new strategy is needed. A fourth issue is evaluation of alternative housing types, such as SRO s (single room occupancy). The fifih issue is to facilitate preservation of existing subsidized housing stock. Economic Development - Mr. Sepler pointed out that there are a significant number of light industrial jobs that could be created, if services could be extended to Glen Cove, which is constrained by lack of sewage infrastructure. This would require working with the County and creating a new UGA in the draft plan. 'T'his would likely then include the 80 acres from DNR, which is adjacent but outside the City Limits. Mr. Sepler said that as long as you have fiduciary responsibility to the rate payers, the utilities can be expanded but not outside the UGA. Counties designate a UGA; the City can propose such. The rationale for choosing this area isjob based, not a population increase. In terms of the 80 acres, there may be non-contiguous portions of the City outside the City Limits. He cited the Sequim sewage treatment plant as an example and the Cedar River watershed for Seattle. However, in order to provide services the area must be par[ of a UGA. To expand a UGA for P/arming Commission Page Z of 7 August Z8, 7008 residential populations, a ease must be made that there is a deficiency in the existing allocation, or request additional growth allocation. In response to a question about LAMIRDs, he explained that the County has designated Glen Cove as a LAMIRD, separated by intervening properties that are not light industrial serving as a buffer area. If the land is in the UGA, but not in the City, services can be provided. But most UGAs have an out of service area rate, higher than the City rate. This is to cover the higher cost of service delivery. He added that there may need to be a revenue agreement with the County. One option is for the City to take the increment over and above the current revenue. Another is to ramp up the City percentage of the revenue over a period of years. A third option is to split the revenue after the annexation. Mr. Sepler described the process: if the Planning Commission wished to expand the future UGA to include Glen Cove, they would propose this to City Council. If accepted, the City Council would go to thejoint Growth Management Steering Conunittee and reconcile that. The County would also have to amend their Comprehensive Plan to show the new boundary. He said it would not be advisable to begin one step without having a clear path to consider the 80 acres. Commissioner Kristen Nelson asked what tact could be taken other than proving a deficiency in light industrial in the City. Mr. Sepler said thaT in 1997 the allocation was considered appropriate. There would need to be a new assessment to see what has changed, e.g. space for the Port, the general demographics, and the light industrial zoning affected by the CAO. Basically, solid factual data would be needed to show what has changed. Mr. LeMaster suggested that formal protocols and jurisdictional boundaries should not be allowed to slow progress toward the co~mnon goal of economic development for east Jefferson County. Mr. Sepler reminded that each step of the process can be appealed; government entities must be mindful to follow al] rules and processes. He said, however, that once [he desired direction is decided, discussions with the County would begin promptly. Ms. Nelson recalled Mr. Sepler s earlier caution regarding limited resources. He explained that if multiple projects are initiated, they should be prioritized and phased in such a way as to allow maximum use of staff and other resources_ This gave rise to a discussion about the possible PDA (Public Development Authority) and its time sensitive nature. Mr. Sepler said that some sense of what is most important and what should be done first is essential. If mixed use is seen as critical and is not happening, it maybe necessity for the community to `jump start" via a PDA. The third key idea under Economic Development would be to pursue "economic cluster' areas, as had been described by Team Jefferson. "fhe idea is to identify existing successful arenas/ activities and pursuits that are the most promising and focus on them. There was a brief discussion about whether or not agriculture was a viable member of this list. Mr. Sepler pointed out the necessary trade off in UGAs between agriculture, open space or other low density uses and higher densities elsewhere to offset it. Mr. LeMaster suggested that by using some of the in fill areas for agriculture, this could possibly drive more mixed use high density development in designated locations. He asked why we would not encourage agricultural businesses that create jobs and are eco-friendly in the City. Ms. Nelson said that an economically viable faun requires a large amount of land, which is not really available within the city limits. She expressed concern about the need to balance that with ~ story buildings to achieve necessary average density. Judy Surber raised the question of what is locally grown food. Since Port Townsend is only about 8 square miles in area, food grown anywhere in the County is considered locally grown. She also mentioned community gardens, which are not intended to create jobs, but can provide value to the community with relatively little land. Ms. Mickhager said that there can be garden Planning Commission Page 9 of7 August Z8, 2008 or farm businesses of a scale that lie between these two options. such as the wholesale nursery on Hastings Avenue. She said that 5 story condos overlooking neighborhood gardens is a concept worth pursuing. She cited the examples in Europe, New York City and Chicago. She said the Comtnission should support businesses that can be sustained on relatively small parcels of land. She noted that over time, family properties that can be used in this way will otherwise disappear. Cotnmissioner LeMaster requested that comments from the two members of the public be pcnnitted, which Chair Emery granted. CommissionerEry stated that there is a minimum size for garden-hpe businesses that can actually work. He described a 5 acre family truck farming business, Joe`s Garden, that had been situated in the midst of Bellingham for many years. He said, "They were the Fanner s Market". He said that when the original owner reached a certain age and could no longer work, the only economically viable way to keep i[ going as a business was to give it away -the price of land had risen too high. Staff pointed out that such gardening in allowed in R-I and to a limited extent in R-II. Mr. Sepler said there are long teen challenges to urban agriculture, and the City could not provide protections such as right to practice or right to faun, consistent with the GMA. Those protections are intended for the County. with minimum of 5 acre lots. Mr_ Emery added that the intention is to curtail sprawl. Small scale farming, open space and clustering can be encouraged within the city limits, but it does not make sense to push housing onto viable farmland out in the County. Mr. Sepler suggested that the Commissioners review each of the worksheet items and identify any issues that staff should flesh out for a future meeting_ Climate Action - Mr. Emery said that the phrase "hydrocarbon emissions" implied traffic reduction measure, but that alternative energy should be encouraged, as well. There was a brief discussion about wind energy and the present limitations. Mr. Emery mentioned new turbines just coming on the market that are functional on 35 and 50 foot masts, which are designed to meet current city codes. Ms. Surber said she had envisioned a policy supporting the Climate Action Conunittee and Plan, with more specific consideration of their work at a later time. Mr. Emery said he would agree with that approach, providing that the scope was broadened to include alternative energy. }Iousing Element - Mr. LeMaster requested discussion of item a, alternative housing types. He said insurance and liability issues seemed to be barriers to innovation in not allowing housing models and styles that can reduce the carbon footprint and the cost of housing. He said he would like to see the City address this in some way. He mentioned lot sizes, aliordabihty and jobs, PllAs and mixed use. He pointed out the "working poor" strata of the community that cannot afford housing. There was a brief discussion of the wage range of this group; commissioners suggested annual incomes of less than $30,000. Mr. Emery described the planned South Seven development in Hadlock, which would include amini-mart to subsidize the housing. He asked if a PDA with profits from mixed use applications rolled back into the housing would work. He mentioned the San Juan grocery as an excellent candidate for this type of arrangement. Mr. Sepler noted one of the realizations about PDAs: the yield of affordable housing is small in comparison to the size and cost of the total project. More grant funds and tax credits are available for subsidized housing than affordable housing. He added that in this market, comtercial can't pay for new construction; the rents are so low that the rates can't cover the cost of the building. Once underway, it is possible for commercial uses to provide the operation and maintenance monies. Types of services mentioned included groceries, Laundromat and miniature go] f. Mr. Sepler said that the City can lend credit for subsidized housing, such as waiving connection fees, but not for non-subsidized. However, it can possibly provide the ]and to build on, which Planning Commission Page 4 of 7 August Z8, 2008 amounts to about one third of the cost. In general, he indicated that successes are possible but there must be strong commitment and priority on the part of the City and community. Mr. Emery asked how Sequim has been able [o provide affordable housing. Mr. Sepler attributed that to the significantly lower cost of land. Ms. Surber mentioned their very active housing authority which has a track record of finding funding. Bonus densities were briefly discussed. Staffplans to research their use outside a PUD, as for SROs (single room occupancy), also known as efficiency units. This is a niche need, particularly directed at working singles and/or elders on a fixed or limited income. The definition is not intended to be applied to vacation homes. At this time, this type of housing is allowed as multi- family housing, but there is no economic incentive for developers. Upzones - Mr. Sepler said that while this idea is theoretically attractive, it can be difficult in application. }f directed, staff would look for criteria, perform an analysis, and return with a recommendation. Mr. Emery mentioned the Nomura property as a possible example. There was a brief discussion about the past lack of mixed use development and the reasons. Mr. Sepler said the challenge is the scale of development and the relatively low number of units that can be absorbed in a year. There is also no track record; this type of development is considered to be very risky; and the commercial portion required can't pencil. The question is whether this can be incentivized suf3iciently to make it happen, and is there sufficient demand to support these businesses once built. Mr. LeMaster advocated for completing Howard Street to Hastings as quickly as possible (secondary to Glen Cove) to move traffic down Hastings and into the vicinity of planned mixed use. Mr. Sepler reviewed the 26 unit project that had been permitted for San Juan and E Streets. He explained that the project turned out not to be economically viable with that few units. "there was further discussion about what size project could be accepted by the community, provide some percentage of affordable units. and remain affordable. It was also noted that amenities will overcome size and price, and also the preference for a single family home. There was discussion about inclusionary zoning and its place in the policy list that wilt be researched. Mr. LeMaster raised a question about the net number of additional acres needed. per [he Comp Plan given various changes over the years. Ms. Surber said that further analysis is needed to fully answer that question. Economic Development -Chair Emery inquired as to why the paper mill, which is an industrial lacility, had not been included in a UGA automatically. Mr. Sepler reported that the argument has been that loss of the mill would bankrupt the County. He said that if Glen Cove does become part of a UGA, the service could be provided_ He said it would be costly, although that would be somewhat tempered by the location of the treatment facility and the advantage of gravity flow. He said that a lift station that is planned for the southwest portion of the City could serve Glen Cove. The City standards would require storm sewers, utilities and road upgrades. He recalled that one of the arguments against expanding the UGA had been the fear of sprawl. There was a brief discussion about the measures in place to linvt formula stores and size of buildings. A future urban Growth area would have an optimum land use map and appropriate zoning. Mr_ Sepler said that Team Jefferson had been talking about the industrial area, and not about highway based corrunercial. There was acknowledgement that there would be pressure and measures would be need to betaken to prevent that. Planning would need to he done jointly' with the County. Planning Commission Page s of 7 August Z8, 2008 Mr. Emery raised the question of a contingency plan for land use in the event that the paper mill was not operational at some point in the future. There was clarification that although this area is not now within the City`s jurisdiction, it is allowable to plan beyond the current boundaries. The key is to work with the County, making certain that benefits for both entities are identified. He noted that putting the mill in a UGA has no benefit for the County. Mr. Sepler said it may be proper to discuss a process that would be followed if the mill did close. This would include a policy for developing a contingency plan, etc., and outline of elements for discussion. Mr. Fry said he sees negotiations for a UGA as the first step and creating the relationship with the County. Mr. Sepler said that the compelling factor is that there is no other place for the City to do light industrial. Mr. Fry said that existing businesses in Glen Cove are constrained from growing by their drain field requirements. Lack of additional power and roads for infill was also mentioned. Mr. Sepler mentioned that there are several State job creation programs that can be leveraged to fund additional infrastructure_ The mechanism is rebate of sales tax monies that businesses pay. Mr. Emery suggested that Port Townsend should have a shipping facility. The lack of land transportation to the peninsula was discussed. He said that barge shipping should be investigated. Mr. Emery also said that there is some interest in the community for an educational facility such as a skills%trainino center near any light industrial center. Mr. Sepler did a brief recap of the issues discussed. I Ie said he won't be at next meeting; Judy Surber will facilitate. Chair Emery then invited the two guests who were present to comment, if they so choose. Mr_ John Gunning introduced himself as the owner of Collingwood Parms. He said he lives in Chimacum on a 40 acre with about 8 acres in row crop fanning. He said he acquired Collingwood Farms to save that land for agriculture. Elizabeth Crockett then began to buy that land from him; they fornted a joint CSA venture for 4-5 years, but it was not viable for her. At this time, a self service farm stand has been set up. He introduced Jesse Hopkins, who manages this whole site. He said that what is needed is for that land to be designated as Agricuhural. He said that Joe s Garden in Bellingham and other such businesses have served as models for them. He said that although there are about 6 start up CSA's in Jefferson County this year, he and his associates had seen membership fall from a high of 100 in the 1990s to a point where it was no viable. They have now shifred to 3-4 main organic crops, including severa3 varieties of potatoes. He said that farmers need all the help they can get. Transportation costs are a major issue. He encouraged everyone to look at the European mode]. IIe said the common goal is make this the most livable community possible, that it is idyllic, but that there are many issues to investigate and resolve. Mr. Gunning added that, as a child, he had experience life on his grandparents` farm in Duwamish before the entire area had become industrialized. He stressed that agriculture is a necessity that must be preserved. Mr. Hopkins described his experience in farming Collingwood Farms, realizing that surrounding residents enjoy watching the work he is doing. He advocated for building smaller, taller structures for housing and leaving more spaces for agriculture. He said in his opinion, $40,000 annual income defines the working poor in this town. He said he appreciates that these issues are being discussed and considered. He said that locally grown food and the Patmers Market are a P/arming Commission Page 6 of 7 August 28, 2008 draw for this town. and that goals of sustainability and smaller carbon footprints are differentiators from other places, like Sequim. Ms. Mickhager expressed her agreement that the European models are appropriate. Shc said that most of the issues of space, transportation, architecture, and preserving beauty and quality of life have been dealt with successfully and we can Team from that. Mr. Sepler said that the challenge wilt come from those who see 5 story buildings and certain other changes as not in character with this city. He said there is a need to show that the character will indeed be lost if some reasonable adjustments are made. In summary, Mr. Sepler said that staff to produce a draft with sufficient notes as to convey to City Council the spirit and intent of the plan. They will look at the Comp Plan and see which policies, if any, must be emphasized or ]inked. Mr. LeMaster requested a printed copy ofthe Comprehensive Plan VIII. UPCOMING MEF,`TINGS September ] 1: September 25: October 9: October ] 3: IX. COMMUNIC Workshop- Developing aMid-cycle Scope of Work Mid-cycle 5eope of Work (if necessary) Uptown C-Ill Design Guidelines Uptown C-III Design Guidelines City Council Workshop -Mid-cycle Scope of Work ; 6:00 PM ATIONS Ms. Mickhager said she would be unable to attend the September 2~ meeting. X. ADJOURNMENT Ms. Nelson moved for adjournment, which was seconded by Mr. LeMaster. Chair Emery adjourned the meeting at 8:50 PM_ Gail Bernhard, Recorder P/arming Commission Page 7of7 August78, 7008