Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout032191 Min Ag -C*Ity of Port TowlifilisgPd _ i' k. Planning 540 Water r St., Port Townsend, SVA 98368 206/385.3000 Minutes of Meeting of March 21, 1991 I. Roll Call. Chairman Ron Kosec called the Meeting to order at 7 : 34 p. . other members present were Alam Carman, Karen Erickson, Sally McDole, Jim Tavernakis and Jim Roberts. Lois Sherwood was not present. i II. STAFF UPDATE AND COMMISSION COMMENTS { Michael Hildt, Director of Planning Building, stated that since the Planning Commission hearing of March 14 , I99,11 the Planning and Building Department staff has made changes to the Gateway Plan as the commissioners had requested, and has also asked Dori Stastny, the consultant on the project, to incorporate those changes into the plan. Michael Hildt said that a particular emphasis in amandin the plan will be to closely examine the parking situation. Mr. Hildt directed the commission' s attention -to the letters and reports included in the commission packets. He said the goal of this meeting was to understand the needs of the commission in making - decision on the plan. Mr.. Hildt stated that planner Dave Robison had met with James Davis, a gateway property owner earlier today and resolved Mr. Davis 'srevious concerns about the plan. Mr. Robison, staff planner, began his update With a discussion of the report by the traffic engineer. Mr. Robison stated that- the only unprotected left turn was onto Kearney Street from Sins Way. He stated that the traffic engineer recommended creating a left hand tura lane onto Washington and deleting the left hand turn lane onto Kearney from Sims Way. A signal would be installed at the Sims/Washington intersection. Some discussion followed about westbound access onto Decatur Street. The traffic engineer's recommendation is to prohibit a left land turn onto Decatur due to visibility. and traffic back-up problems. Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of March 21, 1991 Page Mr. Tavernatkis asked about the difficulty of creating a five way intersection. Mr. Hildt said that the traffic engineer is still working on a way to make this intersection work. Ms. Erickson asked .i the Visitor's Center would have a curb curt or not. Mr. Hilt said the photo on page 33 of the plan shows a curb. Some discussion followed about the difficulty of ferry passengers to get to the visitor's Center. Mr. Hildt discussed possible access from Benedict and Jefferson Streets. Jefferson Street is fairly wide and is not frequently used. , Hildt turned to the Forest Corridor section of the Plan pg. 1 -1 He stated that the graphics could be unproved. Mr, Robison said the recommendations he thinks are most important are the signalization and widening of Mill road, continuous shoulder for bicycle lanes and the protection of trees. Mr. Robi Planning commission Minutes Meeting of March 21, 1991 Page . Robison moved to the second room, the "Established onmmerci Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of March 21, 1991 Page Ms. icDole asked about the possibility of creating a truck route for trucks coming from downtown since that seemed to be a major reason for the realignment. Mr. Hildt said that the difficulty of trucks stopping on the hill was only one consideration. others included visibility problems. Ms. Erickson stated that if a light were at the intersection, the light should solve visibility problems. She, said the trucks are used to hills; they manage in Seattle. She , said she cannot see that it is that critical to form this realignment. Mr, Robison referred the commissioners to memos in their packets from the traffic engineer, consultant Don Stastny and an economic study by Hudson & Jelaco regarding the realignment. Mr. Hildt said the Hudson & Jelaco study was funded jointly by the City and property owners. . Erickson asked for a summary of the materials. Mr. Robison said the traffic engi9 neer found . this intersection in the Castle Hill District to be the most critical in the gateway district. The grade and visibility problems were also considered in determining the intersection should be realigned. Hudson & Jelaco expected the realignment help Castle Hill ' business. Ms. McDole said she would lice to hear from Dr. ' avernakis since he has a business that would be affected. Dr. Tavernakis said that he agrees with the realignment through Castle .,Hill because of the reasons Mr. Robison mentioned above. He said he is concerned about the proposed expansion of the hospital and increased residential uses, He said he is also concerned about the lack of sidewalks and crosswalks for children and other pedestrians. He said he is not personally impacted by the plan. He said further that he f Inds this a high priority and should be done now. He said this may be the number one priority, but may not be number one doable. Mr. Robison agreed. Mr, Hildt said he thinks the realignment would improve the entrance into the Castle Hill shopping center. Ms. McDole stated that the photo shop/kiosk was completely eliminated according to the graphics. Mr. Hildt said that needs to be addressed in the text of the plan. Mr. Robison moved to discussion of the I'S Corridor. " He briefly stated the recommendations for this district, as written in the plan. Planning commission Minutes Meeting of Mare 21, 1991 Page . Carman asked if the city should consider , four lanes and not only two lanes for this area if the plan is for a 20 year time period. Mr. Hi idt said that he thinks the traffic growth assumptions should be closely analyzed now so that the city can be comfortable in thinking two lanes and a left hand turning lane would be adequate for the level of flow along this corridor since the city and property owners will be mak ing substantial financial investments in idewa►lk curbs, etc. He said cuts into the residential bluff would not be necessary to widen the streets, Mr. Robison briefly summarized the recommendations for the Flats District, as stated in the plan. Mr, Robison then turned to the Haines street Room. one recommendation in this district is the realignment of Haines street through the Safeway parking lot. Ms. Mcole said at the present time there is a lot of traffic coming out of McDonalds trying to make a left hand turn onto sins Way. Mr. Robison said he had identified that as an area that requires further examination and that the geometrics of this problem Mould have to be worked out. Mr. Robison said there has been broad support for this realignment, Ms. Erickson said that is because no businesses are adversely affected by this realignment. Mr. Carman asked how this realignment would affect Safeway's parking requirements. Mr. Hildt responded that Safeway exceeds current requirements and would not be adversely impacted by the realignment. Mr. Carman turned to page 33 of the plan where it discusses the possibility of additional parking along Decatur and Jefferson, Ms, Erickson said that she didn't know where Decatur had any room for providing additional parking. A brief disuion of parking in this area followed. Mr. Robison turned to the crossroads District, He said there are still some questions that should be resolved and the trees in the graphics are exaggerated. Ms, Erickson said the wa►terwalk along this area was taken out by City council in the Urban Waterfront Plan, she said she thinks the Waterwalk begins at Kearney St. Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of March 21, 1991 Page Mr. Robison moved to discussion of the last district, the Bluff Corridor. He briefly stated the recommendations, as written in the plan. Mr. Hildt stated that the computer generated photo of this district showed the difference that new signage would make. He said monument signs will have to be tailored to work in this district. Ms. IcDole asked about access to businesses. Mr. Hildt said that good driveways will have to be established in this area. He also said the city had spent some time with the businesses last spring to discuss driveways and the talks were not very successful. He said further work needs to be dome on the driveway issue. Mr. Robison moved onto the Gateway plan design guidelines. He said the guidelines were crafted by Don Stastny who also wrote the guidelines for the Urban Waterfront plan. He said the guidelines are compatible with the Urban Waterfront guidelines but are more flexible, Mr. Hildt said the staff has examined the plans of some recent developments along the corridor. Staff found that for the most part the developments work with the guidelines, except for a few small inconsistencies, Mr. Robison said Don Stastny and the Planning and Building staff want to avoid the "cookbook" approach to design guidelines for this district. Flexibility is key. Mr. Robison moved to discussion of the. Route Development Transportation Analysis. He said that staff would be going out into the field to examine the recommendations, Mr. Hildt i the data and analysis are solid, however the text needs to be unproved and maps added. Ms, McDole said she recalls several fatalities on Sins Way in the last 10 or 20 years. Nis. Erickson turned to the major recommendations of the Route Development Transportation Analysis. she asked what the setbacks are that are referred to in the fifth major recommendation on page 9, Mr. Hildt said the city plans to examine setback requirements for buildings so that consolidating access points will be possible. Mr. Hildt thea moved to the Cost Memorandum, He said the memorandum shows global costs of improving each district as well as information to use for estimating specific projects. Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of March 21, 1991 Page Mr. Robison sa.id that the two most expensive items are street lights and undergrounding utilities. He said undergrounding utilities may not be financially feasible for the entire corridor. Puget Power said the costs of street lights could be cut by almost 0 percent by looping at other streetlight alternatives,, He said the costs for traffic i w r" Planning Commission Minutes Meeting of March 21, 1991 Page Mr. Cunningham said the plan is predicated on growth estimates of two percent a year. He said he has heard figures of seven percent year. He said he thinks alternatives should be proposed to the Com ission and pros and cons of each alternative presented. He asked what the impact on Discovery Bay Road would be if this plan were adopted. He said that all the state highways are bypassing the urban areas in the state. Will Port Townsend be bypassed next, he asked, Mr. Cunningham said he sees two problems. First, the city needs to address the traffic congestion that exists. He said we need solution now. Second, we need to determine where SR 20 traffic should go. He said we need to examine the consequences of traffic growing seven percent on Discovery Bay Road. Chairman Ron Nosec closed the public hearing testimony section of the hearing. Mr. Robison suggested scheduling a workshop meeting to discuss the Implementation and Financing Plan. Mr. Hildt suggested scheduling a workshop meeting for April 11. V. RECOMMENDATION To ADHERE TO ARTICLE IX Mr, Hildt suggested to the Commission that they adhere to Article IX of thein bylaws: have one workshop and one business meeting a month. He said that other- possibilities exist for handling some issues administratively. One example is a variance for a person who needs a two foot setback for a porch, Mr. Hildt also suggested some code amendments to make some things more consistent. He also stated we need to consider cases that require more than one meetings discussion. The Commission had no objections to adhering the rules as they stand, A Gateway workshop meeting will be held April 11, 1991. VI, ADJOURN Ids. Erickson moved to adjourn. Ms, McDole seconded the motion. Chairman Ron Kosec adjourned the meeting at 10:20 p.m. Minutes recorded b K thenine M. Johnson Planning & Building Assistant GATEWAY DEVELOPLONT PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING MARCH 21, 1991 7-030 PM. AGENDA 1. STAFF UPDATE 2. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PLAN 3. IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCING STRATEGY A. GATEWAY PRIORITIES B. DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS • C. RECOMMENDED FINANCIAL STRATEGY D. KEEPING OPPORTUNITIES ALIVE 4. PUBLIC TESTIMONY: NEW INFORMATION 5. RECOMMENDATION TO ADHERE TO ARTICLE IX (SCHEDULING OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS) T � - j1► City of Port Townsend 4 Planning and Building Depa en 540 Watcr Street, Port Towascnd,SVA 98368 2061385-3000 T : City Council Planning Commission CW16ad to COMCM From: Darlene Bloomfield Administrative Assistant DaLe Date: March 1 , 1991 Subject: Meetings Notifications In accordance with conditional use permit 9O10-04 , Summit Communications, channel 8 is broadcasting on a daily basis the schedule of upcoming City of Port Townsend meetings,. The schedule will be shown periodically between 7 and 11 p.m, and will display meetings for a two-week period, including date, time and agenda, The meeting schedule will be updated each Friday. The information that is relayed to ane through, the pink meeting . information form after the Council meetings will be forwarded for broadcast. The list will be essentially the 'axe as the Meetings, Meetings, Meetings list. Thanks. " ' "� � � �� r� �. - � vine,e���-� � �S F �m CPn. �. ° Y�'loww -�i-aw, D. I�.corn�',e1:P c�c�-�-�'� �urne,�.�, ��a�ns L - �r,d.�5 end ('�,�,� eves � -F� meq. � �y��'� ,4 � � �il,,�v,,wte s a� 3//¢�9/ • 4 t C'Ity of Port Townsend Planning and Building Department 540 dater Street, Port Townscnd,STA 98368 206/385-3000 To: Planning Commission From: Michael Hildt Director, Planning and Building Date: Larch 1 , 1391 Subject: Request to return to monthly business meetings. As you know, Article IX of the Rules of Policy and Procedure of the Planning Commission provide that unless a special meeting is called, the Planning Commission shall convene monthly on the last Thursday of each month for its regular- business meeting, and on the second Thursdays for its regular workshop meetings. In recent years, the Planning Commission has devoted most of its workshop meeting time 2nd Thursdays) to business 1 .e. , hearings on applications) in order to keep up with the extraordinary number of development applications received by the city. While this has expedited city decisions on proposed development projects, it has placed considerable strain on the commission and planning staff as we redouble our efforts to keep pace.. Oftentimes special meetings have been scheduled to find time to consider major future planning decisions, adding to the demands on commissioners and interested citizens trying to cover the myriad meetings underway most evenings. This is to request that the Commission adhere to Article IX in its scheduling to better allocate our limited resources to the ' before the cit' Amnon these are � mayor future planning natters y g the Gateway Development Plan, Growth Management, Transportation Planning, and subdivision and zoning code amendments, Use of workshop meetings for future planning ratters should also allow � us to work more closely with the Commissi i Planning Commission March 1 , 1991 Page 2 current development hearings. Unless we better balance these demands, present development is likely to occur without prudent consideration of future public costs and community impacts. I hope you will agree that in the long run the public will be hest served if priority time and attention be provided these pressing future planning decisions. Attached is a recommended revised schedule of present applications. Any legal deadlines on hearings or applications would, of course, be met. I would appreciate your review and consideration at your meeting of March 21. 'hank you, cc: City Council 70 June 27, 1991 (continued) B. Variance Application, 9102-03, F o ert L. Force (Committee: Tavemakis/Carman) (Staff: S ler July 25. 1991 A. Street Vacation Application, 9102-04, George and Shirley Peterson (Committee: Cannan/Erickson) (Staff: Bloomfidd B. Vadance Application, 9102-05, Robert ert E. Mc ole (Committee: Sherwood/Roberts) (Staff: Bl onn field . w 1 k � ission nni Conn Next Scheduled Meetings Draft March 21, 1991 A. Gateway Recommendation to City Council (Staff. Robison) ison BVI a 2_ ; 1991 A. Rezone Application, 9011-03, City of Port Townsend (Committee: Erickson Tavernaki (Staff:Robison) E. Conditional Use Permit, City of Fort Townsend (Committee: Erickson Tavernakis (Staff:Robison) C. Conditional Use Permit, 8912-07, Doug and Nancy Lary (Committee: Mc ole Car an (Staff: Sepler D. Short Plat Text Amendment (Staff: Sepler E. Officer ElectionsqFY I . 5 APd1 25o 1991 A. Street Vacation Application, 9101-08, Mike Marson/Lee Wilburn (Committee: Roberts/Erickson) (Staff: S pier B. Street Vacation Application, 3101-10, Virginia Dignan (Committee: Erickson/Sherwood) (Staff: Sepler ma 30, 1 A. Conditional Use Permit, 3012- 3t William White (Committee: Tavemakrs/Carman) (Staff: Sepler) B. Subdivision Application,, 900 9-03, Parkview, Vantage Homes (Committee: T e akis/Sherwood) (Staff: Sepler June A. Conditional Use Permit, 9102-01, Inn Deering (Committee: o rt McC of (Staff: Sepler) is r j f• 'I city of Port Towntend ry,, RECEIVED l.�.., MAR 2 1991 B1 & MONTGOMERY ASSOCIATES 1200 West Sims way fort Townsend, Washington 98368 Planninand Building Business(200)385-3303 Business 1-800-848-8831 Fax{208}385-3420 March i , 1991 To the Planning Department f Port Townsend re: The Gateway Plan. Since the committee has now pub l i shed the-of f i c i al plan , i is only noir possible to see what it has in mind. We are addressing speci+ically the Sheri dare-Si ms Way intersection. Last Thursday 's public. meeting has now made it clear that the problem being addressed is the trucking di i cul ty. Most of the trucks begin at the bottom of the hill from zero speed there. They seem to cope; why can they not , cope here at a light? It appears to us that a regrading to create a f l atter intersection would be entirely feasible and considerably less expensive; not to mention avoiding the need to destroy a► real - asset to the community. Visibility could be increased by taking a slice from the already available unimproved land and adding a light. The land at the NE corner of the intersection presently is blocking advanced view of the intersection. Even more significantly, a simple sign on Sheridan prohibiting left turns onto Sims Way wound eliminate almost all of the danger without even a light. Mos o+ the local citizens already have adapted a personal policy cif ref usi ng to use this intersection for left turns onto Sims, a p err f ec t l y reasonable solution. The diagram showing realignment of Sheridan appears to put a new -Curve on that street - woul-d that really sol.ve the problem? How much di ff i cUi ter Will it create for the ambulances which regularly travel this route's I+ the p.resent -21 of f l ce is separated from the rest of the mall , then a foot tra f i problem is created. Do we want that'? We are constantly hearing about the parking prob-lem that exists in downtown Port Townsend, yet this entity seems to be trying to grab up parking that has already been created in our only well designed mall . This mall provides plenty of parking for the existing commercial buildings, and also plenty for any additional businesses that may be added. This concept is a good one, and should not be tampered with. Would Port Townsend really be wel i-served if a commercial building is severed from the mall and forced to exist i n limbo outside the mall? Our building at present has occasional need for over 30 parking spaces, and we foresee ars increase in need as more businesses are added in the building and a►s we grow. i Each Office Is Independently Owned And Operated OPPORTUNITY M As to what this plan wo ld do to the present building , i t would do all of the following: 1 Force entry by a flight of steps. We automatically would not be able to serve handicapped people - a Washington State no-no. Conceal the entrance to available parking. How 'in the world can people be expected to know where the parking is? Force complete redesign for both the interior and the exterior with a new entrance and provision for wheelchair access, Is an el-evat or what you have n-6i'nd' 'That would not cure the second A,evel problem that exists in Port Townsend. It i well known that in thistown ., �t l s almost impossible v create a viable commercial endeavor i+ the public has to walk up stairs, It is vital that any business have street level access. `hese problems, 16 -f- adoption of this plan is achlieiv6d will result in the fol l awi rig: 1 Complete collapse in the value of the property. It 1 s hard to believe that that will benefit the community. Possible loss of tenants for the owner. 13) Reduce drastically the ability of the owner to ever sell the property. 4 Impact over twenty workers, not including those of the other businesses on the premises. One of these workers i handicapped and level entry is important. As a whole, it appears that the Planning Department does not value the integrity of an important and well designed mall . ,The mall is already providing separation from the traffic , plenty of parking ng and room to grove. In addition the sketch appears to force all the ingress and egress from Sims Way through to Hendricks St. It at present is only suitable for one war traffic, If this is forced , then - even less parking for the businesses facing Sims Way will be available because of the need to redesign the entrance there. It is shocking that so little regard has been paid to the owners o both this building and of the Stock Market building, who do not want this, ,acrd to the tenants, who might meed to moire if this happens. This mall serves the of f erson County population very well . Do we really want to mess it up so much that more shopping than ever is done outside this county? It is interesting that the .O.T, goes out and tries to straighten roads, at much expense, and in town we have an attempt to add kinks in a straight road. Does this make sense's 4 F f + As a f l real comment , it appears that certain decisions were made from a personal prejudice ce a s t C-21 . It 'in u i rig to u for~ the firm of Stasny & Burke to publicly state that our - ompany is not good enough to occupy this corner ! How can anyone expect the Gateway Committee to obtain any public support for this project with that kind of approach? B.J. Johnson', Broker . Century 21 , B.J. Montgomery Associates i