Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01131994 Min Ag '< . . . PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Regular Meeting January 13, 1994 I. ROLL CALL II. APPROV AL OF MINUTES: December 9, 1993 III. COMMUNICATIONS: Current mail IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Review of Thurston Final Plat 9204-01 1. Staff Review (Bloomfield) 2. Commission Discussion 3. Requirements or Approval V. NEW BUSINESS A. Growth Management Act 1. Work Plan and General Discussion 2. Committee Assignments B. Zoning Code Amendments VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings January 27, 1994 A. Robert and Edeltraut Sokol, Conditional Use Permit, 9401-04 VII. ADJOURN · · · !< City of Port Townsend Planning Commission 540 Water St., Port Townsend, \VA 98368 206/385·3000 PLANNING . COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting January 13, 1994 I. ROLL CALL Meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Lois Sherwood, Chair. Other members present were Ernie Baird, Mark Welch, Lisa Enarson, Bob Rickar.d-andCindy Thayer. Karen Erickson entered the meeting at 7:20 PM._- II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: December 9, 1993 Mption to approve the minutes as written was made by Mark Welch. and seconded by Ernie Baird. All were in favor. III. COMMUNICATIONS: Current mail IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Review of Thurston Final Plat 9204-01 Enarson and Sherwood disqualified themselves from the prOceedings. 1. Staff Review (Bloomfield) Bloomfield -said that the applicant has fulfilled all the requirements of the preliminary plat and Public Works has signed off on the infrastructure requirements. It is before the Planning Commission at this time for approval of the final plat; then it goes to tbe City Council for final review. Motion to approve the Thurston Final Plat #9204-01 was made by Rickard and seconded by Welch. All were in favor (Baird, Welch, Rickard and Sherwood). Bloomfield stated for the record that the only change to be added to the plat will be a notary seal under Thurston's signature. Thurston stated for the record that a written agreement for road maintenance on all short plats should be required. He suggested that staff make a recommendation that anytime there is any sort of process where a private easement will be allocated to the public, there be a written road maintenaI'!ce agreement, especially if there is access for more than one. . . . -'C~~ -, . Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1994 Page Two Enarson and Thayer returned to the meeting at 7: 10 PM. v. NEW BUSINESS A. Growth Management Act (GMA) 1. Work Plan & General Discussion Hildt briefly described the purposes of the GMA. Growth, the way it often occurs, is very expensive for the taxpayers so the Comprehensive Plan has to have a capitol facilities plan that is balanced. One of the purposes of the GMA is governance itself. Since the state is so fragmented (cities, counties, puds, irrigation and port districts) it is difficult to get them all going in a concerted direction without duplicating themselves. Our deadline moved from July 1993 to the end of 1994. We have a lot of work done, but are behind, so are trying to free-up more planner time for Dave Robison to do it. It will be a major undertaking. It will have to go from projects to high profile community interests. Intensive community planning has been fairly successful in Port Townsend. We have a lot of new energy with four new council members. At the Council retreat in February we will let them know we think we can do a good job but that the push and leadership has got to come from council members and the Planning Commission. Staff will be in the role of coordinators and schedulers. A lot of time will be required by the community, City Council and the Planning Commission. Erickson entered the meeting at this time (7:20 PM). Robison discussed plan elements and gave a rough outline of the process for the next year. He explained the packet of materials before the Commission and the work program chart displayed on the wall. The chart is a quick attempt at trying to layout a very simplified GMA planning process. The five elements which make up the plan are: land use; transportation; housing; utilities; and capitol facilities. Economic development is not a mandatory element of the plan but staff is going to recommend to Council that it be included. Robison suggested that in January that Council committees take on the five elements and include Planning Commission members on each. These committees would be reviewing information that has to be in included in each of the elements of the plan. Robison also suggested expanding the committee to include citizens from the community. In February and March staff will take the information that was gathered from the PT2020 process and the 13 planning goals developed by the state and try to tailor them to suite Port Townsend. We also have to coordinate with the county, PUD, etc. After we have visions and goals we will begin working with the committee reo other analysis; what are the issues? . . . Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1994 Page Three We will try to get committees together for evening meetings (staff will be included). These will be informal meetings to share ideas and be coordinated. After identifying the issues and trying to incorporate the EIS, the committees will bring in the community and ask them what they think and what are the trade-offs within the document. This will be an intense process involving the City Council, Planning Commission and the public. This is the overall framework that staff is proposing. The number of persons serving on the committees has not been determined at this point. Thayer recommended not getting too many involved because decisions are harder to make. Baird asked how much support will the committees get in the way of staff/secretarial help. Robison said there may not always be a staff person at every meeting, but that he doesn't anticipate the committee actually writing the document. The committees will have to let staff know what information they need. This will not be a staff-driven process. Staff will help shape and guide but will not drive the process. City Council and Planning Commission will be responsible for that. Rickard suggested the Port Townsend Community Forum (successors to PT2020) be used as a resource because it would be independent of the city and not be city-driven. Hildt mentioned that we need meeting space for these forums. The city budget didn't provide space for staff to work and for the community forums. Enarson asked how you are going to keep straight in peoples' minds the relationship between the county and city on this. Robison said this issue needs to be addressed by council. Hildt said there is a joint GMA steering committee with the County Commissioners, the Mayor and two council members. Transportation and water services are critical services that need to be coordinated with the county. Robison said our plan needs to be coordinated and consistent with the county. If we get to the city adoption of the plan then any aggrieved party of record (citizen or county) can petition the plan to go before the Growth Hearings Board. The Board would look at what the issues are and determine if the plan or a portion of it needs to be redone. The County Commissioners do not vote on the Port Townsend plan. Erickson asked how you do projected land use planning without economic development. Robison responded that land use planning and population and employment growth must go hand-in-hand. Hildt said there is going to have to be some trust and cooperation. We feel it is workable and we have some new enthusiasm on the council. . ,,' ....,...,.-- ..... . . . Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1994 Page Four Robison would like to have a Planning Commission member on every committee so that they will understand how it all fits together which should make the process go more smoothly. Future Planning Commission workshops could bring the individual committees (GMA element) together to share information so all would know what is going on. Procedural Criteria, Chapter 369.195 WAC is the guidebook for putting together the Comprehensive Plan and was developed by the Department of Community Development. They provide technical assistance and review the final plans to see that they are consistent with the GMA. There are recommendations and requirements which layout what needs to be in the plan. The 13 goals must be in the plan, and economic development is strongly recommended but not required. Robison gave a brief outline of the Procedural Criteria and said it is the most important document we will be using over the next year. After plan adoption, the Planning Commission should evaluate the plan on an annual basis. We hope to work with the Leader on public education and on what the issues are of the planning process. Public involvement is a key ingredient of the GMA planning process. We have to make a response to the public input and consider it throughout the process. Committee tasks were talked about and Planning Commission members were asked how they would like to participate. Council hasn't seen this flow chart so it is a little early to work on committee assignments. The council will be going over this process at a retreat in February. Erickson agreed that the Planning Commission has to be totally involved in the committees and suggested that the City and County Planning Commissions work together and that would be a good body to coordinate planning between the City and the County. Hildt explained that the County Planning Commission is not necessarily a respected body that the county commissioners listen to and that this may not work well. Enarson said there will be a lot of anger if the city and county do not work on this together. Robison talked about the water meeting held at Chimacum this week. The county commissioners and PUD commissioners that were invited did not attend. This was a first attempt to reach out to the Tri-Area and explain what our concerns are with water. Essentially we do not have very much supply; so how are we going to pay for future supply and growth? Wheeler (Public Works Director) did a masterful job of going through charts and answering questions. The mayor and Council Utility Committee attended the meeting. These issues are really prime for both the city and county over the next year. The meeting was so well done Public Works is considering trying to do it again and tape it for cable tv. .. -.~_._~.._--~- . . . Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1994 Page Five 2. Committee Assignments Enarson expressed hope that the City Council would agree to Planning Commission assignments on the committees. Commission members expressed the following interests: Thayer - housing and land use; Erickson - economic development; Baird - housing; Welch & Rickard - Transportation Advisory Committee; Welch - utilities; Enarson - capitol facilities; and Sherwood - transportation After plan adoption, then the zoning code and comprehensive plan have to be consistent. They aren't presently. The Comprehensive Plan can only be changed once a year. Welch asked if the GIS maps were available to anybody. Dave explained the problems with the large gaps in the GIS system. We have all the data but accessing it is problematic. A lot of the county data didn't translate easily. The GIS consulting firm is in Olympia and we have had problems with some of the products they have developed. The City's GIS technology is lacking; however, all the committees are going to need access to that data. Robison distributed a list of technical assistance guidebooks available from DCD which can be ordered. We have a complete set at City Hall and also the library has a set. Commission members can also order any that they want at no cost. The next Planning Commission workshop meeting will be held February 11, which will be right after the Council retreat. Then we can go over the county-wide planning policies and get ideas on how to structure the goal workshop and community direction. Thayer announced she would not be available for meetings on 1/27/94 and 2/11/94. B. Zoning Code Amendments Hildt said that in trying to solve problems in the zoning code we may want to tackle some of them this year, even before the GMA. Following is a list of some of the areas that we may want to look at: 1) Mother-in-law apartments (accessory rental units); 2) R-II zone (problem is that it has the same density as R-I - very little land is zoned R-II); 3) setbacks - look at this to avoid some variance requests; 4) C-II zone (especially offices). It is for retail and offices but an office building takes a conditional use permit; 5) produce stands. What is a produce stand? It is allowed in an R-l zone? -" - - .J . . . .... Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1994 Page six 6) Home Occupations. a) retail sales, b) can you use out buildings, and c) the permit process itself. One thought is to publish the rules and then applicant doesn't have to talk to staff. But if your neighbor complains then we will have to check it out. If you want a permit - pay and we will go through the process. This way they could protect themselves before investing. They have the choice whether they want to go through the process; 7) manufactured homes; and 8) fences 7 hedges. Priority would be mother-in-law units and then mobile homes. The Planning Commission requested more information on manufactured homes. Rickard announced that we will be getting a new area code next year. VI. Announcements: Next Scheduled Meetings January 27, 1994 Robert and Edeltraut Sokol, Conditional Use Permit #9401-04 Committee: Enarson/Erickson VII. ADJOURN Meeting adjourned at 9:10 PM. -~. ~ Sheila Spears ~ Planning & Building Assistant