Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11171993 Ag Min . . . City of Port Townsend Planning Commission 540 Water St., Port Townsend, WA 98368 206/385·3000 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Special Meeting Wednesday, November 17, 1993 I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 21, 1993 and October 28, 1993 III. COMMUNICATIONS: Current mail IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Larry and Marty Johnson, Variance Application #9310-09 1. Staff report (Bloomfield) 2. Public testimony 3. Committee report (BairdLWelch) 4. Commission discussion and conclusions V. NEW BUSINESS VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings VII. ADJOURN , I Guest List :. it/eeting of: Purpose: Date: r Name Ipl.... p"o<' I Address ~ T:~~ml~~ j 11 ~I '" /)) III ) Ii <r tL~, / Lrll ¿//; 10v ',,,, /" J 'l. , - I . --- I . - -- -- -------_.' -- --_.-...~-~.._,,------~._--_._------,. '--- - --- --- .--- --~ _.~--~----~-- . --"---'---~'---'---------~--- '" . . . City of Port Townsend Planning and Building Department 540 Water Street, Port Townsend, W A 98368 2061385-3000 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 17, 1993 I. ROLL CALL Chair Pro-tem Karen Erickson called the special meeting to order at 7:05 PM. Other members present were Lisa Enarson, Ernie Baird and Mark Welch. Lois Sherwood entered the meeting at 7: 15 PM. Cindy Thayer was in attendance until there was a quorum. She excused herself because of a conflict of interest. Staff members present were Darlene Bloomfield and Sheila Spears. Commissioner Bob Rickard was absent. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion to approve the minutes of 10/21/93 and 10/28/93 (with the condition that the secretary confirm whìch commissioner made the motion in the 10/21 minutes) was made bY·Enarson. Seconded. by Welch. All were in favor. . III. ~. COMMUNICATIONS: None IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Larry and Marty Johnson, Variance Application #9310--09 1. Staff Report (Bloomfield) Bloomfield presented two draft staff reports, one recommending in favor of the variance and one recommending denial. She stated that the only person present in the audience was Larry Johnson. Erickson asked for clarification of the height limitation. Bloomfield explained thai the building code allows for 30 feet in R-I and R-IA zones, and 35 feetin R-II and R-IIlzones. Bloomfield will change the confusing language in the report and add whichever is the more restrictive of the two. Enarson asked how wide "S" Street is and if there is any information that might help determine what the future access might be from property owners on "S" Street. Bloomfield answered. that "S" Street has a 60 ft right-of-way and that it is pretty steep on the East. Lois Sherwood entered at 7: 15 PM and took charge of the meeting at this point. . . . Planning Commission Minutes November 17, 1993 Page Two Commission asked about the common areas and said it would have been helpful to know if Public Works had expressed when "S" Street might be opened. 2. Public Testimony Applicant Larry Johnson stated that he wishes to build a 2-story house on the lot which has a southwesterly exposure, so the best part of yard is the front. He said the topography is steep and the likelihood of anything going through there is minimal. Lots 6 and 7 can be fed by Maple Hill. He said he doesn't see that the request will harm anybody; appreciates the letter of the law but it is the spirit of the law. 3. Committee Report (Baird/Welch) Baird said he would not be opposed to the variance if "S" Street truly is never going to go through. On the other hand he would feel better if he had assurance to that effect from Public Works. Bloomfield said the only way to assure that "S" Street would never be put through would be to get a street vacation. Unless it is vacated even the streets superintendent could not give a definite response. Baird said the common sense position would be to approve the variance if there is no other practical use for the land. On the other hand, without vacating the street or being sure it isn't going to be otherwise used, he doubts whether or not this would be good practice. Welch agreed and said the problem is procedural and there should be a street vacation first. He said that allowing the variance would be taking advantage of a public right-of-way. A street vacation would compensate for the loss of that public right-of-way. Erickson agreed and said that she is torn between why not and saying this will never happen as long as the street is there. She also doesn't like to see the street vacated because then the trees might be removed. If it isn't vacated, the trees will remain. By keeping the 20-foot setback and not opening or vacating the street allows for "pocket parks" for children to play in. Enarson agreed and reminded the Commission that the Lot 1 neighbor (corner lot) would have the right to build 10 feet from "S" Street. Given that information, she asked the Commission to consider offering a 10 foot setback. She expressed concern that as the City becomes more and more developed, developers will be willing to spend the money to make streets on steep grades if there is a need for it. She said the terrain of the street itself isn't enough of a reason to grant the applicant a 5-foot setback, but that a lO-foot setback should be considered. Bloomfield confirmed that a 10-foot setback is possible for Lot 1 on "S" Street. " Planning Commission Minutes November 17, 1993 Page Three . The only other building lot on "S" Street that could come before the Planning Commission would be Lot 6. Applicant Johnson said his view of a street vacation is that it tends to preserve. Erickson said that has not been the practice in Port Townsend. Johnson said a street vacation takes much longer and he has a construction time-table. He said the variance seemed to be the best way for him to go (more affordable and somewhat more likely to happen). He said the neighbors are interested in a street vacation for the purpose of preserving. Erickson questioned the Maple Hill SEP A access and was told access to all of Maple Hill would be from Maple Hill Court by way of Fir Street. A 10-foot setback would not be more restrictive than that allowed for Lot 1. The Planning Commission agreed to a 1O-foot setback. Bloomfield suggested she could reference a 1O-foot setback from "S" Street in the conclusions and add a condition for a 10-foot minimum setback. Enarson made a motion to approve the Findings, Conclusions and Conditions as amended and recommend to City Council approval of Variance Application #9310-09. The motion included the addition of a condition for a minimum lO-foot setback from "S" Street and the revision to . Finding #8 to clarify the height restrictions. Seconded by Erickson. All were in favor. V. NEW BUSINESS A. Conditional Use (9311-04) and Variance (9311-05) applications by the City of Port Townsend for a water standpipe near 20th and Howard Streets scheduled for hearing on December 9. VII. ADJOURN Motion to adjourn was made by Erickson. Seconded by Enarson. All were in favor. Meeting adjourned at 7:40 PM. ~~ Sheila Spears Planning & Building Assistant .