CITY OF PORT ORCHARD Planning Commission Minutes 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366 Phone: (360) 874-5533 Fax: (360) 876-4980 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 5, 2017 COMMISSIONERS: Present: Tim Drury, Marcus Lane, Suanne Martin Smith, Annette Stewart (Chair), Mark Trenary, Kathleen Wilson Absent: Stephanie Bailey, Trish Tierney STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Nick Bond, Long Range Planner Keri Sallee 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Stewart called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. and led the pledge of allegiance. 2. AUDIENCE COMMENTS: Dale Morris asked if the Comprehensive Plan amendments would result in increased property taxes. Community Development Director Nick Bond said that the County, not the City, would decide whether changes to land use and zoning designations should result in changes to property tax rates, and that multiple factors (not just zoning) are generally taken into account when the County Assessor determines property taxes. 3. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Public Hearing 2017 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Bond gave an overview of the 2017 Comprehensive Plan amendments and the reasons they had been proposed by the City. He also updated the Planning Commission and the public on transportation studies and improvements that are currently underway, as well as the ongoing development of multifamily and commercial design guidelines. Chair Stewart opened the public hearing. Map 4 Tim Matthes said that the maps provided to property owners with the initial notice mailout were confusing. He asked why having 50% more land designated Greenbelt was necessary to protect Blackjack Creek. The redesignation would be a taking of property rights. He is against additional protection that would give no value to the property owner, and City regulations already provide sufficient protection. Everyone in the City will be impacted by the Greenbelt increase. James Van Cleef, 2864 Harold Dr, said that he owns two five-acre lots near the intersection of Lundberg and Harold. He has concerns about the proposed increase of Greenbelt designated area on his property. He has worked with Bond to come up with a compromise designation that allows more development on a portion of his property while still showing a Greenbelt increase. Bond asked Van Cleef if the compromise solution is still acceptable to him, and Van Cleef said yes. Steve Jarrett, 850 Higher Ground Ln, said that he feels the Greenbelt redesignations are excessive. He discussed the proposal for his property with Bond, and Bond agreed to recommend that no changes be made to his property.
Doug Bean said that he lives on Tufts Ave in the county. He is concerned that if more development occurs near his neighborhood, the problems they are already having with a high water table and basement flooding could become worse. Their neighborhood needs to be protected from more stormwater runoff. Bond said more protection will be provided by stormwater regulations than by zoning categories. The City adopted a new stormwater management manual in 2016, which meets the most stringent requirements that the EPA and the state currently impose, and new development will be required to meet these increased standards for managing stormwater runoff. Chair Stewart asked for testimony on Map 5. Bond noted that Blueberry Ridge (approximately 106-109 homes) and Andazio Village (64 homes), which were approved in the County prior to annexation, are currently being built in this area at a density higher than what the current City zoning allows. The proposed land use and zoning redesignation would correct the zoning to reflect what will actually be built. Bond also discussed the road improvements that will be required with these developments. Dale Morris, 4655 Geiger Rd, said that his properties on Geiger Rd are being changed from Residential Low to Residential High, and he doesn t want this change. Geiger Rd would not be able to handle the increased traffic of higher density development. Morris asked if Geiger Rd would become one-way when the Blueberry Ridge and Andazio Village road improvements are made, and Bond said no, although the intersection of Geiger and Sedgwick will only allow right turns from Sedgwick onto Geiger, and from Geiger onto Sedgwick. Theresa Brock, 898 Blueberry Rd, said that her entire 6.4 acre property near Geiger and Blueberry has been designated Greenbelt. She does not want this, as she may want to subdivide in future to allow her son to build a home there too. She may meet with Bond after the public hearing to discuss other possible options for the land use designation on her property. James Chicolo said that he wanted to confirm that his properties at the southwest corner of Blueberry and Geiger are no longer proposed for any change, according to his previous discussion with Bond. Bond confirmed that they are no longer recommended to be changed. James Van Cleef said he doesn t want to develop his property, but if it becomes undesirable to live there in future because of new development and traffic, he would rather have a higher zoning designation so that he can potentially sell it and live elsewhere. Charles Cregier wanted to confirm that his property at 4708 Ramsey will not be recommended for redesignation from Commercial to Residential High Density, as agreed with Bond. He is selling his property to the owner of Westcoast Fitness as a parking lot. Bond confirmed that the property is no longer recommended for a redesignation. Nicholas Geisinger, 2103 Caleb Pl, asked how the proposed change to from R4.5 zoning to R12 zoning would affect his Blackjack Terrace neighborhood. Bond said that the R12 zoning designation would more accurately reflect the density of Blackjack Terrace, which was approved in the County under zoning that allowed smaller lots than allowed in the City s R4.5 zone, and would make these lots conforming. Sheila Cronan, 250 Flower Meadows St, said that she doesn t understand why part of the Flower Meadows neighborhood is being redesignated from R4.5 to R8, since the lots are conforming to R4.5 zoning. Bond said that there appears to be an error on the designation of the proposed change. He will look into this further and make any changes necessary before the Comprehensive Plan amendments go forward to City Council. Sophia Palermo, 2201 West Ave, said that she wants her property to stay zoned R4.5. Bond confirmed that this is the case. 2
Filip Guzikowski said that his properties off Redemption Ave were proposed for an increased area of Greenbelt designation. He said that he came to a compromise with Bond that reduces the amount of increased Greenbelt area, as shown on the most recent map, and protects the value of his investment. He already had a site plan and engineering drawings prepared for development of additional homes on his property. Mike Rowe wanted to confirm that no change is proposed to his property at 4446 Bethel Ave. He also asked if any changes had been made to zone definitions. Bond confirmed that no change is proposed for his property, and no changes were made to zone definitions. Theresa Brock said she has decided that she wants to have the increased Greenbelt designation removed from her property. Bond said that he did not object to leaving her property designation unchanged. Ken Durham, 943 Blueberry Rd, said he is concerned about how the Blueberry Ridge development and its traffic will affect his property. He would like to know what kind of improvements are proposed for Geiger and Blueberry, and how future developments will be reviewed. Bond provided information on the City s transportation review process for new development, and on the proposed road improvements in this area. Kirk Doughty said that he had submitted a letter about his three properties at 3842 Redemption Ave, and asked that the current zoning be maintained instead of having the Greenbelt area increased. In future he may want to sell the properties for development. Bond said he had no objection to maintaining the existing zoning. Chair Stewart asked for testimony on Map 6. No one testified. Bond said that the intention of the proposed changes in this area was to redesignate and consolidate sites along Sedgwick with commercial development potential, and to move R-20 zoned areas behind the commercial sites and away from Sedgwick. Chair Stewart asked for testimony on Map 7. Bond noted that the McCormick Woods amendment had been withdrawn and was no longer under consideration. The McCormick Woods applicant will likely apply for a conditional use permit to develop a community center under the existing R8 zoning, after reaching out to provide more information to McCormick Woods residents. The other two proposed changes will redesignate properties that are owned by the South Kitsap Fire District (future fire station site) and the City (sewer lift station) from Greenbelt to Public Facilities, to correctly reflect their existing and proposed uses. Adam Christopher, 4668 Chanting Circle, said that he had not been aware that a fire station was proposed to be built so close to his house. The map and notice sent to residents didn t say anything about a fire station. He is concerned about having a fire station located so close to an existing neighborhood. Bond said that there was no immediate plan to build a fire station, which could be 10-20 years away depending on how fast the rest of McCormick Woods North is developed. Alan Bailey, 4662 Chanting Circle, expressed a number of concerns about having a fire station near his neighborhood. The notice was unclear and people in his neighborhood thought the amendment must be about McCormick Village Park. He is concerned about the rate of development in his area, and asked how the fire station would be reviewed for noise and environmental impacts. Bond said that when the fire district proposes to develop the fire station, it will be required to receive a building permit and have SEPA review, which includes analysis of environmental impacts. Chair Stewart asked for testimony on Maps 1 and 2. No one testified. Bond said that the proposal to redesignate the property at 1636 Bay Street from Commercial to Residential High Density had been 3
withdrawn. The Map 2 amendment will correct the erroneous zoning of a property on DeKalb Ave with an existing land use designation of High Density Residential by rezoning it from Commercial to R20. The Rockwell Apartments at 103 Rockwell St will also have its land use designation corrected from Residential Low Density to Residential High Density to reflect the existing multifamily zoning and use of the property. Chair Stewart asked for testimony on Map 3. Bond said that the change from Commercial to R12 zoning for a number of properties in this area is intended to reflect existing development and likely future uses. Rebecca Brown said that her family had recently purchased a house at 1521 Retsil Rd which had turned out to be zoned Commercial, and she would like to have residential zoning in case they want to sell in future. Andrew Brown, Ms. Brown s husband, confirmed that they would prefer residential zoning. He would like to build a shed, which he would not be able to do if his house remained nonconforming because of the existing Commercial zoning. Chair Stewart closed the public hearing. B. Discussion 2017 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. The Commission discussed the issues of property taxation and the process for requesting comprehensive plan amendments. Chair Stewart said that since Bond had been amenable to working with property owners who didn t want increased Greenbelt zoning on their properties, and didn t want to force rezoning on anyone, how important was it to expand the Greenbelt zone? Bond responded that all gains to the Greenbelt zone will reduce the amount of hard surface coverage in this area and will help maintain aquifer and stream recharge via infiltration. It will also help people see and understand the restrictions of topography, buffers, and available infrastructure on future development in this area. However, the protections of the critical areas ordinance are applicable citywide, and will be applied to future development proposals within or adjacent to critical areas (e.g., steep slopes, streams, wetlands) regardless of zoning. Even if a property is all or nearly all encumbered by critical areas or buffers, however, the property owner can apply for a variance to allow reasonable use of their property as allowed by the underlying zone. Chair Stewart asked if any additional requests for changes by property owners made after the hearing would be considered. Bond said that all requests would be considered and forwarded to the City Council with a staff recommendation. The Commission will be provided with a copy of the minutes from the September 5 meeting, as well as the staff s final recommendation to City Council. Commissioner Drury made a motion to approve Resolution 001-17, recommending approval to the City Council of the 2017 Comprehensive Plan amendments as presented, with the changes requested by the property owners who provided testimony at the public hearing. Commissioner Lane seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. C. Discussion - Repeal of POMC 20.38.706 and.707 (Trees and Foliage in View Protection Overlay District) Bond gave an overview of the proposed repeal of the tree and foliage maintenance regulations in the City s View Protection Overlay District (VPOD). POMC Sections 20.38.706 and.707 require that the mature height of all trees planted in the VPOD must be consistent with view protection requirements, that new trees and foliage in the VPOD shall be limited to certain species, and that no tree or foliage shall be planted that does or could unreasonably obstruct views within the VPOD. Since no inventory was taken prior to the VPOD code adoption of existing trees within the VPOD, there is no data on the location, species, size and existing view obstruction (if any) created by those trees at the time the VPOD was created. Without a baseline against which to measure additional growth/obstruction of views from existing trees, and to document which trees are new plantings since the VPOD was 4
created, enforcement of this provision by the City is impractical and would not be based on reliable information. Additionally, much of the VPOD includes steep slopes which are subject to critical areas regulations protecting trees within geologically hazardous areas. It is inconsistent with the intent of the critical areas ordinance to require that trees within geologically hazardous areas be removed to protect or enhance views, which could result in soil instability, erosion and slide movement. Based on these concerns, City Council requested that the Planning Commission review existing POMC Sections 20.38.706 and.707, and indicate whether the Commission would support the Council s repeal of these regulations. A public hearing will be held on the proposed repeal at the Planning Commission s October 2017 meeting. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Wilson made a motion to approve the minutes from August 1, 2017. Commissioner Trenary seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURN: Chair Stewart adjourned the meeting at 8:47 pm. Annette Stewart, Chair Nick Bond, City Development Director 5