Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout120805 Minutes . . . CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Tbursday, December 8, 2005 7:00PM Cedar Room, Waterman and Katz Building Meeting Materials: EXH 1. Randall, Memo to Planning Commission: 2005 Year End Wrap Up and Looking Ahead to 2006, dated December 8, 2005 EXH 2. Implementing tbe Port Townsend Comprehensive Plan, revised June 2005 EXH 3. Dave and Eric's Top Ten List, revised June, 2005 EXH 4. Capron, Memo to Jeff Randall: Untitled, dated November 14, 2005 EXH 5. Agenda - Planning Commission, December 8, 2005 I. CALL TO ORDER: In recognition of Jeff Ranclalrs last meeting and year's end, celebratory pizza, cake and beverages were on hand. Those in attendance were invited to share refreshments before being seated. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Chair Randels. II. ROLL CALL: Planning Commission members present were: George Randels, Harriet Capron, Steve Emery, Alice King, Roger Lizut, Liesl Slabaugh and Cindy Thayer. JeffKelety continues to be on leave of absence. Ill. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Mr. Randels a<;ked if anyone wished to make a motion regarding a change to the agenda. Mr. Randels said that he had one additional item that would be announced later in the meeting. Several commissioners had reviewed the draft minutes for December 1 online. However, since paper copies were distributed just prior to this meeting, Mr. Randels deferred approval until the next meeting. Ms. Thayer moved that the agenda be accepted as amended; Mr. Emery seconded; alll,vere in favor. The agenda was approved, as amended. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Review of the draft minutes for December I, 2005 was deferred until the next meeting. V. NEW BUSINESS Planning Commission: 2005 Wrap Up and 2006 Planning Session Staff Presentation: Jeff Randall and Judy Surber were both present for this meeting. Mr. Randall began by briefly reviewing the packet of materials, listed above under Meeting Materials. He referred to Exhibit I, which listed the legislative items that had been considered and passed by the Planning Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for December 8, 2005 Page 1 . Commission during 20D5. He noted that there had been nine topics, most of which were dealt with from May through December. I. The Critical Areas Ordinance was adopted by City Council in June, and appealed by Nancy Dorgan. The appeal is on hold, by mutual agreement, pending action by the City Council, pertaining to the adoption of the 2005 Storm Water Manual. Council has taken a first reading on that, and final action is anticipated before the end of the year. 2. The Parking Code Update was adopted by Council. 3. The Adult Entertainment Ordinance, is before Council; the first public hearing has taken place, and action is anticipated in early 2006. 4. The Manufactured Housing Ordinance and Definitions of Attached Dwelling Units was adopted by Council in July. 5. The Formula Retail Business Ordinance was adopted by Council in October. 6. The Mixed Use and Commercial Design Standards Update has been forwarded to CounciL The first hearing is scheduled for December 5. 7. The Shoreline Master Program is currently before Council; target for forwarding to DOE is mid December. 8. The Point Hudson Restaurant Sizes Ordinance was adopted in September. 9. The Statutory Street Vacation Ordinance was adopted by Council in October. City Council Member Michelle Sandoval was present for the first hour of the meeting. Mr. Randall suggested that she share her ideas on important issues to be cousidered in 2006. He noted that staff had compiled a rough list of issues, and that once the Commission had reviewed the list, and had heard Ms. Sandovars comments, they could discuss priorities, and refine the list. . 1. PTMC Technical Code Cleanup -- Mr. Randall noted that there are about a dozen or less items that have caused staff some interpretation challenges. This would be, more or less, an omnibus code clean up. 2. Housing Needs Assessment for Port Townsend and Jefferson County. - Mr. Emery is a member of the oversight or advisory group. The Planning Commission's role is not necessarily to adopt it, since this is a public planning process. The intention is for the Housing group to gather and analyze the data regarding housing needs, and to go through a public process to arrive at a strategy for addressing those needs, and identifying action steps for major participants: City, County, banks, non-profits, etc. ,Vhile this should not be a heavy demand on the Planning Commission, there will be opportunities for input and possibly guidance on any related legislative proposals that may arise. 3. The Transportation Plan refers to the recognized need for a city-wide comprehensive transportation plan, which does not yet exist. There are pieces in place for certain corridors. There is a budget for this initiative in 2006. There is a Public Works consultant on board, and there is a public process defined. The Plan developed would come before the Planning Commission because it has implications for Comp Plan consistency, etc. The timing for adoption is likely not until the end of 2006 or early 2007. Mr. Emery added that any streets capital projects funding would depend on this plan. 4. The Storm Water Plan would likely occur earlier in 2006 than the previous item. Mr. Rande1s asked how this related to the 2005 Manual. Mr. Randall replied that the Storm Water Manual is generic, and that the Stonn Water Plan would represent the local specific implementation of the state guidelines. He said he did not know the details or conditions associated with the appeal mentioned earlier. 5. The Water System Plan is a rather minor, somewhat routine effort, required by the DOE. Although it may not come to the Commission for deliberation, there may be a briefing by Public Works as to status. 6. SMP Revisions will be as needed, i.e., if DOE should have issues or required amendments that need to be addressed. 7. Neighborhood Feedback Process - Mr. Randall asked Ms. Surber if she would like to speak to this item. Ms. Surber recalled that in 1996, a citizen involvement process related to the Comp Plan, known as coffee hours, had been quite successful. She wondered if the Planning Commission might conduct similar sessions on a quarterly basis, possibly one neighborhood at a time. She said the special concerns and needs for each . Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for December 8, 2005 Page 2 . neighborhood could possibly lead to neighborhood projects. She also raised the idea ofInternet based surveys for collecting statistically valid information on citizen opinions and priorities. 8. Sign Code - Mr. Randall noted that this had been on City Council's list for some time, and should possibly be addressed in 2006. He noted that it could be time-consuming, because it is of significant public interest, and characterized by diversity and strength of opinions. 9. Comp Plan Amendment, Site Specific -In any year, such proposals are permitted. A notice is sent out at the beginning of each year; proposals are due by March I. 10. Comp Plan Amendment Process - Currently, the governor has a task force looking at possible amendments to GMA and other laws. One item that has come forward is changing the timeframe for updating Comprehensive Plans and Master Programs. The idea is to align the updates, so that they are done every ten years, with a five year window for accomplishing that Mr. Randall said that the legislature may act upon that during 2006. Mr. Randall also called attention to EXH. 2., Implementing the Port Townsend Plan, which is the most comprehensive list of projects, many of which have been accomplished. It was last updated in June, 2005. EXH. 3, Dave and Eric's Top Ten List, is an older working list of projects, most of which have been accomplished, was also provided as background infonnation. Next, Chair Randels asked Ms. Sandoval to share her thoughts on issues or projects for Planning Connnission attention in the coming year. ~fs. Sandoval said that she had been collecting ideas, issues and information from citizens and other sources. She first noted that the starting list from Mr. Randall was a good list . Ms. Sandoval briefly described the set of issues that had most often been raised by citizens -- some dozens of times and others less frequently. The number one issue is fear of building "tear do\VIlS" in residential areas, and the -impact on the historical districts and aspects of Port Townsend. She said this can be referred to as a "tear do'WIl issue!! or as a lIMcMansion issue." She cited the example of an 8,000 square foot "dwelling" under construction in her own neighborhood. She says that residents are shocked by the over- scale size of this building and the impact to the neighborhood. Ms. Sandoval also spoke of several related matters. People who move to Port Townsend invariably ask nWhat do I have to do?", "What am I allowed to do?", nVlhat are the restrictions with regard to renovation, remodeling, and modifications to historic buildings?" They arrive from other areas with the expectation that there are standards in place "With regard to historic buildings, and are surprised to learn that there are no special regulations or standards that apply to historic residences. Property owners can renovate, remodel, and even tear down historic houses, provided they comply with generally applicable local building regulations and codes. Ms. Sandoval also noted that, apparently, there has been in a shift in the trend to renovate old homes. She has observed that the most sought after homes are new construction on sites with the best views and access to center of town facilities, typically sites occupied by historic houses. Purchasers of property are often willing to tear down historic structures to make way for new construction. Another related issue is the permitted height of buildings and guidelines for measuring the height and compliance with height limitations. Restrictions on heights of buildings are related to property values, property rights, view equity and protection of views. In the case mentioned above, the property owner altered the natural grade by raising it 6 to 10 feet above street level. The house design also incorporated a steep roof pitch with a net effect that resnlted in the blockage of views for several neighbors. However, the design and construction is not in violation of any existing City code or regulation. . Ms. Sandoval also mentioned another specific home construction in the vicinity of Point Hudson that has drawn numerous negative comments and complaints from other residents of that area. Objections include the large scale, the height, and the blockage of view from neighboring properties, and public. She noted Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for December 8, 2005 Page 3 . that there had been many tear downs over the years, and that, although it may not turn out to be a popular idea, some sort of regulation should be explored. Nigbt light, night glare and light pollution is another set of issues to investigate. She said she had just received e-mail about this. Ms. Sandoval said she applauded the neighborhood feedback process idea. It is common for groups of neighbors to come together in protest of certain development activities: tree/foliage clearing, rats, outside developers buying up lots in less developed areas in pursuit of large "developments". This would be a more proactive approach to gathering public opinions and priorities. Illegal or unlicensed Transient Accommodations/Vacation Homel Tourist Rentals - Ms. Sandoval mentioned this issue as. one in which she was personally interested and would like to see addressed. There are various regulations in place in Port Townsend. For example, it is illegal to rent out a house or ADU for less than 30 days at a time ( considered permanent residency). For any rental, the owner must live on site, and a conditional use pennit and/or a Bed & Breakfast license is required. Ms. Sandoval reported that many people wish to buy properties with the intention of renting them out on a weekly basis. Although this is illegal, sometimes people do not know the regulations, and sometimes the regulations are ignored. Mr. Randels questioned whether this would be a Planning Commission issue, unless to legalize what is now illegaL Ms. Sandoval said that this could be a tegitimate business, but one that required enforceable licensing regulations, to ensure safety for renters and the overall good of the community. She gave an example of a once attractive and livable small town community, Hollywood Beach, CA, where the entire town had been turned into transient accommodations. She said that the entire tlpennanent" population had moved away. . She also mentioned the Dan Burden seminars (on sustainable, walkable communities), and recalled his comments about what Port Townsend could become as the area is fully built out: 14 villages and a total population of27,OOO. She spoke of several areas in town, where mixed use zoning could be pursued for encouragement ofhigWy livable, walkable neighborhoods. Mr. Randall added that this might be a good topic to discuss in the neighborhood meetings mentioned earlier. Councilor Sandoval suggested the need to explore and consider what neighborhood commercial means. How is it characterized? Is it flexible enough, but also stringent enough, to support the desired objectives? She noted, from experience, that having sign ordinances for neighborhood commercial and general commercial be exactly the same is not appropriate. There was a brief mention regarding redrafting of county-wide planning policies, and \vhether or not the Planning Commission would/should be involved in this. Ms. Sandoval also noted the importance of the Housing Needs Assessment discussed earlier by Mr. Randall. She then asked if there was anything Planning Commission members would like her to convey to the full Council, or any1hing in particular to take back for the upcoming City Council planning retreat. Ms. Thayer stated, "Having been on the Planning COnmllssion for 14 years, this is the best working planning commission that I have ever had the opportunity to work with. There are some really good minds on this commission, and these are great, really dedicated people." Mr. Lizut added that, being a fairly new member, this type of feedback was very helpful and useful, and he would appreciate a similar session in abont six months. Ms. Sandoval responded that, in the past, she had attended Planning Commission meetings more regularly, nntil the role of the liaison had changed somewhat in 2005. Ms_ Thayer expressed a concern about an apparent communication lapse between the Commission and the Council, specifically in the case of the Adult Entertainment proposal. She expressed a concern that, in this case, when the Planning Commission's recommendation was presented to City Council, the city attorney may have left City Council with the impression that certain issues and ordinance provisions had not been discussed at the Planning Commission level. . Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for December 8, 2005 Page 4 . There was additional follow up discussion regarding roles, communication, and possible ways to improve and refme working processes. Chair Randels stated that one of the results from this meeting would be some form of communication from the Planning Commission to the City Council noting significant issues or proj eets anticipated by the Commissioners, and expressing willingness to take them under consideration if so indicated by the Council. Such a summary might also include ideas or suggestions from the Commission for ways to enhance communication or refine working processes, including the liaison function. Ms. Slabaugh suggested that perhaps having a Council member more closely involved throughout Planning Commission deliberations would actually save time at the Council Meeting level. There was agreement that it is necessary for those involved at all levels of government to strive for mutual respect and trust, and to help strike a balance between too little and too much process. Mr. Randels added that he would welcome a closerrelationship with the CDLU, which includes a subset of Council members. Ms. ThayerrecaUed that at some points in the past, joint workshops of the City Council and Planning Commission, related to Comp Plan development, had occurred with good results. Ms. Sandoval needed to leave the meeting at 8:00 PM. Chair Randels thanked Ms. Sandoval for participating and welcomed her to future meetings. . Mr. Lizut asked who would be replacing Mr. Randall as the primary staff person assigned to the>Planning ConnnissioD. Mr. Randall explained that Judy Surber would be assuming that responsibility. There was a brief discussion about the planning workload and questions from Commissioners about how it would be distributed. Mr. Lizut asked if it would be permissible to have an e-mail mark-up cycle prior to a meeting, for code revisions, and whether or not that would save staff time and effort. Ms. Surber reported that city attorney John Watts had approved typographical edits to be handled in such a fashion, but not necessarily content revisions. Mr. Lizut and Ms. Slabaugh indicated they would be in favor of using software to track the suggested edits from all commissioners where possible, as a replacement for line by line edit review within a meeting. Mr. Lizut and Mr. Randall noted the ease and speed with which the Commercial Design subcommittee had been able to prepare their proposed documentation, prior to presentation for the full Planning Commission. Chair Randels suggested another change regarding meeting schedules. He said he would formally introduce a change to the schedule, from second and last Thursday of the month to second and fourth Thursday of each month. Mr. Randels then asked if anyone wished to comment on earlier ideas raised by Ms. Sandoval or Mr. Randall, or if they wished to hring other new ideas to the table. My. Randall said that Ms. Capron had sent him a letter with her ideas. Ms. Capron agreed that copies should be distrihuted ( EXH. 4). She stated that the most important issue for her was the need for a new swimming pool, item 4. Within the memo, Ms. Capron identifies the problems with the existing pool at Mountain View school, and suggests that the solution is a new pool, unot a fix to the old one." There was brief mention of the Sequim aquatic facility, and the bond issue to fund it. Ms. Capron pointed out that Forks also has a new community pool, and that a community the size of Port Townsend should be able to accommodate that need, as well. Ms. Thayer commented on item 3, Coyotes, noting that it was similar to the deer presence. She said that even though she is a cat owner, she still loves to see the Coyotes in town. Regarding item 5, Mill Odor, she said that the mill does have filters, but thought that lately the odor had been worse. My. Emery stated that the poor air quality, of late, is due to an unusual weather/wind pattern, so that the odor is settling over the tovm instead of being blov.rn out over the water. Others mentioned that the mill had made improvements by installing lIscrubberslf in the past in response to a law suit, and that it really is not technically possible to entirely eliminate the odor. . Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for December 8, 2005 Page 5 . . . Ms. Thayer stated that the Underground Wiring issue, item 2., had been discussed in several conunittees; and that it was economically prohibitive. Mr. Randall mentioned the $ 500,000 grant for downtown sidewalks, and several people noted just how little can be done with a half million dollars. Mr. Randall asked if there were any other ideas, or priorities, not already discussed. Mr_ Lizut brought up the Sign Code revision, and a recent HPC meeting regarding a merchant-proposed plan for Water and Taylor St The five Taylor SI. merchants wish to erect Victorian lamp post type structures that point to various business establishments, and that would replace sandwich board signs. The HPC is recommending that this idea be implemented all along Water SI. Chair Rande1s reiterated Mr. Randall's suggestion that Commissioners consider these ideas further between meetings. He said that the first meeting in January could be used to follow up on the most important items: VilTitten communication to City Council, changes to procedures, election of officers, and any additional discussion on the work plan. Mr. Randels then shifted to his additional agenda item, which he had prepared in the form of a Resolution. He read the entire Resolution aloud. TVhereas Jeff Randall has provided yeoman service to Port Townsend Planning Commissions over the past several years, and whereas Jeff Randall has presented an endless number of briefings on an innumerable /ist qf topics, and put up with infinite questions, frequently of dubious quality and relevance, all with unwavering good humor and patience, and whereas Jeff Randall has demonstrated an unparalleled, almast photographic knawledge of the City:, zoning, land use design, shoreline, infrastructure and other plans and codes, and has unselfishly shared said knowledge with Planning Commissioners, and 1'vhereas members and prior members of the Port Townsend Planning Commission wish to extend their thanks and appreciation Jar all that Jeff Randall has done and tolerated over the past several years, Now, therefore, be it resolved that the current and fanner Planning Commissioners, whose names are affixed hereto, extend to JefJRandall their gratitude, and wish him Happy Travels, as he embarks on his new adventures. Chair Randels moved Jar the adoption oj this resolution. Mr. Emery seconded. All were in favor. The motion carried by unanimous approval: 7/0/0. The written resolution was presented to Mr. Randall, who expressed his heartfelt appreciation for this recognition. -He thanked the Conunissioners for their outstanding professionalism and efforts, and said that it had been a great pleasure working with all of them. Mr. Randall's noted that he and his wife would be publishing a log of their upcoming travels, linked from her website at www.shellyrandall.com. VI. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. VII. COMMUNICATIONS There were no communication items. VIlI. uPCOMING MEETINGS Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for December 8, 2005 Page 6 . . . 01/12/2006: Planning for 2006, continued - 7:00 PM; Location To Be Determined IX. ADJOURNMENT Ms. Thayer moved that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Lizut seconded; all were in favor. Chair Randels adjourned the meeting at 8:25 PM /UL- 4/~ Gai(Bemhard, Meeting Recorder Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for December 8, 2005 Page 7