Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02231995 Min Ag .. . e· . PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Business Meeting I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 1/19/95 and 1/26/95 III. COMMUNICATIONS: Current mail IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Brent Wesenberg/Mary Winters, Variance #9501-01 1. Staff Report (Surber) 2. Public Testimony 3. Committee Report (Welch/Keith) 4. Commission Discussion and Conclusions B. Joe & Agnes Placz, Home Occupation Permit #9501-02 1. Staff Report (Surber) 2. Public Testimony 3. Committee Report (Thayer/Baird) 4. Commission Discussion and Conclusions V. NEW BUSINESS VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings March 9. 1995 Bertram Levy/Roberta Butler, Variance #9501-05 (Baird/Enarson) March 30. 1995 VII. ADJOURN February 23, 1995 . . e e .. " City of Port Townsend Planning Commission 540 "Vater St., Port Townsend, \VA 98368 206/385-3000 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 23, 1995 Business Meeting 7:00 PM I. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:03 PM by Chair Lois Sherwood. Other members in attendance were Ernie Baird, Lisa Enarson, Karen Erickson, Cindy Thayer and Mark Welch. Ian Keith was absent. Staff members present were Judy Surber, Sheila Spears, C. L. Flint, Tim McMahan and Judy Erlandson. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion to approve the minutes, as corrected, of the meetings of 1/19/95 and 1/26/95 was - - - - made by.Erickson. Seconded by Thayer. All were in favor. III. COMMUNICATIONS . Surber distributed two letters to commission members: 1) letter of opposition (Placz Home Occupation) from Myron Offstein, labeled Exhibit 12; and 2) letter of support (Placz Home Occupation) from Mary Pranger, label~ Exhibit 13. IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Brent Wesenberg/Mary Winters, Variance #9501-01 1. Staff Report ( Surber) Surber described the applicants' proposal to construct a single-family home five feet higher and 15 feet closer to the front property line than the zoning code allows in the R-l zone. The site is located within an environmentally sensitive area (steep slopes). If the structure adhered to the setback requirements, the residence would be built on the steepest area of the site and would require more extensive grading and increase disruption of the natural topography and drainage. The applicants propose to build on a small plateau and into the slope. From the front of the lot the structure would be no more than 30 feet in height. Along the rear of the structure, a maximum height of 35 feet is proposed. The applicants stated that the adjacent home to the west has no front setback. Staff .recommended a condition that an ESA permit be required prior tt6"!W1oĊ“tIftÞHPg permIt. sS' BY DATE 348/95- · · · Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 1995 Page Two 2. Public Testimony Sherwood explained the hearing procedure, and that the Planning Com~ission would then forward its recommendation to City Council. The applicant, Brent Wesenberg, stated that the intent of the variance was well-summarized by staff. He said that clearly a plateau would reduce the grading. A reduced front yard setback is reasonable as the street doesn't seem to have any possibility of ever going through and there is a house further along which has a zero setback. There would be no neighborhood impact. Marilyn Freeman, 610 Reed Street, asked where the power, sewer and water hook-ups would be and requested that they be as close to the road as possible. Wesenberg said they would be tying in on Reed Street. Mary Gripp stated that she was concerned about the impact on water pressure. Sherwood explained that is outside of dealing with the variance application. 3. Committee Report (Welch) Welch said he had walked the site and agrees that the request is reasonable. This is the best way to minimize any impact on the slope. The height won't impede anybody's view. 4. Commission Discussion and Conclusions Thayer said that #10 in the draft findings of fact incorrectly states that Reed Street dead ends to the west of the site. One more house is serviced beyond the site. Erickson asked how wide Reed Street is. It is platted at 60 feet and the road bed is on the south half. Motion to recommend to City Council for approval of Variance Application #9501-01, as conditioned, with clarification of finding #10 was made by Welch. Seconded by Enarson. All were in favor. B. Joe & Agnes Placz, Home Occupation Permit #9501-02 1. Staff Report (Surber) Surber described the Home Occupation Permit \yhich was issued to Joseph and Agnes Placz of 2519 Seaview Drive on 1/9/95 to operate a computer software business (XREF Publishing Co.) within their home. The entire operation is computerized, not mechanical. The "publishing" aspect of the business is transfer of data onto tapes, which are then packaged for shipment via UPS. There are no printing presses of any kind and the level of noise is · · · Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 1995 Page Three minimal. Surber offered that the City Attorney and building staff members were in attendance to answer questions. 2. Public Testimony Joe Placz described his computer software development business which he has operated for the last 12 years, two of which have been in Port Townsend. He has obtained all city, state ánd federal permits and is paying full benefits to his employee. There were no complaints about his home occupation when he lived on Adams Street and before moving to Seaview he checked with the City about what the requirements would be to transfer his home occupation. He was told that he would need a Home Occupation Permit and a city business license. He said that his business generates no additional traffic, has no signs, no pollution, no odor, no printing presses or noise. The home and grounds are well-maintained and the business could not be identified from the street. He sent a written invitation to the neighbors to tour his home and observe his operation. None of those in opposition have accepted his invitation. Placz stated that, having met all of the regulations, his family wishes to stay in their new home on Seaview, contribute to society and operate their "hobby" out of their home. Sherwood expl3ined that the Planning Commission can only relate to the home occupation that is before them, and not the Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions of Seaview Estates. The City is not a party to the CC&R' s of Seaview Estates.. Those speaking in favor of the home occupation were: Jack H. Kruse, Chair of the Architectural Committee, 2261 Seaview Drive; Phil Rich, 2300 Seaview Drive; Kurt Lamberton, 2456 Seaview; Ann McLaughlin; Michael Thomas, 2611 Seaview; Pat Lamberton; Carl Marshall, 2364 Seaview Drive; and Lisa Gudina, employee of the Placzs'. Recurring themes in favor of the home occupation were: 1) UPS usually makes only one delivery per day; 2) no noise comes from the business; 3) there are no salesmen or traffic; 4) the business is confined within the residence; 5) no objection to any lighting from the residence; and 6) the objection to the home occupation is an unfounded complaint. As long as the Placzs are within the parameters of the permit itself, the'neighbors request that they be allowed to continue. The one violation mentioned was that the allowable working hours are being exceeded by an early arrival of the employee each morning. It was explained that the employee (Lisa Gudina) is an extended family member that moved here from California with the Placzs. She used to live with them but now that she has her own apartment, she has a key to the Placzs' residence and is allowed entry at any time. In addition to being an employee of the Placzs, Lisa also visits frequently, and comes early in the morning for coffee and to do her school work. Those speaking in opposition to the home occupation were: James Gibson, 2860 Clarmont; Gaither Baker, 2740 Peary Avenue; Bruce Cannavaro; Myron Offstein, 2519 Seaview; Edith Offstein, 2529 Seaview; and Bonnie Baker. . . .' Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 1995 Page Four Recurring themes in opposition to the home occupation were: 1) Seaview Estates CC&R' s allow residential uses only; 2) the remodel to the home to accommodate the home business was started prior to obtaining a building permit; 3) opposition to businesses being permitted in a residential area; 4) extended hours of operation; 5) diminished marketability and value of surrounding homes: 6) undue objectional impacts; 7) inadequate information supplied' on the building permit application; 8) a bathroom should be included in the allowable floor area for the employee; and 8) how will the City know if the business expands beyond the allowable area. 3. Committee Report (Thayer/Baird) Thayer reported that home occupation permits are the most volatile issue to come before the Planning Commission. She has visited the site and the entire file and said that she has nothing better to rely upon than the building inspector's testimony for compliance. ' She said there are two home occupations in her neighborhood and they are not disruptive. Since home occupations are allowed within the City, this hearing is not the avenue to change the ordinance. The only concern is that the employee arrives at the house at 6:00 AM. Thayer said she feels that the employee has answered these questions by being part of an extended family. It is hard for the Planning Commission to determine why Lisa is there so early in the morning, so she will rely on the applicant's report that the employee is working from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM. Baird said he accepts the city report that the home occupation is operating in compliance. He also accepts the good faith explanation of the employee's arrival on the scene as a friend of the family. Bairq recommended that the home occupation be allowed to continue operation. 4. Commission Discussion and Conclusions Enarson said that the home occupation should be allowed to continue. She added that because the business is a home occupation, a bathroom for the employee is not required. Home occupations are meant to help the tax base. Commercial print shops are not allowed as home occupations, but this business is clearly not a print shop. Enarson suggested that mediation in the neighborhood be dealt with, but that is not within the scope of the Planning Commission. She recommended that the employee's working hours be limited to 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM per the code. Enarson said that she believes anyone moving to Port Townsend that was restricted from having a home business would not buy. Welch stated this home occupation is clearly less disruptive than a neighbor with three teenagers. There are three home occupations in his neighborhood and he wouldn't have it any other way. It provides ecological and economic benefits to the community. Erickson questioned residential/commercial on the permit application. She explained the process that created home occupation permits and the thought behind it that it would be staff · · · Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 1995 Page Five administered and if an individual permit caused neighborhood concerns, then it could come before the Planning Commission for hearing. Erickson said that not many home occupation permits have come before the Planning Commission and this particular one is the least invasive one that she has seen. She applauded the neighborhood for its homework and presentation. Motion to recommend to City Council for approval of Home Occupation Permit #9501-02 was made by Thayer. Seconded by Baird. All were in favor. Sherwood e~plained that the recommendation would be forwarded to City Council and that the additional exhibits presented at tonight's meeting (Exhibits 12-18) would be included in their packets. V. NEW BUSINESS: None VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings March 9. 1995 Bertram Levy/Roberta Butler , Variance #9501-05 (Baird/Enarson) March 30. 1995 Port Townsend School District #50/Early Childhood Educational Center Conditional Use Permit #9411-06 (Enarson/Keith) VII. ADJOURN Motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Thayer. Seconded by Erickson. All were in favor. The meeting adjourned at 9:05 PM. ~~ Sheila Spears Community Development Assistant . . .:- .-- It ~ I Name I.~u, .".tI I Address I T~~mln~~ I , -- <r'~~h~l~ üO )..:~W ~,l' ~:-! 'w. "" ~ ..¡ D k' \t" I-l- 2 2.r'1 f1 <: rzLJ 1/'1/'"7'.1 '" \)11' f-,..J l L .....-- cJ fl-z-I <. 1.,( If v S ¡;- "}..'Î~~ I .s i--n-v' I....~ 1M L--" !.\) Il) F m U.j'f tA..G--úL/ I ) ~(n I J S.e tL,) ¡ t'3 c..o ""., - ~I~es '1> . 'DI ,2b"IQ 5.eo. II t~ w .Dr ~ t;lC2 f. ..A ,'11\ N (ë G u () it"¡i~ ''fJc L"\wr~....CIl... )..,.- JqM't{ .. r <!s-r G I f?- J 1M., If{ ¿. c1 C f 0 ¿. p J.t( ú\,>C1 t../" 'g@.\)ec: C+tA \l~,4. u-¡{-~ . B'?iJJ ~3~ V-" 0c> S $\ , ,,^,y fJ.eN 0 FFs 1Y3r rY :;k $;>.C{ .-Sé31J v (fE-U/ p(.2... P T / 't~'7....Æ Wf"f A,ß71/., ¡,} , ~ )7w-o;,,;)11 PT ~ . in.f\Î L-¡ L....) I "-.\;V 7 ~¡ éSf:J,s< Û ,I , ¡ L~---" g~S'5 It.. "v'..@r 5<Q;~- Be i /.¿¡- ~. ....... - --- --- --- ---