HomeMy WebLinkAbout110410CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
City Hall Council Chambers
Thursday, November 4, 2010 6:30 PM
Materials:
EXH 1 Planning Commission Meeting (Revised) Agenda, November 4, 2010
EXH 2 Transpo Group, City of Port Townsend Transportation Functional Plan,
Apri12009
EXH 3 Planning Commission, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and
Recommendation Re: LUP10-032, Review and Recommendation
on Adoption of a Transportation Functional Plan, Nov 4, 2010
EXH 4 R. Sepler, Memo to Planning Commission, Form-based Strategies for
Upper Sims Way/Howard Street Corridor, October 25, 2010
EXH 5-7 R. Sepler, Draft Form Based Code Considerations for Commercial,
Apartment and Row house building types (for Howard Street
Corridor)
EXH 6 R. Sepler, Form Based Land Use Map for Howard Street Corridor
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Ray called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM.
II. ROLL CALL
A quorum of Planning Commission members was present: Sarah Bowman, Steve
Emery, Gerald Fry, Gee Heckscher (arrived 6:32 PM), Monica Mick-Hager,
Julian Ray (Chair).
Staff present: Rick Sepler, Ken Clow and John McDonagh
III. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA
Mr. Emery moved for acceptance of the agenda; Mr. Fry seconded. The
agenda was approved, all in favor.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
July 22, 2010 - Mr Emery moved for approval of the minutes for July 22; Mr.
Fry seconded. The minutes of July 22 were approved, as written.
August 5, 2010 -Recorder noted that Sarah Bowman's affiliation had been
added to the draft minutes. Mr. Fry moved for approval of the minutes for
Page 1 of 9
August 5; Mr. Emery seconded. The minutes of August S, 2010 were approved,
as amended.
October 14, 2010 - Mr. Emery moved for approval of the minutes for October
14; Mr. Heckscher seconded. The minutes of October 14 were approved, as
written.
The minutes for September 9, 2010 appeared on the agenda for approval
erroneously. That meeting had been cancelled.
V. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT: None
VI. NEW BUSINESS
Public Hearing: Transportation Functional Plan
Ken Clow, P.E., Public Works Director and John McDonagh, Senior Planner
(Reading of the rules of order for public hearings was deferred, since there were
no members of the public present.)
Staff Presentation:
John McDonagh introduced himself and Ken Clow, Director of Public Works. He
identified the public record as LUP 10-032, Review and Recommendation on
Adoption of a Transportation Functional Plan. Materials previously provided
were a set of findings and fact, conclusions and a recommendation that would be
passed on to City Council concerning the Planning Commission vote on adoption
of the Transportation Functional Plan (TFP).
The purpose of the TFP is to provide a measure of the current levels of
transportation systems and guidance for the City to carry out its responsibilities
for its transportation systems now and into the future. Adoption of the TFP
includes a long range forecast of population and employment growth in the area
and provides direction for prioritizing transportation improvements. It also
provides program level identification of specific potential improvements such as
roadway widening and extension projects, intersection projects, non-motorized
improvements and upgrades and maintenance to the existing transportation
system. Adoption of the TFP is anon-project action designed to improve and
update existing standards in a mariner consistent with the City's adopted
Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the TFP was subject to environmental review
under SEPA; a threshold determination of non-significance was issued and
became final on October 6. The TSP has been provided to the State Department
of Commerce as an element/modification of the Comprehensive Plan. No
comments to the SEPA determination were received from the General Public and
no appeals were filed. The Planning Commission conducted a workshop on the
Page 2 of 9
matter, where Ken Clow and the City's consultant presented background and
major issues were discussed. In the findings presented, staff had provided a list of
the most applicable transportation goals and policies that support adoption of the
TFP.
Mr. McDonagh noted that the development of the TFP had been in progress for
quite some time. It had been reviewed in City Council workshop sessions in years
past; staff is now bringing it forward for formal adoption. He added that in 2011,
there will be concurrency changes to Chapter 12 for the Planning Commission
and City Council to consider.
uestions from the Planning Commission:
Commissioner Bowman inquired about the origin or source of TFP Policy 8.4.
John McDonagh said that policy comes from the Comprehensive Plan itself.
Commissioner Emery inquired about funding sources and time tables for the
anticipated capital projects, considering the likely decline in available State
funding due to budget constraints. Mr. Clow said that City Council had spent
considerable time on the financing of the TFP. Several elements are in progress
including the Fire District issue, Parks District and City/County issues, all of
which are potential funding sources for both capital projects as well as for
Operations and Maintenance. The City relies heavily on the State and more
recently on federal dollars; about $100,000 in federal money per year may be
aggregated over several years for large projects. State funding through the
Department of Transportation and the Transportation Improvement Board have
been sources of funding for the Downtown Streetscape and Upper Sims projects.
Mr. Clow confirmed that funding is expected to tighten and that would influence
the scheduling. The next step is to find the funding sources for the TFP.
Chair Ray noted that he was in favor of moving forward on the recommendation
of the TFP to City Council. Commissioner Mick-Hager commended the staff and
consultant on the readability of the TFP document.
Commissioner Heckscher moved that the TFP (Transportation Functional
Plan), LUP 10-032, as recommended by staff be approved by the Planning
Commission; Commissioner Mick-Hager seconded. The motion was approved
unanimously.
John McDonagh indicated that final copies would be provided for Chair Ray to
sign the following day. He and Mr. Clow left the meeting at 6:46 PM.
At 6:50 PM, after a short break to adjust seating, the Planning Commission
resumed its meeting.
Page 3 of 9
VII. OLD BUSINESS
Workshop: Maximum Residential Building Size
Rick Sepler, DSD Planning Director
Mr. Sepler briefly reviewed the previous workshop on Maximum Building Size.
City Councilor Randels had attended that meeting and requested that the Planning
Commission reconsider their prior recommendation on establishing a maximum
square footage for residential building size. Mr. Randels had described the
reasons for why that might be appropriate. Mr. Sepler said he had also brought
back for re-review the materials and references from the earlier workshop. He
said that the matter referred by City Council for consideration is entirely
discretionary; the Planning Commission may either report back that the matter has
been considered and that they do not wish to recommend action, or that the idea
has merit and requests Council direction to proceed. Chair Ray mentioned a third
option which would be to recommend revisiting the issue in the future with
performance based design criteria. He invited Commissioners to comment.
Commissioner Emery referred to a web link on form based code; he said it was
his impression that parameters such as floor to area ratios (FARs) were not really
compatible with performance based design. He said he was not in favor of setting
a maximum size.
Commissioner Heckscher said that he was sympathetic with Commissioner
Randels' intentions, but also recognized the difficulties inherent in implementing
a limit on residential building size. He also said that any potential conflicts
between FARs and performance based design criteria in the future were
surmountable and should not be the sole basis for the decision on whether or not
to limit house size.
Commissioner Fry noted that in previous discussion only one example of an
objectionably large residence in Port Townsend had been cited; he said he was not
convinced that there is truly a problem or a trend, especially given the depressed
economy. He said he would like consider the performance based approach before
taking any action.
Commissioner Bowman said she did not think putting controls on residential
building size would provide the outcomes desired. She said she understands the
concerns but does not think limiting the size is a solution to that problem, and she
would not be interested in pursuing that option further.
Commissioner Mick-Hager said that although she was very sensitive to Councilor
Randels position, she did not wish to pursue this issue for much the same reasons
as Mr. Fry had stated.
Paqe 4 of 9
Chair Ray said that he, too, was familiar with the problems Mr. Randels had
observed on the East Coast. However, he did not believe that FAR restrictions
would provide the solution. He mentioned the "law of unintended consequences"
and undesirable outcomes that may stem from square footage limitations. He
suggested that the Planning Commission inform City Council that it does not
recommend pursuing maximum building size but wishes to pursue investigation
of performance based design in a number of areas.
Commissioner Bowman inquired whether the Commission would be looking at
design guidelines for residential communities as part of the form based
discussions. Mr. Sepler said that at this point, the Commission would be looking
at form based code as an overlay for a specific area of Upper Sims/Howard Street
Corridor. He said expansion to other areas could be discussed. He noted that this
method does not work best in mature areas or for in-fill purposes. It works best
for "clean slate" situations, and as such has become the poster child for the "New
Urbanists." Mr. Sepler said form based design maybe appropriate for
neighborhoods yet to be built, which is actually Councilor Randels' greatest area
of concern.
Commissioner Heckscher raised the question of how "undeveloped areas" are
defined. Mr. Sepler agreed that categorization and definition of boundaries in
relation to zoning can be challenging.
There was further discussion regarding communication with City Council on this
matter. Mr. Sepler explained that the minutes of this meeting would be attached
along with a memo elucidating the major points, signed by the Chair on behalf of
the Commission. Chair Ray noted that there had been a thorough review of the
issues and options. There was consensus among Commissioners that the
documentation for City Council should reflect the major points discussed above.
In particular, setting a maximum size limit was not seen as the best means to
achieving the desired end, and that the potential application of form based design
should be investigated further.
Workshop: Land Use Approaches for the Howard Street Corridor and
Upper Sims Way (Rick Sepler, DSD Planning Director)
Mr. Sepler distributed paper copies of additional materials.
Mr. Sepler reported that he had met with the CDLU (Community Development
and Land Use Committee of the City Council) to provide them with an update and
materials from October 28. He said there is $670,000 (councilmatic bond) to
finish the Howard/Rainier Street Corridor design; application has been made to
the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB), which funded the Sims Way
improvements, for the actual construction funding. He said the TIB tends to favor
projects that it has already invested in. He mentioned the possibility of interim
Page 5 of 9
controls to ensure that any building in the area is compatible with the eventual
design.
Mr. Sepler discussed the distinctions between guidelines and requirements. He is
in favor of a blend between current zoning practice and the application of
elements from form-based codes. He pointed out and explained key elements
shown in the form based code handout materials. He discussed the differences
and similarities to traditional zoning requirements regarding use tables, reliance
on setbacks, parking orientation, etc. He said that this type of approach could
work as an overlay district. That is, there maybe additional rules, suspension of
some rules, or amplification of some rules for a given area. The likely format
would be graphic, rather than strictly textual.
There are three fundamental types for the areas under consideration. The first is
commercial frontage on Howard/Rainier. In earlier meetings, there was
agreement that the mixed use approach (with residential/office on the upper floor
and commercial, office and lobby uses on the ground floor) seems appropriate and
workable.
The second type is apartments. He suggested that apartments should have
amenities, such as shops or restaurants, within easy walking distance. In response
to a question about parking, he indicated that must be situated in the rear. There
was additional discussion about street parking needs and traffic controls, as well
as changing habits/preferences of younger generations.
The third type is row houses: duplex, triplex and fourplex. Mr. Sepler discussed
various elements such as roof form, transparency, front door height above the
grade, and the configuration of duplexes, triplexes, etc within a block.
There was also discussion about where the building types might best be situated
within the planning area. Mr. Sepler pointed out functional areas and transitions
on the map. He invited Commissioners to share their reactions/responses to these
concepts. He also explained that if there is interest, he would return to a future
meeting with more graphics and text regarding the various component parts.
Chair Ray spoke in favor of moving this work forward as quickly as possible so
as to be ready to take advantage of opportunities when the economy improves.
He also urged taking a fresh look at the formula store ordinance with regard to the
Howard Street Corridor Overlay area with an eye to addressing jobs and wages
and other economic growth.
There was agreement among the Commissioners to adjust the meeting schedule to
allow staff to allocate more time to the refinement of the form based design
documentation.
Page 6 of 9
Commissioner Fry expressed enthusiasm for this approach, noting that he had
photos to share from California that show certain results of form based design
concepts.
Commissioner Bowman said she likes the focus on how to direct growth and to
create community and livable/purposeful environments. However, she had a
concern about the creation of a third "core" area, in addition to Downtown and
Uptown. She wondered if there is a defined purpose or key intention for this area
and how these three main centers are connected within an overall scheme. For
example, how will children travel to school? Mr. Sepler noted that efforts are
being made to anticipate unintended consequences. He noted that Grant Street
School is within walking distance and there are provisions in the Transportation
Plan to install sidewalks along Discovery Road along with other improvements.
Chair Ray noted that this area is the only remaining site within the city limits that
is not already developed, and provides an opportunity to "do it right". He spoke
in favor of giving it enough structure and form to allow growth "organically'.
Commissioner Fry noted that interest rates are at an all time low, and that it is
important to have the plan in place as the economy picks up.
Commissioner Bowman raised other questions about residential density and
amenities such as parks. There was further discussion about the concentration of
single family homes in the Uptown area, and the plan for multi-family dwellings
in the Howard/Rainier area. Mr. Sepler reviewed the demographic trends and
some of the issues associated with the current zoning. He pointed out that as the
details enfold some zoning adjustments maybe appropriate. He reviewed the
plan for extension of existing walking trails to the Larry Scott Trail. Mr. Sepler
indicated that other options are possible, such as reserving portions of multi-
family lots for common green areas.
Commissioner Mick-Hager advocated consideration of many types of families
and their needs; she spoke in favor of providing play and biking areas for families
with young children in very close proximity to housing, even if these areas are
relatively small. She also stressed the need for stores and shops within short
walking distance that sell daily essentials. Mr. Emery suggested roof-top parks.
Chair Ray recalled that the previous design for Upper Sims had included plans for
many amenities, including day care, and had perhaps been too ambitious and
therefore unaffordable. He suggested that it may not be possible to provide every
convenience to everyone, and that determination would evolve as discussions
progress over the next few months.
Commissioner Mick-Hager suggested that the obvious first step would be to
identify the potential residents and occupants of this area, i.e. who would live here
and what would they require/desire? Mr. Sepler said that the in/out migration
to/from Port Townsend is fairly balanced but that many young people leave. He
Page 7 of 9
quoted an economist/consultant who had said that Port Townsend has unusual
demographics: a trend of flattening out the middle of the curve in terms of age
and income. What the incoming younger people can afford is the type of housing
that is under discussion for the Howard/Rainier Corridor. However, for the first
5-7 years, the area may be mainly commercial. Chair Ray said that it is hoped
that commercial development will fuel residential development in this area.
Commissioner Heckscher raised the question of how to ensure that the
commercial development is the type that will bring in residential capacity and use.
Mr. Sepler noted that single story building will be curtailed. He briefly reviewed
the types of developers/development that are possible and appropriate,
acknowledging that there is a degree of risk and that economics will be the main
driver. Chair Ray noted that there are examples of both success and failure in
other cities.
Commissioner Emery said that he would hope to see those individuals who are
now driving in from outlying areas in and outside the county to be able to afford
this planned new housing. Currently, any affordable rental units are costly in
terms of heating. He noted that a large percentage of Americans will not be able
to afford their own homes, and that Howard/Rainier is the best remaining place to
locate higher density housing. There was further discussion about other shifts in
lifestyle. Commissioner Bowman noted that an AARP poll shows that 90% of
Americans 45 or older wish to continue living in the community that they are in
and wish it to be age-in-place friendly. She stressed the need to provide/support
an active community environment and the ability to walk, not drive, to shops and
daily activities, and have links to other centers/amenities. She was also concerned
about the configurations of green space and places to enjoy the surroundings. She
cited examples of past concepts that were not at all successful, and urged very
careful consideration of these types of factors. Commissioners agreed that the
challenge is determining how to "to it right".
Commissioner Bowman also mentioned duplex designs in Baldwin Park, Florida
which include home offices or auxiliary dwelling units walled off from the main
living quarters. There was agreement that there is both opportunity and challenge
in finding creative designs blends that would be attractive and truly functional for
a diversity of residents/incomes. Commissioner Fry mentioned the option of a
senior co-housing project. The unknown of any factors stemming from the bio-
generation facility was also mentioned. There was additional discussion about the
open questions surrounding infrastructure and financing. Commissioners and
staff recognized that the plans discussed during this meeting are at a high level;
there is need for significantly more research and further development of these
ideas.
Page 8 of 9
VIII. UPCOMING MEETINGS
Chair Ray and Commissioner Bowman stated they would be unavailable for the
November 18 meeting. Chair Ray suggested cancelling the November/December
meetings and resuming in January. There was unanimous agreement on schedule
changes. The remainder of meetings for November and December were
cancelled.
The next scheduled Planning Commission meetings are January 13 and January
27, 2011.
Annual election of Planning Commission Chair and Vice Chair will be on the
agenda for January 13.
Commissioner Mick-Hager will be traveling to New Zealand and unable to attend
meetings during the entire month of February.
IX. COMMUNICATIONS
Chair Ray mentioned a recent Economic Development Council meeting that he,
Gee Heckscher and Rick Sepler had attended. He urged Planning Commissioners
to attend future meetings.
X. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Ray adjourned the meeting at 8:17 PM.
Planning Commission Chair
Attest: ,•
4
Gail Bernard, Recorder
Page 9 of 1 D