Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04151993 Ag Min . .-- . .. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA (Revised) Workshop Meeting April 15, 1993 I. ROLL CALL---------------------7:00 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 11, 1993 III. COMMUNICATIONS A. Current mail IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Gateway Development Plan 1) Michael Hildt, Planning Director (Introduction) 2) Jeff Hamm, Jefferson Transit Manager (Role of Peninsula Regional Transportation Organization) 3) Dave Robison, Planner (Goals and Objectives of Gateway Development Plan) B. Questions and Answers (Audience) C. Planning Commission Discussion V. NEW BUSINESS VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS ,;;. NAME (please print) ADDRESS ¡j¡Ä/J<¿ I PI ù::. kdb v- (i A L M.oC;C f<- ft' fjoK 1-'2l9 $¿~-s. L..Þ.... 3~rO UJ~ II JI M 17IÅJlaWJ Vl~ 1)îq1+ \ () , f( ~tnV ,. V '2-. C6\~c.~~ ~1.-f . ór f Sf .c¡ //:rA 11 /of~ Do you wish to If yes, indicate present testimony? topic. YES NO ,0 0 0 ø 0 G- O rfJ· 0 I2f 0 ~ 0 G}- O l2r' 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 tJ 0 ~ 0 0 JJ ,0 ~ .. '... : NAME Iplease print! ,-.:óii N.þ1::»~bD M~~'~~S -'3 ~ I e;c. '1) ø,/d~ Clr? 17&k /1 Guest List p¿ IIIf/ A/I ¡(/ a C () ~ ~4' /5510A/ ---- ADDRESS --g bJ/.. I <69 +-- 17- I. d-(? l( ), .J.\ tv '1 ~ ~L{)~ [,S <éUM "I /;5);3 /~ ,20 {' ~. Do you wish to presenllesllmony? YES NO .0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 .,. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tJ 0 0 0 0 0 ·0 0 If yes, indicate' topic. . - . City of Port Townsend Planning Commission 540 \Vacer Sc., Port Townsend, WA 98368 206/385-3000 Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 1993 I. ROLL CALL Chair Lois Sherwood called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Other members present were Lisa Enarson, Ernie Baird, Karen Erickson, Cindy Thayer and Bob Rickard. Mark Welch joined the meeting at 7:20. Staff members present were Dave RObison, Michael Hildt, Kit Perkins and Sheila Spears. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion was made by Erickson to approve the minutes of February 11, 1993 as amended. Seconded by Thayer. All were in favor. III. COMMUNICATIONS IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Gateway Development Plan Sherwood explained that this meeting is a workshop rather than a public hearing, and that the audience will be given the opportunity to ask questions later in the meeting. 1) Michael Hildt, Planning Director (Introduction) Hildt gave a brief history of the plan to date saying that in 1987 the Chamber of Commerce asked the City to look at the SR20 corridor as a place to do business. He explained the relationship with State Highways saying that it is helpful to the Department of Transportation (DOT) for the community to plan its needs and goals rather than wait for a crisis (difficult intersections and merchant situations). 2) Jeff Hamm, Jefferson Transit Manager (Role of Peninsula Regional Transportation Organization) Hamm said that in 1991 there was a major shift in thinking at the federal level for funding of transportation. What we have gotten for the last 40 years is more vehicles and the problems that come with that. The basis on which they are now distributing funds throughout the states is based on the manner in which we plan and fund the transportation system - transporting people not just cars, (pedestrians, bicycles, and public transportation). The state has asked that all local planning be in sync with regional planning. Gateway is not only SR20 but is also part of the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO). 3) Dave RObison, Planner (Goals and Objectives of Gateway Development Plan) · · · Planning Commission Minutes April 15, 1993 Page Two Robison said that the purpose of this meeting is to provide basic general information and give a framework of where the City is at on the Gateway Plan. It is hoped that based on the information from this meeting the Planning Commission will set future meetings. The goals of the plan are traffic safety, economic vitality and streetscape appearance. The major recommendations of the plan are signalization at five major intersections, left turn lane throughout most of the corridor (three lane roadway configuration), access consolidation, bicycle lanes and pedestrian shoulder paths, and design guidelines. Robison showed an illustration of what the road may look like if Gateway is implemented. B. Questions and Answers (Audience) Where is the parking going to be and has consideration been given to another mode of transportation so people could park out and not have to drive into town? Most buildings are outside of the 100 ft. right-of-way. New development has to provide parking on its property; there will be no parking spaces on the highway. The funding level is higher for inter-modal transportation and the proposal is that over time there will not .be any more parking in the right-of-way from the city limits to the ferry terminal. Safeway and Smiley's (at the entrance to town) have been looked at for park and ride lots. How are you going to pay for this? Funding for the long-range project will be provided in different ways including: when new developments go in they are going to have to provide necessary improvements (e.g. sidewalks, street lights and left turn lanes) to keep the flow of traffic reduced to a safe level; state and federal grants for particular sections; and in-kind support. Staff said that there is a good opportunity that the state pay 80% for funding the plan. The plan is in the planning and there is no definite scheme for funding at this time. will work on making sure that funding information is made available to the public. Do residences within 200 ft. of the right-of-way have to pay? Property within 200 ft. of the right-of-way was used for planning purposes only. The planning process required that the uses within 200 ft. be studied for traffic needs. The 200 ft. figure was arbitrary and has nothing to do with property rights. might stage Staff Existing businesses on Sims Way should not be the only ones to have to pay for this. The community needs to be approached and let them pay some of this. Existing businesses may want to put together a package with the City that is competitive at the state level for grant money. The way a business may be required to pay for landscaping when it doesn't want it would be because of a Local Improvement District (LID). An LID goes through a formal hearing process and 51% of front footage of businesses have to · · · Planning Commission Minutes April 15, 1993 Page Three approve for it to go through. That is a funding tool that may be initiated by the businesses. Sidewalks and landscaping could be included in a state grant package. Do improvements to existing businesses have to conform to Gateway? Gateway hasn't been adopted at the city level and there is presently no way to require present businesses that do improvements to make them fit into the plan. Is there going to be a traffic light at Sims Way and Sheridan? The number one priority is a traffic light in the area of Sims Way and Sheridan. There are three or four options for a light there, all with different benefits and costs. The first chance to get a light would be to adopt the plan and prepare a state grant for funding next year. Concern was expressed about the safety of bicycles on the roadway because of people coming out of their driveways onto the roadway. Since bicycles are going to be there we need to be sure the design is the safest. Suggestion was made to encourage the Police Department to enforce the 30 mph speed limit. Traffic flow at Safeway and the Port is a real problem and there needs to be a breakup there to allow people to enter and exit. Who is going to be responsible for pedestrian safety in this area? If my parking is taken away from me am I forced into a position somehow to create more parking and different access to my business? Businesses that currently use the highway's 100 ft. right-of-way for parking may lose their parking at some time in the future. It is in their best interests to create alternatives. If we don't have a local plan the state can do whatever it wants and we may not have a say in it. The plan recommends that parallel parking not be permitted along SR20. If SR20 is kept to only two lanes of traffic it will slow down travel and decrease the efficiency and mobility of the roadway. In response to the questions of how far can we go with changes to the plan before we have to start the approval process allover again and what the time frame is for getting something approved by the state, staff said that now is a good time. Jeff Hamm said that funds are available now and funding policies are set. As other communities get their plans together there will be more competition for the funds. Request was made that the plan provide for more flexibility and staff responded that since the state has bought off on the plan we may not have to meet more stringent DOT restrictions scheduled for adoption at the state level. · · · Planning Commission Minutes April 15, 1993 Page Four What are the plans for dividers between residential property and the highway? One of the major considerations in the plan is to try to minimize the widening of the roadway to have the least affect on adjacent properties. The state has to go through a very formalized design and engineering process before it can begin construction. They have been told that we have a very active community and that any plans have to provide for citizen review and comment. C. Planning Commission Discussion Commission asked staff to: 1) keep trying to educate the public that this is an opportunity for us to better access funds for needed roadway improvements; 2) provide LID information; 3) get clarification of consent of council on LID majority; 4) provide minutes of past Planning Commission hearings on Gateway; 5) walk through the plan with Commission without pausing to problem-solve, because of four new Commission members. Identify problem areas and then make a list at the end and start resolving the big ones first; and 6) bring a suggested schedule to the April 29 meeting. since this isn't a quasi judicial matter it should be discussed with lots of people. Rickard asked that the process be laid out and be explained to the public that no decisions are being made now and that the public will be given the opportunity to be heard at the public hearing. They need to be assured that they will get an opportunity to speak so they don't feel like they have to keep diving in while the Commission is figuring it out. Let them know the order in which the Commission will be discussing the plan. On April 29, the Commission will have a work session to walk through the plan. The public is welcome to listen. Discussion included that Sheridan street realignment is still a possibility and we need to evaluate the different alternatives for a traffic light at Sheridan/Sims Way. The City has to convey that this is a plan and will be implemented over a long period of time, rather than happening right now. This is not a plan to make changes. It is a way for these changes to happen, it gives them a starting point. This plan isn't to change everything - it is to plan for the inevitable change so as to avoid deterioration. Enarson felt it important to keep in mind that we need all three goals and not just traffic safety. · · · ., " Planning Commission Minutes April 15, 1993 Page Five V. NEW BUSINESS The Port Townsend Business Park was agenda. It will be a large packet. work on this project. Erickson and work on the business park. scheduled for the May 13 Rickard and Welch cannot Thayer said that they could VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings April 29. 1993 Gateway Development Plan, Workshop meeting Mav 13. 1993 Port Townsend Business Park (Erickson/Thayer) Motion to adjourn was made by Erickson and seconded by Baird. All were in favor. Meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. ~.~~Lz.~4'~ Sheila Spears Planning & Building Assistant