Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout100809CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING City Hall, Third Floor Conference Room Thursday, October 8, 2009 6:30 PM Materials: EXH 1 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda, October 8, 2009 EXH 2 copies of 2002 Comprehensive Plan updates -deletion of FUGA references I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Monica Mick-Hager called the meeting to order at 6:35 PM. II. ROLL CALL A quorum of Planning Commission members was present: Steve Emery, Jerry Fry, Bill LeMaster, Monica Mick-Hager and Julian Ray. Excused: Gee Heckscher Staff: Rick Sepler; Judy Surber Guest Speakers: David Robison, Eric Toews III. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA Commissioner Ray moved for acceptance of the agenda; the motion was seconded by Commissioner LeMaster. The agenda was approved, as presented, all in favor. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES September 17, 2009: Commissioner Emery moved and Commissioner Fry seconded for approval, as presented. The minutes of August 13, 2009 were approved, as presented, all in favor. V. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT (None) VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Update on Joint City/County Planning Meeting Rick Sepler, Director, DSD/Planning Mr. Sepler recalled that the direction from the previous meeting had been for identifying specific dates for a joint City/County Planning Commission meeting, and for the-two Chairs to consider an agenda. However, the County is unable to set a date before December or January due to items already scheduled for review. Page 1 of 9 VII. NEW BUSINESS Background Presentation on City's original Future Urban Growth Area (FUGA) and Glen Cove Industrial Area Dave Robison (former Planning Director) Eric Toews (former Staff Planner) Mr. Sepler recalled that within the previous six months, certain meeting time had been devoted to orienting the Planning Commission on the work plan issue to investigate the potential expansion of the City's UGA to allow for serving the Light Industrial area of Glen Cove. At a prior meeting with Al Scalf, County Planning Director, the history of Glen Cove from a County perspective was reviewed. Mr. Sepler introduced David Robison and Eric Toews, who had both been involved as authors of the City's Comprehensive Plan during the 1980s. He asked Mr. Robison and Mr. Toews to discuss the history of the Plan related to Glen Cove and their recollections regarding key issues. Mr. Robison noted that considering the number of years that have passed, recollections from he and Mr. Toews may differ somewhat with regard to the legislative intent. However, the Plan itself serves as the ultimate reference. Mr. Robison said that the GMA was adopted in 1990. He said that he started working with the City, with Mr. Sepler, in 1990. At that time, the City was most concerned with Urban Waterfront and Gateway; these were the first two planning projects they addressed. After these, they began the Critical Areas Ordinance. The second building block for the Comprehensive Plan was the County-wide planning policies, which lay out a framework for the County, City, Port, PUDs to work together on GMA implementation. He mentioned the public outreach visioning process known as Port Townsend 20/20, know as the Coffee Hours. This was an attempt to inform the entire community about Growth Management and to involve them in defining what they would like to see and what was important looking ahead 20 years. In 1993 and 1994, after finishing the visioning process, they embarked on the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Toews worked for Jefferson County from 1990-1994, until he moved to the City as a Planner. Mr. Toews noted that there had been 15 drafts of the interim CAO at the County, where there was little interest in implementing Growth Management. After moving to the City, he was immediately involved in an appeal of the County's Interim Urban Growth Area designation. Mr. Robison said that the City was very concerned with the boundaries established by the County, which ran from the Chevron Station to the restaurant known as Nancy's Place on Rhody Drive (Rte 20). Mr. Toews said it was a huge UGA drawn at the last minute to comply with statutory deadlines, and was not based on data collection or analysis. [Mr. Sepler added that a UGA is characterized by rural outside, higher lot size and lower densities; and inside, urban services, at least 4 per acre.] Mr. Toews noted there had been no infrastructure planning whatsoever. At the time, the City was the operator of the Tri-area water system at the time, and was potentially responsible for supplying service to a massive urban area. The City Council was also extremely concerned about potential strip development on the Rte 20 corridor. However, the appeal in 1994 related specifically to the Tri-Area interim UGA boundary, and not to the areas to the north including the Glen Cove area. Regarding Glen Cove, Mr. Toews said that the County did not have a zoning ordinance for most of its history. Rather, it had a "Mother, may I?" approach, meaning that there was more and more development taking place in proximity to the City's municipal boundary of a commercial industrial nature. In 1988, the County Planning Director based on community concerns, developed the Highway 20 Corridor policies. This was not code, but could trigger SEPA reviews and was intended to address some of the worst development practices that had been occurring. These were in place through the early 1990s. The County had adopted development code that was "performance based zoning", not zoning designations or defined boundaries on a map. In the early 1990s, Mr. Sepler, as a consultant, helped develop actual County zoning Page 2 of 9 code with map boundaries, etc. That was the first time the area within the boundaries within the Highway 20 Corridor had been zoned Light Industrial Manufacturing. Meanwhile, the City/County relationships were not good. In the early 1990s, the County was pro-GMA; by 1994, there was a definite anti-GMA stance from the County leadership. In 1994, as the City embarked on the Comp Plan, there were 10 framework policies being sought by the community. 1. A system of inter-connected open spaces and trails; keep the town walkable 2. Proper designation of the Critical Areas and well integrated code 3. There was significant support for Up Zones done via mixed use center strategy; Bainbridge Island was seen as a successful model. That is more small, neighborhood commercial stores/services. 4. A Housing Sub-committee arrived at 125 acres Up Zone for multi-family housing and allow manufactured housing anyway except the historic district 5. Ensure that the Urban Waterfront Plan was integrated into the Comp Plan 6. Public Works Standards, particularly street standards that respected the small town atmosphere 7. Include an optional economic development element, i.e. desirable commercial and industrial uses. This helped to set the framework for City County coordination expansion of the City UGA into the Glen Cove Area. Mr. Robison said that there were seven committees corresponding to each element, such as transportation, land use, economic development. The Land Use Committee emphasized determining the alternatives with each of the Policy directions. Each of the alternatives were predicated on a different accommodation of population. GMA requires planning to meet the OFM (Office of Financial Management) projections. Mr. Toews added that the Land Use Committee held an all day Design Charette which was focused within the City; Glen Cove was not yet in view, in any significant sense. However, Glen Cove discussions after the Land Use committee had finished its work, are ultimately reflected in the integrated draft Comp Plan and draft EIS. Mr. Robison described three alternatives developed by the Land Use committee and staff, besides the Mill Action alternative. The first was Residential Community; the City would remain predominantly residential, and remain more or less a retirement and resort community. There would be some Up Zones for affordable housing. In summary, not much change. Glen Cove would have remained rural manufacturing and City boundaries would remain as they were. The second alternative was the Community Neighborhoods, with higher density growth in 5 pedestrian scale mixed use centers, including some higher density residential. This was to coordinate development of infrastructure in several places, improve the transportation system, and integrated with open space and trails. This alternative included a moderately expanded Glen Cove UGA, with some infrastructure extended to Glen Cove and the southwest portion of the City. The paper mill would still be outside the expanded UGA boundary. This was associated with a 600 acre Glen Cove footprint. The third alternative was called the Urban Community. The objective was for Port Townsend to become the County's commercial, manufacturing and cultural center. At that time, the Tri-Area and Port Ludlow were also lining up to be UGAs but this alternative assumed that PT would be the only urban center. This would be more aggressive and also linked to a county wide retail and manufacturing center at Glen Cove. This was associated with a 900 acre Glen Cove footprint. This also strongly emphasized a better jobs/housing balance to encourage people to come here. With alternative 2, there was a desire to increase employment but keep it community serving, and not try to provide everything (jobs, retail, commercial and manufacturing growth) within the City UGA. As the process moved through the environmental assessment, a hybrid alternative was developed, which is the Plan adopted in 1996. Page 3 of 9 Mr. Toews said that what was ultimately adopted in July 1996 was the community neighborhood focused alternative, along with a moderately expanded UGA. He said he would provide a back story on Glen Cove and the rationales within the "board room" and in the public arena. First, by this time the interim UGA designation in the Tri-Area has clearly failed, the County has experienced significant staff turn over, and is lacking political will to implement GMA in any meaningful way. He said that there had been considerable confusion and inability to gather the resources and leadership necessary for planning and financing that was necessary to make a UGA in the Tri- Area happen. However, the County wide planning policy remained unchanged. That is, it envisioned three distinct UGAs in Port Townsend, the Tri-Area and in Port Ludlow (which later became a master plan resort). Port Townsend was clearly envisioned in the CPPs (Comprehensive Plans) as a regional employment and population center for east Jefferson County. There was considerable concern from City Public Works about the type of development occurring in Glen Cove on infrastructure that the City would likely have to take over and upgrade eventually. He mentioned sub- standard water, inadequate fire flow, lack of sewer service, etc. Another concern was that the Hwy 20 Corridor policies had been ineffective in protecting the aesthetics of the entrance to town. There was concern that there would never be effective regulatory control over the area, even if it were retained in a rural status. With that as a background context, there was still a need to generate employment opportunities. The City within its municipal boundaries had/has a huge population holding capacity, not considering Glen Cove, i.e. over 30,000 people. However, there is only one major transportation corridor into town, and areas mainly undeveloped to the west and northwest were fragmented due to low density residential development, and areas not developed were significantly constrained. In some cases, undeveloped areas of the City were farther away from existing infrastructure and transportation corridors than Glen Cove. However, it was realized that the vision for expansion into Glen Cove was not explicitly spelled out in the Act (GMA). 3670-A 110 discusses UGA expansion only in the context of the need to accommodate additional urban population. Therefore, if that strategy were to be effective, it required the County to collaborate regarding Glen Cove, and for the Port Townsend expanded UGA to be the employment center for east Jefferson County. Mr. Robison also noted the concern about retail leakage to Kitsap County and the notion that incorporation of retail opportunities in Glen Cove could reduce the leakage and enhance the tax base. Mr. LeMaster asked if that was issue was seen as a threat to many in Port Townsend, i.e. that "box stores" would impact the survival of local retailers. Mr. Toews said he had just reviewed the final Environmental Impact Statement, which responded to comments on the draft. One criticism of the City was that it wasn't planning for all the urban population growth in eastern Jefferson County. The response noted that the CPPs still acknowledged three UGAs. He said the City also acknowledged that the plans for Tri Area would be contentious, and in the long run the CPPS may be amended to include Port Townsend and Port Ludlow (as master plan resort). That is, there is a need not only to generate jobs and employment for all of east Jefferson County, but also need to address the service and retail needs of the wider community. Mr. Toews reviewed the three alternatives mentioned above. He said the County was very concerned about tax base and about losing revenue. The Mill was a major component, as were the businesses in Glen Cove. Therefore any expansion of the UGA into Glen Cove must exclude the Mill. The second alternative (ultimately reflected in the adopted Comp Plan), a community serving UGA, provided fora 600 acre expansion along Hwy 20 with a boundary on Old Fort Townsend Road. In addition to existing light industrial, it had a significant area of community serving retail (analogous to C-II zoning) and one contiguous site of 23 acres at the south end of the UGA for potential C-N regional retail. A much larger alternative that provided for 900 acres including the Mill and residential areas farther to the west was rejected. In June of 1995, the County indicated support for a study of the three options and, in concept, support for the selected alternative. He said that in the draft of the EIS particularly some of the analysis as related to Page 4 of 9 commercial and manufacturing land needs, and potential future employment bases reflects that staff was searching for some metric that was rational. There were no resources for consulting and full studies. They looked at the number of existing jobs, the amount of land and how many people are projected for 2014, and how much land would be needed based on a straight line projection. The conclusion was that there was sufficient manufacturing land in the City with the Evans property south of Sims Way, west of Les Schwab. However, there was a projected deficiency for Commercial. An employment ratio was also developed, i.e., employment in relation to zoning, which concluded that there was a huge deficit in the City. However, the calculations were based on a huge population growth which has not materialized. Mr. Robison noted the implicit assumption that, under an expanded UGA, the City would do a much better job of providing services, planning and controlling development. He said that in 1995, although the BOCC was anti-GMA, they agreed to consider an expanded UGA. Mr. Toews noted other contributing factors: support from property owners, the fact that the Mill was left alone, and because there was agreement in principle to revenue sharing and joint permit processing. Plan Adoption - Mr. Robison stated that this was uncharted territory. He noted that UGAs, especially those expansions in rural county areas, were being disallowed by the Growth Hearings Board. From 1994 - 1997, the City fared badly in its appeals. Mr. Emery recalled that this was after the period when Micron International expressed interest in locating a chip manufacturing plant in this area. One of their requirements was access to the water that was going to the Mill. Mr. Toews said that after the City's Plan was adopted, the final County plan did not mirror the language regarding Glen Cove that had been expected. While there was some mention, it was a rurally focused plan and no provision for UGAs. Commissioner LeMaster noted the particular economic challenges of the current period, and the natural development that has already taken place at Glen Cove. He asked what the City could do to support the Tri-Area, as well as proceed with the movement toward expansion of the UGA to Glen Cove. He said that as a citizen he has problems with the maintenance of artificial boundaries and would like to see the County and City move forward in cooperation and collaboration for the benefit of its 28,000 citizens. He stressed the issue of water control. Mr. Toews noted typical inertial forces and the time it can take for governmental entities to change course. He cited the clear failure of the Tri-Area UGA notion and the relationship of the population projections and allocations to that. He said that in the late 1990s, while the CPPs had not yet been amended, the population allocations needed to reflect that reality. The City and County were both working in good faith to making Glen Cove happen. In 2002, the (City??) Comp Plan was amended to eliminate any and all reference to an expanded Port Townsend UGA. He said that, in his recollection, that coincided with the County resurrecting the possibility of a Tri-Area UGA. Mr. Toews said that it in his understanding, there is no industrial zoning proposed for the Tri-Area UGA other than the site identified for the future waste water treatment plant. Mr. Sepler noted that there are many issues, among them the lack of a federal largess of $37 million dollars for the County to build the facility ($27 million) and desalinization plant ($10 million). He said that it is highly unlikely residents with existing septic will agree to pay $1,000/mo. Mr. Toews said that this underscores the insufficiency of manufacturing and commercial land base in east Jefferson County. Page 5 of 9 Mr. Sepler said that the City contributed to the situation by allowing its water system to extend Willy-nilly through out the County. However, the County did not require urban services for urban densities. He said that, realistically, the reason for the GMA is exemplified by what happened in the Tri-Area, i.e., urban areas without urban services. Mr. Ray noted the disjointed, discontiguous nature of development. Mr. Sepler noted the challenge of dealing with many small pockets of growth and developing a plan to serve them efficiently. He said. that Glen Cove is certainly not rural but without urban services it does not have the capability and momentum to fund its own growth. On the other hand, it is difficult for the City to compete considering its requirement for roads, water, sewer, etc when it is possible to erect a cheap building anywhere in the County. Within that scenario, individuals can save money but they are being subsidized by the rest of the population. Mr. Toews mentioned that after the Tri-Area UGA was abandoned for a time, the County adopted its initial Comp Plan in 1998. Since the LAMIRD boundaries were drawn similarly to those of Port Townsend, it was possible to have the intensity and density of Port Townsend development without the equivalent required services. In response to the City's protests, the LAMIRD boundaries were tightly redrawn, and established maximum building size requirements. However, he said, the Tri-Area remains on the agenda. Judy Surber asked if Mr. Toews would speak to the history of lots of record in the County and throughout the State. He said he did not believe the County had any restrictions on sub-division until their Growth Management Plan in 1998. It operated under the old non-GMP which permitted up to units per acre in coastal areas. Mr. Robison mentioned there are at least 10,000 septic systems/permits in the County. This coincides with the very high population estimates based on both the existing 1890 rules and speculative platting during the 1990s. It was noted that successful counties in Washington State had done some form of lot consolidation. The Health Department rule regarding a minimum lot size (building area) of 12,500 square feet had remained in effect even beyond GMA. It was noted that neither the City nor County had not come close to the population growth estimates assumed in planning, but that the County had proportionately more growth than the City by far. Judy Surber asked for clarification on whether or not the County's 1998 Comp Plan assumed no Tri-Area UGA and assumed a Glen Cove LAMIRD. Mr. Toews noted that the language was not entirely clear, and had only vague references to these elements. He said that the City had expected that mirror image policies and narrative would be included in both the City and County drafts, and would provide the framework for joint planning. Ms. Surber recalled that when the FUGA came out in 2002, it's absence from the County Plan had been noted. There was a brief discussion of studies LTrottier ???_ and the Industrial Land bank study) by the City in updating population and land use estimates. Mr. Sepler said these confirmed that there was a deficit of Light Industrial zoning in the City (and County?). He said that although both the City and County agree about the deficit and tend to focus on Light Industrial at Glen Cove, the driver in the past was concern about C-IV. He said there was strong push back during the coffee hours (Port Townsend 2020) but that later working committees had seen the need for some provision for retail. He asked how that had been reconciled. Both Mr. Robison and Mr. Toews recalled that the City realized that any accommodation for big box retail should be carefully controlled and planned by the City (transportation, aesthetics, and definitely limited to one such complex), and located close to the UGA. Mr. Toews said that there was a placeholder in the Plan for C-N, but it was not applied anywhere in City, nor was there intention for it to be located within the City. It was only assumed within the context of a potential, future, unincorporated UGA with that being the only employment and commercial center in east Jefferson County. The lack of a large contiguous area in the City was a contributing factor. Mr. Sepler wondered whether the prevailing feeling in 2002 was that any such big box retail should be stopped anywhere in east Jefferson County, OR that it was inevitable so the City should exercise as much control over it as possible. He said that perhaps Michelle Sandoval could address that question at the planned future meeting. Page 6 of 9 There was further discussion considering whether there is currently significant interest and support for locating a big box retailer in the Tri-Area. Judy Surber said there appeared to be little support during the Tri-Area conversations on zoning. Mr. Toews said that the C-IV discussions arose late in the planning discussions, after the Light Manufacturing focus and virtual abandonment of the Tri- Area as possible FUGA. He said that there would have been a way to a more modest UGA expansion that would have captured the areas already devoted to Light Industrial, which may have garnered significant support. Mr. Sepler noted that this particular aspect not withstanding, the City Comp Plan has not been significantly amended over the years. He acknowledged its strong base and that it has endured for many years. For example, with regard to residential street use and in many areas, it has been a useful guide and is still used actively today. Mr. Sepler returned to the Light Industrial deficiency and noted that there has not been a good history of doing green field industrial uses. Similar to the challenge of creating new mixed use districts, the current notion is to overlay mixed use on an existing commercial district. With Light Industrial, the idea is now to work with an existing location and expand. He said the impetus to look carefully again at Glen Cove stems largely from the Team Jefferson presentation. Per recent estimates, the lift station improvements to serve Glen Cove will cost about $1,000,000. Mr. LeMaster mentioned the Port of Port Townsend planning process, and questioned how there could be more collaboration and less contention and concern among the City, County and Port. He questioned what has been going wrong with the planning process. Mr. Robison said that some misperceptions may be the cause, and that it is necessary to have a forum of interested parties at the table. He noted that there had not been a meeting of the Joint Growth Management Committee since 2005. He stressed that communication is a prerequisite for cooperation and collaboration. He said that the Strategic Plan was a win for the City in that this was the first time the Port committed to a planning process involving a wide range of stakeholders, including the City and the County. There was mention that Mr. Robison and Mr. Toews were under contract to the Port, and that Mr. Sepler had also participated in the Port planning meetings. Mr. Sepler said he had voiced his concerns during that process. Mr. Toews said he supported Mr. Robison's comments about the need for some structured process that provides for at least quarterly or semi-annual meetings. He also noted that the County-wide planning process has not been amended since 1993 or 1994. He said that both the City and County would be out of compliance in at least one respect, with regard to population. Mr. Sepler added that the Joint Growth Management Committee is comprised of 3 County Commissioners, 3 City Council members, one Port and one PUD representatives. He said that for Glen Cove, the County has the ultimate authority jurisdictionally to amend growth areas; a joint planning process is necessary. He mentioned that he had received a call from the County regarding a staff to staff process for mapping out a process. Mr. Sepler added that after starting out with extending the sewer line, tight-lining the service area and filling in properties, there will be strong interest from those outside the line to obtain services. Property owners there will be wish to ensure they received adequate service for the cost. Mr. Toews said that the County had denied a number of rezone requests for those within the original Hwy 20 Corridor Policy boundary on the west side of Hwy 20, but who were not within the tight-line LAMIRD boundary that was drawn. These property owners are frustrated by the fact that their properties are completely unsuitable for rural residential development and that they cannot move forward until some Glen Cove expansion occurs. Mr. Sepler pointed out that there will also be concern about sprawl development if the boundary is extended across the highway. Page7of9 Mr. Sepler distributed copies of the 2002 City legislation that changed the FUGA and eliminated any reference to it the Comprehensive Plan. He briefly discussed the background of those changes, particularly the concerns of very active citizen groups who did not wish to see the character of the City change. VIII. IX He said there will be a public hearing on height for block located between Monroe and Jackson Streets including vacated Franklin Street (LUP09-070). As part of the waterfront plan, this block was inadvertently included in the overlay map, which allowed a 43 foot height in stead of 35 feet maximum. Mr. Sepler and Commissioners thanked Mr. Robison and Mr. Toews for their presentation. He explained to Commissioners that he had also invited Alice King as suggested, but she was unable to attend. Chair Mick-Hager called for any questions or comments from Commissioners. Mr. Emery inquired about the 30 foot vegetative buffer along Hwy 20. Mr. Toews said that the 1988 highway corridor policies required a buffer but they did not prevent cutting and replanting. Mr. Robison and Mr. Toews left the meeting at 8:00 PM. There was a brief discussion about the invitation to Michelle Sandoval to attend the October 22 Planning Commission meeting to provide additional history on Glen Cove/FUGA from the City's point of view. Mr. Sepler said this should complete the background on the issue. There was also a brief discussion about the challenges to implementing sewer infrastructure upgrades in the Port Hadlock area. Chair Mick-Hager shared her recollections of sewer and storm water issues in Port Townsend and the County. Ms. Surber noted that current science has revealed more about the cumulative effects of storm water run off on water quality, while in the past the focus was primarily on point source. Commissioners discussed possible ways in which to assist the joint planning process with the County Planning Commission. The possibility of developing certain draft documents as a basis for workshops and discussion was mentioned. Mr. Sepler mentioned that the Port Executive Director, the County Administrator and the City Manager would be meeting on October 9. UPCOMING MEETINGS October 22, 2009 - Public Hearing on height for block located between Monroe and Jackson Streets including vacated Franklin Street (LUP09-070) and Michelle Sandoval will provide background on the 2002 City Comp Plan FUGA amendments. November 4, 2009 - Open House -Designated Historic Residential Property Owners- Planning Commission invited although not a schedule meeting. (Tentative) November 19, 2009 - Public Hearing -Residential Bulk, Scale and Teardown Ordinance (Tentative) Mr. LeMaster commented that notices of regular meetings (non Public Hearings) of the Planning Commission do not usually include agenda information. He suggested that agenda topics should be included. Mr. Sepler said that a copy of the agenda could also be posted on the web. Commissioners and staff agreed to those changes and noted that any steps to promote additional public input are appropriate. COMMUNICATIONS (None) Page 8 of 9 X. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Emery moved for adjournment and Mr. LeMaster seconded. Chair Mick-Hager adjourned the meeting at 8:25 PM. . / Monica Mick-Hager, Chair f Gail A. Bernhard, Recorder Page 9 of 9