Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07141993 Ag Min . . . City of Port Townsend Planning Commission 540 \Vater St., Port Townsend, WA 98368 206/385-3000 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA (Revised) Special Meeting July 14, 1993 I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 24, 1993 III. COMMUNICATIONS: Current mail IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Gateway Development Plan 1) Gateway Project Process (Hildt) 2) Overview of Plan (Robison) 3) Questions and Answers to Planning Staff 4) Public testimony 5) Commission discussion Commission and V. NEW BUSINESS VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings Julv 15. 1993 Gateway Development Plan (Commission recommendation) Julv 29. 1993 Madge Wallin, Variance 9306-09 Committee: Enarson/Erickson William Schwilke/Robert Murray, Rezone 9305-03 Committee: Baird/Rickard City of Port Townsend, Conditional Use Permit 9306-01 Committee: Thayer/Welch Auqust 12. 1993 Joint Planning Commission, City Council Workshop and Transportation Planning Advisory Committee * Draft Arterial Street Plan Auqust 26. 1993 James P. Ramey, Conditional Use Permit 9306-14 Committee: Rickard/Enarson . . . City of Pert Tewnsend Planning Commission 540 \-Vater St., Port Townsend. \-VA 98368 206/385-3000 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Special Meeting July 14, 1993 'I . ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 24, 1993 III. COMMUNICATIONS: Current mail IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Gateway Development Plan 1) Overview of Plan (Robison) 2) Public testimony 3) Commission discussion V. NEW BUSINESS VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings July 15, 1993 Gateway Development Plan (Commission recommendation) July 29, 1993 Madge Wallin, Variance 9306-09 Committee: Enarson/Erickson william Schwilke/Robert Murray, Rezone 9305-03 Committee: Baird/Rickard city of Port Townsend, Conditional Use Permit 9306-01 Committee: Thayer/Welch Auqust 12, 1993 Joint Planning Commission, City Council Workshop and Transportation Planning Advisory Committee * Draft Arterial Street Plan Auqust 26, 1993 James P. Ramey, Conditional Use Permit 9306-14 Committee: Rickard/Enarson . . . City of Port Townsend Planning Commission 540 \Vater St., Port Townsend, WA 98368 206/385-3000 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Public Hearing . July 14, 1993 1. ROLL CALL Chair Lois Sherwood called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Other members present were Lisa Enarson, Cindy Thayer, Bob Rickard, Mark Welch, and Karen Erickson. Ernie Baird was excused. Staff members present were Michael Hildt, Dave Robison, and Pia Boyer. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 24, 1993 Rickard made several corrections to the minutes. Rickard moved, and Thayer seconded that the minutes be approved as amended. III. COMMUNICATIONS: Current Mail No current mail. IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Gateway Development Plan 1) Gateway Project Process (Hildt) Hildt began by asking for a show of hands by people who felt they completely understood everything that went into the Gateway planning process to this point. About half the audience raised their hands. Hildt gave a brief history of the project, beginning with the Chamber of Commerce in 1987. So far this year, the Planning Commission has had 5 public workshops, suggesting changes to the Plan. The last one was attended by representatives from the Department of Transportation. The next step is a Council recommendation. It has been a long process, but the result is a better, more thoughtful plan. He introduced Dave Robison. 2) Overview of Plan (Robison) Robison began by summarizing the goals of the Gateway plan. 1. Traffic safety. 2. Gateway corridor as more than a transportation system. Sims way is a community road, and as such how can it better serve the community's goals. Economics. The corridor as an economically viable commercial center. 3. Aesthetics. Enhance character of Gateway district through streetscape improvements. Robison then described the recommendations of plan. 1. Signalize major intersections. Stoplights at Sheridan. These are important for traffic safety. 2. Left hand turn lane throughout most of the corridor. 3. Consolidate driveways. The existing mass of turning confusion creates traffic safety problems. 4. Install bicycle lanes, pedestrian paths and transit facilities along SR20. · · · Planning Commission Public Hearing July 14, 1993 Page 2 5. Establish park and ride lots along the corridor. 6. Establishment of a flex zone. 7. Design guidelines for new buildings. Robison referenced pages in the plan with the drawings on the wall. Hildt distributed copies of the plan. The Gateway plan anticipates 5 signalized intersections along the corridor based on the predictions of the amount of cars expected to be in the area. Signalization is important, along with turn lanes, to break up traffic. The only area the plan recommends that SR20 will need to go to four lanes will be between Kosec funeral home and near Sheridan. It's important to remember that SR20 is a state highway, with a 100 foot state right-of-way. The proposed roadway is to be 48 feet wide, which leaves 26 feet on each side of the highway. This area is proposed for the flex zone. There is some combination of public and private improvements that can occur in this area. These improvements can benefit both business and also the community. Chapter 2A was added to adress the funding and implementation of the improvements outlined in the Plan. The Gateway plan is primarily a tool to guide new developments. The state DOT won't just come in and do roadway improvements, as most funding comes through competitive grant processes. Plan has been prepared so one of its main benefit is that a large portion of the plan could be funded by the state and federal grants. The city needs a tool to tell new large developers what the community wants. It's a guide for new development. NorthSound bank and business park are required by DOT to put in specific street improvements. Each project, as it's developed, is required to pay a portion of the cost based on the vehicle trips their business generates. Existing businesses don't have to pay anything, as they are grandfathered. Robison also summarized the guiding principles of the Gateway plan outlined in Chapter 2A. Robison asked the audience if they'd like to direct questions to staff and the Planning Commission. 3) Questions and Answers to Planning Commission and Staff Paula Amell asked a question about access to her property. Robison said he'd meet with her to work it out. A man asked what happened to a flow chart that shows the traffic through left turn lanes, for example, Sims Way from the ferry dock, if there will be a Sheridan left turn lane. Robison said that the turning lane will be both ways. Ted Belgard asked who had to pay for the project. He said that in the plan, there is no realism in the funding. Taxpayers have to pay. Robison said that a funding plan has been put together. Belgard rephrased his question. Robison said that new development will have to contribute. The only other way is through state and private grants. Only in increments, bite sized chunks over the course of 20 years, will new improvements happen. Hildt answered a man's question about roadway improvements in front of their property. Port Townsend will be the only jurisdiction in the state to be able to regulate signage within a state right-of-way, for example. Robison said that the Gateway plan takes away authority from the state and gives it to the city. As an example, without the plan, the permitting process would take up to a year, though with the city-adopted plan, it would take close to a month. Irwin Jones said that he was troubled with the policy of charging for development rights. He sees a constitutional problem with that. Hildt replied by saying that none of us are attorneys. If someone develops their property, the fair share of their impacts is a mitigation measure. RCWs limit amount attributable to the impact of their development. Jones said that existing businesses will benefit just as much through improvements, that it is not fair . . . Planning Commission Public Hearing July 14, 1993 Page 3 to new business. Hildt replied, saying that today, there are more requirements. Are the requirements of the new business greater than the impact of their new growth? No one is saying that existing businesses never have to pay anything. Dave has mentioned LID's. Businesses need to get together to pay cost of improvements which they may want in the future. Jones asked, with 601 and 602, if they pass, do you really think you'll get state funding? Hildt replied that that was not an answerable question. Erickson asked if state already has conditions. Have they already approved the Gateway plan? Hildt, Robison replied that NorthSound bank approved of the Gateway plan, and approached the state with it, and the state approved their project on the basis of the plan. Erickson asked if there is no regulation for latecomer's fee. Robison replied that the state does not administer latecomer's agreements. Forrest Aldrich asked for a response to a typical scenario: a specific segment, for example the area from Kearney Street going west past Harper's Shell, past Coldwell Banker. Do you see that area as an LID? Would the city administer that, who would initiate it? Robison replied that the city could initiate an LID, and property owners could defeat it; or property owners could initiate, and the other property owners could defeat by a 60 % majority vote. Aldrich said he assumes there must be a longer larger segment, i.e., you wouldn't just put in a bicycle path in front of a 20 foot long business. Jim Meyers asked a question about the 100 foot right of way. Are you planning on condemning property, then, and what about acquisition? Robison replied that he doesn't anticipate any acquisition, although some realignments of intersections may take place. Thayer asked if in the widening of Sims Way at the "SO curve, if cuts create a problem with abutting property, will there be compensation. Hildt said that one will find that the flex zone will be next to nothing there because, we just don't need it. Enarson asked a question about City Council Resolution #12, what will the city mandate for developers. Robison replied that compliance with Gateway recommendations would be accomplished during SEPA review. 4) Public Testimony Phil Speser, Vice President of EDC, spoke on behalf of the EDC. EDC wants to express very strong support for moving forward with the Gateway plan. The bottom line, is that there's a need to put forth a strong vision, so that we can control our future. The way it's been put together, we're not committed to spend money until the funds are available. Speser also said that he is an attorney, and has no constitutional concerns with the plan. As a taxpayer, he's happy to see improvements being made to this community. He spoke on fairness to incoming business. Said new business comes here because there is a viable economic, and business community. Businesses come here because existing businesses and community have created a favorable environment that they'll benefit from. Fairness works both directions. Russ Hoover said that none of us like to pay for anything. Hoover stated that he's so impressed with this plan that he's considering moving his business to the Gateway area. He comes from a community that's done something similar, and found it very beneficial. He's personally very excited, and hopes it passes. Rick Sepler said that he supports the Gateway plan for traffic safety. He also clarified "fair share" for the Commission. · · · Planning Commission Public Hearing July 14, 1993 Page 4 Scott Walker talked about pedestrian and bicycle improvemetns. He's very supportive of ideas put forth in plan for improvements. Joshua Sage, a Gateway business owner, said that he frequently watches accidents happen at the Safeway/Boat Haven intersection, and sees that being addressed as part of plan. As a business owner, he's willing to pay more, wants to move uptown to business park. Supportive of improvements to bicycle lanes. People will have to adjust and change, but it's worth it from a business standpoint. Greg Bennet spoke and said he works on pedestrian and bicycle issues in town. Talked about access and egress problems on SR20, both for cars and bicycles. Priority is to improve SR20 for those who want to bike and ride to work. More people would ride if facilities would provide for it. Gateway plan addresses these concerns. JeffHamm, general manager for Jefferson Transit, spoke and said that the Transit Board has not formally reviewed the project, but that staff is very supportive of plan; if Jefferson Transit's longterm plans for Port Townsend are to come to pass, Gateway needs to be there. Bob Geisler. Co-Chair of Transportation committee for Chamber of Commerce, said that he endorses the plan, and would like to see it pass. Mark Downing said that he doesn't own or work along the corridor, but does shop there. His main mode of transportation is by bike, and he is in support of the plan. Joan Deering said that she was a member of the original charrette, and she's excited about fact that the plan wasn't only visionary, it's actually happening. The steering committee that put Gateway together did a wonderful job of thinking about the future. Margaret Caro said that she supports plan and its utility. Peter Badame said that he has been involved in Gateway planning process since immediately after the charette. One of the reasons he got involved was on the level of vehicular safety. The plan is a progressive concept to deal with vehicular traffic in Port Townsend. We'll all be better off with this. It's comprehensive, it's progressive, and he encourages recommending it to the Council. Earnest Callahan said that he's lived in Port Townsend for 27 years. He's always liked Sims Way the way it is, wants to keep it as is. Ted Belgard raised issues about money. It's a struggle to survive and prosper in this community. He doesn't antcipate anything will change. He regards the plan as pie in the sky. In today's tax climate, without identifying sources and funding, there's no way to achieve success. It has to be paid for from some source. He doesn't trust government. It doesn't do much to help small business. He has heard nothing to allay suspicions. John McGinn of John's Auto spoke. He said he agrees with Bob Giesler that it would be great to have more traffic signals, but can't support Gateway Plan as written because it requires more than that, because it would significantly and detrimentally impact his business. It would negatively impact his business to the point that he couldn't afford to stay in business. Dorothy Hunt said that she has been to many meetings and believes in a modified plan. Gateway is lovely, if we were a wealthy community. Merchants have a hard time in this community. Port Townsend is a unique place, she has lived here for 63 years, and seen a lot of things. Doesn't want to see it change any further. Misses the sunset on Kah Tai. . . . , .. Planning Commission Public Hearing July 14, 1993 Page 5 5) Commission discussion Sherwood spoke in reference to Mrs. Hunt's statement. That everyone agrees that we need to protect is Port Townsend. Discussion ensued over process, whether the Commission should set up an agenda now of what to discuss tomorrow night. Enarson said she would like to discuss additions to bike lanes to encourage cautionary language and signs informing bikes that they need to follow speed limits. Also, address the background tree requirement in commercial district. Thayer said she had concernS about 10th Street where it meets Sims Way. Erickson said she had a question about language in regard to traffic lanes. Robison said that it should be added that at the May workshop, there was new language put in. Erickson asked about the holding lane. Robison said that the draft of two years ago contained a technical appendix. The problem was that it was too detailed. What we have today is more streamlined and easier to understand. Enarson said she would like to talk tomorrow one more time about what is optional, what is not in plan. Robison talked about options for development in the flex zone. Sherwood asked if the City Council had adopted it as a plan, would review be mandatory and compliance would be voluntary? Robison said no. Sherwood asked what if NorthSound Bank came through with a proposal, and they didn't want to do what Gateway suggests. Robison said that the design guidelines in plan don't talk about the flex zone. They look at buildings and site design, etc. There is no design review process yet. Sherwood said that we need to assure that we can tell people that if this goes through, you can get approval from the City rather than going through the state. Is it going to be more expensive, or less expensive than without Gateway? Hildt asked if what she was saying is with a plan like Gateway, does the state feel that they can acheive the traffic goals with three lanes. Without Gateway, the state would have to go with a 5 lane highway. Rickard said that it was his understanding is that new access in proposed WACs are more restrictive than Gateway. Hildt said that it's a matter of means. There has to be some plan. To get from this point to something like Gateway, there has to be some sort of organizing plan. Rickard asked about fair share, and if the developer would come forward to help the city find funds to defray costs, specifically in regard to NorthSound Bank and the Business Park. Rickard asked if the Gateway plan had been in place for 5 years, they could have come in and done improvements and paid less that they do now. Robison said that category C improvemnts were in budget, but were taken out in June of this year. Category C funds would have helped to pay for those improvements. Tim Caldwell asked, had the Gateway plan been passed, would Category C funds have been kicked out? Robison said that yes, they probably would have, as the budget was being tightened. Erickson referred to 6/24 meeting, where the Planning Commission was informed by the representatives from DOT that the waiting list for traffic lights is backed up until the year 2045. · · · :. Planning Commission Public Hearing July 14, 1993 Page 6 Erickson also said that she agrees with Mrs. Hunt on modifying the plan because it will modify the look of Port Townsend. She loves the variety of small town look. Every five feet it's different. Rickard responded by saying that came up 3 years ago. Flex zone allows anyone to do anything. It's up to adjacent business owners to do what they want. There are no design standards for the flex zone. Robison said three years ago when we began, we thought we'd have recommended plants, trees. Plan has adapted. Things that have remained consistent are transportation improvements, sidewalks that connect to the adjacent parcel, etc. Enarson questioned Robison about latitude of development, especially the guidelines, which are more specific. Robison said that they give the developer a guide when they walk in the door. He would like to see voluntary review and voluntary compliance, to begin with. Hildt said that it was his own feeling is that no one is ready for design review up there. It would have to wait until the businesses themselves came in asking for reveiw. Thayer suggested adjournment. Commission discussed the order for the next night's meeting. V. NEW BUSINESS VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings Julv 15. 1993 Gateway Development Plan (Commission recommendation) Julv 29. 1993 Madge Wallin, Variance 9306-09 Committee: EnarsonlErickson William SchwilkelRobert Murray, Rezone 9305-03 Committee: Baird/Rickard City of Port Townsend, Conditional Use Permit 9306-01 Committee: Thayer/We1ch Thayer announced she won't be in town for that meeting. Erickson was assigned to the committee in Thayer's place Au!!Ust 12. 1993 Joint Planning Commission, City Council Workshop and Transportation Planning Advisory Committee * Draft Arterial Street Plan Au!!Ust 26. 1993 James P. Ramey, Conditional Use Permit 9306-14 Committee: RickardlEnarson Rickard moved to adjourn, Welch seconded. Meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. . "","'"..s pe~f'aTF"'-L..~ '1""HI neo 1111: ~