Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDELETE. CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MEETING OF APRIL 12, 2007 7:00pm CITY HALL — THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM Meeting Materials: EXH. 1. Planning Commission Meeting Agenda (revised) for April 12, 2007 EXH. 2. J. Surber, Staff Report to Planning Commission: Director's Recommendation on the 2007 Comprehensive Plan Docket, April 5, 2007; with maps (EXHIBITS A, B, C, D, E1, F & G). EXH. E2 Rigby Comprehensive Plan Application ( LUP 07-026) EXH E3 D. Rigby, Letter to Planning Commission, re: Rigby rezone, dated February 15, 2007 EXH HI J. Randall, Letter to Planning Commission, re: Suggested Code Amendment, Small Wind Energy Systems, dated March 1, 2007 EXH H2 AWEA Model Zoning Ordinance: Permitted Use Ordinance for Small Wind Turbines Q. Randall supporting materials, LUP 07-028) EXH H3 Proposed PTMC additions/revisions Q. Randall supporting materials, LUP 07-028) EXH H4 Handbook Cover: Permitting Small Wind Turbines Q. Randall, supporting LUP 07-028) EXH Il J. Randall, Letter to Planning Commission, re: Suggested Code Amendment, Residential Setback Adjustments, dated March 1, 2007 EXH 12 Proposed PTMC additions/revisions (J. Randall supporting materials, LUP 07-029) EXH. 3 Guest Sign In Sheet, Planning Commission Hearing, April 12, 2007 • I. CALL TO ORDER Chair George Randels called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. ROLL CALL A quorum of Planning Commission members was present: Harriet Capron, Steve Emery, Alice King, Roger Lizut, George Randels, Julian Ray, and Liesl Slabaugh. George Unterseher was excused. III. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA Chair Randels moved that the approval of minutes and election of new vice chair be deferred until after the public hearing. Mr. Ray seconded. All were in favor, and the agenda was approved, as amended. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (See below) V. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT (None) • Planning Commission Meeting Page 1 of 11 April 12, 2007 that cannot be explained by the Basin 4 boundaries. Staff recommends that this request be investigated further, with the possibility of including blocks 3, 8, 21, and 22 in addition to block 23, to see if an area of higher density could be supported. In response to a question from Chair Randels about other blocks in the vicinity, Rick Sepler said that it is likely that the area to the east can be served by infrastructure; there are alternatives under consideration for sewer (lift station) that may allow support of higher densities. There was a brief discussion regarding the relationship of infrastructure to zoning. Mr. Sepler said that there is a proponent who is now evaluating the feasibility of opening the area easterly of Howard St. and northerly of Hastings St. 3. Wise Rezone (LUP 06-149) — The proposal is to rezone the property at the corner of F Street and San Juan Avenue (EXH. C) from C -I (Neighborhood Commercial) to C-I/MU (Neighborhood serving Mixed Use Center). This would be consistent with the development of the adjacent properties. Multi -family housing would be allowed as part of future development. Rick Sepler pointed out that this property is the only instance of C -I in the vicinity. The Director's recommendation is to docket this item. Ms. Surber noted that if the Planning Commission ultimately concurs with the recommendation, staff changes the document to indicate "Planning Commission recommendation" and includes any special changes desired. Liesl Slabaugh requested clarification on whether or not a change to C-I/MU would require multi -family housing to be included with new construction, or just allow it. Ms. Surber confirmed that it would be required. 4. Nomura Rezone (LUP 07-014) — The proposal is to rezone all or part of the large property at is the corner of F Street and San Juan Avenue from R-111to C-I/MU and R -III. This appears consistent with the City's vision of walkable, transit -accessible neighborhoods that offer a variety of housing types. Ms. Surber said that in conversations with Teri Nomura, she had been in favor of investigating this further, and noted that the Nomuras would likely be present at future hearings, if the item is docketed. Ms. Slabaugh said she had noticed a swale at the low side of the property, and asked if there was a wetland there. Ms. Surber said that the F Street drainage was on the other side of F Street. Mr. Ray asked if there was additional information from informal conversations regarding which parts of the property the owner may wish to rezone. Ms. Surber indicated that the portion near the corner (F and San Juan Streets) would likely be C -II M/U, bounded by concentric rings of residential, R -III. 5. Rigby Rezone (LUP 07-026) — The proposal is to rezone four lots at Sheridan Street and 111 Street from C-II(H) (Hospital Commercial) to residential use (R -II to R -III residential). The rationale stated in the Rigby letter is that the medical model has changed since the zoning was done, and that this particular property is not needed by the hospital. Ms. Surber said that she and Mr. Sepler had met with Mr. Vic Dirksen, CEO of the Jefferson Health Care, and had learned that the hospital is about to embark on a long range planning process. He spoke of two different models that are possible for the future. One is having associated clinics and services in the near vicinity of the hospital, which is consistent with the current zoning. Another is to somewhat disperse the service locations. According to Mr. Dirksen, the property in question would, under certain circumstances, appear to be a logical clinical facility expansion area. Therefore, in the absence of a hospital master plan, staff is not recommending that this item be docketed at this time. Ms. Surber said that she had received an e-mail from Mr. Rigby following the meeting with the hospital, and she read his comments aloud: "I have chosen not to write or to attend • Thursday night's meeting. From the sound of our conversation, the staff will present a wait and see approach, based on Vic Dirksen's comments. The problem is that the hospital's master plan has been talked about for years. This is also one of the few properties zoned C-II(H) that has Planning Commission Meeting Page 3 of 11 April 12, 2007 Carol Wise identified herself as owner of the property at F and San Juan, as described in item 3, 40 Wise Rezone. She said that it had been suggested that the property be rezoned from Neighborhood Commercial to C-I/MU (Neighborhood Serving Mixed Use Center) to coincide with the work that would be going on in the McCairn property across the street. She said she was very much in favor of the rezoning proposal. She said that they had already done a lot of work on the property under discussion, and that the current zoning was not conducive to the best use of her property. Ms. McLaughlin said she had nothing further to add. Jeff Randall was welcomed as the next speaker, for items 9 (Development Standards for Small Wind Energy Systems) and 10 (Residential Setback Adjustment Process). Mr. Randall said that item 9 arose from observations made during his travels and was related to his current employment. He said that he had been thinking about item 10 during and since his tenure with the City of Port Townsend. He then walked through a slide presentation on item 9. He noted that he works for Power Trip Energy, an electrical contracting firm in Port Townsend, specializing in the installation of solar and grid tied electrical systems. The firm is also qualified to install wind power systems. Chair Randels noted that Mr. Randall was not subject to "appearance of fairness" restrictions. Mr. Randall said that his focus and motivation is the benefit of the community. Mr. Randall showed a photo of a rear -drive wind power system called a Sky Stream (3.7 KW) to illustrate the fit into a city neighborhood of one quarter to one half acre lots. He described the blade size range of 3 —18 feet, on towers as low as 35 feet. He said that he had seen the potential for home owners and even small businesses to make use of these small wind power systems. • Why should Port Townsend residents explore this type of energy generation? Mr. Randall said that Puget Sound Energy derives most of its power from fossil fuel sources: coal (36% +) and natural gas (18% +). Solar and wind are the two most viable renewable energies — they are proven, reliable and do not require significant technological breakthroughs. Both are limited by natural conditions, but can complement one another to provide a more continuous energy flow. Why can't wind energy be used in Port Townsend now? Currently, there is no definition for small wind energy systems, and Mr. Randall has proposed a definition that is used in a number of model codes. As an unlisted use, it would now require a major conditional use permit, with a public hearing. The height limits for residential districts are 30 to 35 feet, which is marginal for wind to be effective. He noted that to increase the height above 35 feet, to improve effectiveness, a variance is needed. The variance process is not designed to handle this type of issue since wind power is not defined in the code. He said that the people in town who are interested in this face a difficult permitting process, unless the code is changed. Therefore, he is taking a proactive approach in defining the issues and proposing these code changes. Why do we need taller towers? Wind generators are intended to operate in "clean", smooth,steady wind conditions. Buildings and trees cause wind turbulence or stress, which reduces the efficiency of the system. One rule of thumb indicates that the wind tower needs to be twice as high as a neighboring structure or object. Otherwise, the tower must be a considerable distance from the high building or tree. He displayed a diagram showing the difference in effectiveness of 90, 60 and 30 foot towers in a 12 mile an hour wind. is The poles are now commercially available; Sky Stream offers its own pre-engineered poles. The code, as drafted, acknowledges the pre-engineered poles and would not require a "wet stamp" for Planning Commission Meeting Page 5 of 11 April 12, 2007 expressed his hope that the wind energy proposal would not be lost in the larger energy research process. He thanked the Planning Commission for their attention to the presentations. Chair Randels asked if there were other proponents or opponents to any of these items, or other comments from the public. Carol Wise asked if the setback proposal would apply to any street or only to those which are 73 feet wide. Mr. Randall said that the intention was to apply this to local access streets. He noted that the City classifies streets in various ways. Lawrence Street for example is not local access, but "the streets where you like to walk" are mainly local access. If the right of way is 60 feet or wider, you could request that adjustment. Staff Response: Chair Randels requested response from staff on any of these three items: 3, 9 and 10, before taking questions from Planning Commission members. Staff had no additional comment. Planning Commission Questions: Liesl Slabaugh questioned Mr. Randall on the feasibility of the Wind Power proposal in R -II, given the space requirements. "Why would you even permit this in R -II?" Mr. Randall said that R -II is the most prevalent zoning. He listed the "best candidate" areas: Happy Valley, the valley between the two bluffs where there is much wind, especially at North Beach. He said there are good size parcels in Happy Valley, where one quarter to one half an acre will provide plenty of land. He said that his draft was based on a model ordinance from the American Wind Industry Association and some other model ordinances. He said that he has been asked why a 10,000 square foot property cannot have a wind tower. He said that the draft does not cover very small properties or the instance of the Belmont roof, for example, and can be modified. He said he was • thinking of the larger parcels in R -I or R -II, and did not want to write off possibilities. George Randels added that he could envision something like this being incorporated as part of a new PUD plan, or in a project such as Hamilton Heights, if it were included at the outset. Mr. Randall added the example of "eco -village" type developments. Mr. Randall also referred to "our roots as Americans"; he said he had seen wind power examples in his travels through rural America. Ms. Slabaugh mentioned the power loss when transferring power over large distances. Mr. Randall spoke briefly of micro -grids. He stressed that he had not wished to leave anything out and that the draft could be modified in various ways. Steve Emery asked about current standards. Mr. Randall said that there are noise standards in Washington, and that he had used the 60 decibel standard, which is equivalent to the sound of a car driving by at 25-30 MPH at a distance of 50 feet. He said that wind itself has a noticeable sound; it is not quiet. From a 50 foot distance, the sound of the device would hardly be noticeable over the sound of the wind. Mr. Emery stated that the proposal establishes standards where none currently exist. Ms. Capron asked if it would be feasible to install a larger capacity tower that could serve the needs of multiple households. Mr. Randall said more research is needed to quantify the power generation that is possible in this location. Mr. Sepler mentioned the 1988 Comp Plan information on this subject. Mr. Randall said that a 3.7 KW system at an average wind speed of 12 MPH can power a home. This assumes connection to a grid system that can bank excess power. Mr. Sepler reminded that this was a docketing agenda and questions should be pertinent to that. Mr. Emery asked if there is currently a height limit for flag poles in Port Townsend; there was no certain information on that question. Planning Commission Meeting Page 7 of 11 April 12, 2007 proponent on certain controversial details and bring the issue back to the Planning Commission in June. Chair Randels said that he would like to add to the recommendation the suggestion that Mr. Randall and associates be invited to join the citizen energy committee, if possible. After a brief discussion, Mr. Randels then moved that the item not be docketed, that staff work with the proponent, Mr. Randall, on a reduced scope proposal in preparation for Planning Commission consideration, as soon as the workplan permits, and to recommend that Mr. Randall and associates be invited to participate in the citizen's energy advisory committee to address the broader wind energy issues; Mr. Emery seconded. All were in favor; motion passed. Item 10, Setback Process — Mr. Lizut suggested that this item be docketed. There was a brief discussion comparing the docketing schedule to fitting it in as time permits. Mr. Lizut said that, if not docketed, he would prefer to give this item priority over the Wind Energy item, which he sees as multi -faceted and complicated in comparison. Mr. Ray moved that item 10, Setback Process, not be docketed, and that staff and Planning Commission incorporate it into the 2007 workplan, as soon as feasible. Mr. Emery seconded All were in favor; motion passed In addition, after brief consideration, Chair Randels noted that he perceived consensus on Mr. Lizut's suggestion to place item 10 ahead of item 9 in the evolving Planning Commission work plan schedule. Item 1, Shapiro/Woods Rezone — Chair Randels noted that this item is automatically docketed; no further action is required at this time. Item 2, Q4 Development — Chair Randels asked if docketing this item should be contingent on also docketing item 8, Establishing Minimum Density for R -III? After a brief discussion, Commissioners agreed that both items would proceed in parallel and ultimately the Planning Commission could make a recommendation to City Council reflecting the relationship between the two proposals. Mr. Emery moved to accept staff recommendation to docket Q4 Development; Ms Slabaugh seconded. All were in favor, motion passed Item 4, Nomura Rezone — Chair Randels moved to accept staff recommendation to docket the Nomura Rezone; Mr. Lizut seconded All were in favor; motion passed. Item 5, Rigby Rezone — Commissioners discussed the probable timing of the hospital master plan, and reviewed the key issues of this proposal. Mr. Ray moved to accept staff recommendation not to docket this item at this time, Mr. Lizut seconded. All were in favor, motion passed. Item 6, Rezone Port Townsend Library — Chair Randels noted the apparent typographical error in paragraph 5 regarding circulation (90, 067 to 22,152); staff will correct as necessary. Mr. Ray moved to accept staff recommendation to docket the Library Rezone; Mr. Lizut seconded. All were in favor, motion passed Item 7, Rezone and Create an Overlay District for the Howard Street Corridor — Chair Randels noted the error, Discovery Bay Road, in paragraph c. He suggested adding the phrase "and beyond" after Discovery Road, and changed accommodate to accommodates in bullet item 6, under paragraph c. Mr. Randels moved to accept staff recommendation to docket the Howard Street item; Mr. Ray seconded. All were in favor; motion passed. Item 8, Minimum Density in R -III — Chair Randels moved to accept staff recommendation to • docket the Minimum Density item; Mr. Ray seconded All were in favor; motion passed. Chair Randels closed the public hearing on the 2007 Comprehensive Plan Preliminary Docket. Planning Commission Meeting Page 9 of 11 April 12, 2007 • CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MEETING OF APRIL 12, 2007 7:00pm CITY HALL — THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM Meeting Materials: EXH. 1. Planning Commission Meeting Agenda (revised) for April 12, 2007 EXH. 2. J. Surber, Staff Report to Planning Commission: Director's Recommendation on the 2007 Comprehensive Plan Docket, April 5, 2007; with maps (EXHIBITS A, B, C, D, E1, F & G). EXH. E2 Rigby Comprehensive Plan Application ( LUP 07-026) EXH E3 D. Rigby, Letter to Planning Commission, re: Rigby rezone, dated February 15, 2007 EXH H1 J. Randall, Letter to Planning Commission, re: Suggested Code Amendment, Small Wind Energy Systems, dated March 1, 2007 EXH H2 AWEA Model Zoning Ordinance: Permitted Use Ordinance for Small Wind Turbines (J. Randall supporting materials, LUP 07-028) EXH H3 Proposed PTMC additions/revisions Q. Randall supporting materials, LUP 07-028) EXH H4 Handbook Cover: Permitting Small Wind Turbines (J. Randall, supporting LUP 07-028) EXH I1 J. Randall, Letter to Planning Commission, re: Suggested Code Amendment, Residential Setback Adjustments, dated March 1, 2007 EXH 12 Proposed PTMC additions/revisions (J. Randall supporting materials, LUP 07-029) EXH. 3 Guest Sign In Sheet, Planning Commission Hearing, April 12, 2007 • I. CALL TO ORDER Chair George Randels called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. ROLL CALL A quorum of Planning Commission members was present: Harriet Capron, Steve Emery, Alice King, Roger Lizut, George Randels, Julian Ray, and Liesl Slabaugh. George Unterseher was excused. III. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA Chair Randels moved that the approval of minutes and election of new vice chair be deferred until after the public hearing. Mr. Ray seconded. All were in favor, and the agenda was approved, as amended. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (See below) V. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT (None) • Planning Commission Meeting Page 1 of 11 April 12, 2007