Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/15/2005 MINUTESMinutes for Planning Commission Regular Meeting February 15, 2005 L Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Streissguth at 5:31 p.m. 11. Roll Call Those present were: Commissioner Kennedy, Commissioner Kosusko, Commissioner Cockburn, Commissioner Nelson, Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf, Commissioner Hoell, and Commissioner Streissguth. Quorum certified. 111. Approval of Agenda Commissioner Streissguth introduced the agenda. A motion was made by Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf and seconded by Commissioner Nelson to approve the agenda as presented. Called for a vote: Cockburn: Yes; Hoell: Yes; Kennedy: Yes; Kosusko: Yes; Nelson: Yes; Streissguth: Yes; Friedberg -Nerf. Yes. The motion carried. . IV. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the Regular Meeting held on January 18, 2005 were presented for approval by Commissioner Streissguth. A motion was made by Commissioner Kosusko and seconded by Commissioner Kennedy to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of January 18, 2005, as presented. Called for a vote: Cockburn: Yes; Hoell: Yes; Kennedy: Yes; Kosusko: Yes; Nelson: Yes; Streissguth: Yes; and Friedberg -Nerf; Yes. The motion carried. V. PUBLIC MEETING A. Call To The Public (public comments on any item not on tonight's agenda). Commissioner Streissguth asked if there were any comments from citizens. Seeing none, she closed this portion of the meeting. B. Public Hearing: Paul Rogerson, Planning Manager, gave an overview of the staff report which. had been distributed to the Commissioners prior to the meeting. He highlighted items in the Initial Neighborhood Center Core (INCC) chapter such as Permitted Uses, Dimensional Standards, and Architectural and Site Design Guidelines. For Parking, staff suggested substituting a new parking section that is identical to the parking section for the IDC. Planning Commission Meeting February 15, 2005 Page 1 of 6 Paul then covered the Initial District Center (IDC) zone chapter which in many regards is the same as the INCC chapter with the following exceptions: In the Pennitted Uses section there is the addition of hotels and lodging places, motion picture theaters, and several types of residential. care facilities; in Dimensional Standards, the height limit is increased to 50 feet; in Architectural and Site Design Guidelines, there is a subsection outlining requirements of commercial structures in the zone; in Parking, staff suggested having both the MCC and the IDC read: "For non - residential uses, the minimum required parking is one space per employee plus one handicapped accessible space. On- site parking for non - residential uses shall not exceed one parking space per 300 square feet of floor area. Parking for residential uses shall not exceed two spaces per residential unit. On -site parking shall be to the rear of buildings facing the arterial street. Access to parking may be from adjacent non - arterial streets, or from driveways off of the arterial. Driveways providing access to parking area shall be well marked. On- street parking shall be allowed to help satisfy parking needs provided paved street widths provide adequate room pursuant to city standards for on -street parking." Paul then read directly from a handout for additional language to be included to both chapters. The intent is to not set up a situation where the parking requirement prevents adaptive reuse of an existing building in either center. Chris Hugo further explained that the change in parking requirements for the core zones was intended to stimulate growth for small businesses that may not meet the current parking requirements but would be an asset to the neighborhood. Commissioner Streissguth asked for comments from the public. Seeing none, she closed this portion of the meeting and moved on to Commission statements. Chris reminded the Commissioners that the Centers Core zones can accommodate buildings up to 20,000 square feet; without having appropriate parking requirements in place, a larger business could potentially not have suitable parking. Commissioner Kosusko asked for clarification on what the maximum or minimum of setback is. Paul responded that it is in the definitions section; generally, it is measured to the portion of the building nearest to the street or sidewalk. There was brief discussion regarding minim setback requirements for commercial structures in District Centers. With setbacks clarified, the dialogue moved to how structures with limited lot space be accessed. Paul suggested reversing the terms so that there is no 712axinnan rear yard setback, and the mininnon will be 20 feet. There was discussion regarding the minim of 30% of commercial structures fronting the street in the Initial District Center Core must be within ten feet of the street. Paul explained that it would be 30% of new construction and not 30% of all structures, noting that this is a very modest number. The intent was for lineal feet and it was acknowledged that additional work on the language was needed. The dialogue moved to Permitted Uses, especially the topic of similar uses. Paul explained that the Director can approve a use not listed if it is determined that it is similar to uses listed. Alluding to the recent event involving a funerary facility in Kitsap County's jurisdiction, it was decided that funeral services would be removed from the list Planning Conunission Meeting February 15, 2005 Page 2 of 6 of permitted uses in the Initial Neighborhood Center Core zone, §20.66.020(3)(a), Personal Services. Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf asked about the omission of hotels, motels, and other lodging from the list of permitted uses in the Oyster Bay Neighborhood, her concern being that there are currently several hotel /motels in that area and the possibility of putting them in a non- conforming status. Paul assured Conunissioner Friedberg -Nerf that a property in a legal, non - conforming status does not affect the value or insurability of that property; improvements can be made to existing property, but the size of the building's footprint cannot be enlarged. Leaving this item off the list of permitted uses will oily prevent additional lodging structures from being built. Chris noted that there is no reference to density in the Initial Neighborhood Center Core zones and proposed adding the sentence, "... Any residential density shall be allowed to the limits of the dimensional standards in §20.66.050 and the site guidelines in §20.66.060." Commissioner Streissguth wondered if this was an appropriate time to include incentives to prompt low - impact development guidelines. She thought the best location would be within the Building Code. This is an item Commissioner Streissguth feels the Commission should be aware of as other bodies of work are moved forward. She believes the City of Bremerton may be participating in a pilot project with Kitsap County to come up with recommendations for what will work in terms of incentives to generate interest in low- impact development. Chris suggested including this item in the middle section of the Zoning & Land Use chapter which covers land use development regulations. There was discussion regarding whether a multi - family residential structure could be allowed [in. the Center Cores] because of the requirement that residential uses only be on the upper floors of mix ed use buildings. It was decided to remove multi - family residential structures from the list. Paul moved on to amendments recommended by staff. In §20.66.060(A)(7)(b), Architectural Guidelines, regarding variations in building heights. It was proposed that the sentence read, "The inclusion of a building element, the height of which varies from the remainder of the building by at least ten per cent." Commissioner Kosusko asked for clarification of the statement, "...Building fagades shall not present a blank fagade to view ", wanting to know if that means the side, back, street side, etc. Paul replied that the intent was to address the fagades other that those that face the street. He suggested language be added such as, to vieu7 frail a public right of 141ay, coratnl ora parking area, or adjacent residential property, or by employing other architectural devices. Commissioner Nelson suggested defining what those architectural devices would be. Commissioner Kosusko recommended replacing the word "Standards" with "Guidelines" in §22.66.060. PIanning Commission Meeting February 1.5, 2005 Page 3 of 6 Paul continued with the suggested amendments with §20.66.060(A)(6). Staff proposed rewriting to read, "One tree for every twenty -five linear feet (25') of street frontage shall be planted along a street, and shall be spaced a maximum of thirty -five feet (35') on center. However, trees may be spaced irregularly in natural groupings rather than uniformly spaced except as noted elsewhere in this chapter." It was agreed upon by the Commissioners use staff s recommendation and defer to the neighborhood process. [Chris Hugo left the meeting at this time.] Staff then proposed that in §20.66.060(B)(1), the term "residential uses" be replaced with "residential or office uses ". There was much discussion regarding this item. Paul revisited the section dealing with Parking. He read directly from his list of proposed amendments, explaining points where clarification was needed [copy is located in the meeting file]. There was discussion of how parking could be accessed from an alley, given the nature of alleys in Bremerton. The narrowness of an alley could be mitigated though the use of one -way traffic. Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf asked if alleys are public right-of-ways; Paul said they are. Paul noted that comments he had received for the Initial District Center Core were identical to the comments for the Initial Neighborhood Center Core and suggested the proposed amendments for the IDCC be applied to the MCC as well. Commissioner Kosusko suggested adding language to limit building footprint size in the IDCC. Paul replied that the lack of a maximum building size requirement in this section was intentional, noting that the intent to control building size was lot coverage. It was agreed upon by the Commissioners to add language clarifying building size to §20.70.050(A), Dimensional Standards. Commissioner Streissguth asked for staff to read back the list of proposed amendments. They are: Neighborhood Center - 1. Amend §20.66.050(3) to read, "No maximum rear yard setback. The minimum setback shall be twenty feet." 2. Remove the phrase "funeral services" from §20.66.020(3)(a). 3. Rewrite §20.66.060(A)(7)(b) to read: "The inclusion of a building element, the height of which varies from the remainder of the building by at least ten per cent." 4. Rewrite §20.66.020(7) to read: "Density shall be allowed per standards and guidelines found in §20.66.050 and §20.66.060 ". 5. Amend §20,66.060(B), replacing the word "regulations" with "guidelines ". 6. In §20.66.060, strike the term "multi- family residential" from the first sentence. 7. In §20.66.060(B)(1), add the phrase "or office" after "residential" each time it is used. Also, add language stating that such office or residential uses would be a vested use. 8, Amend 20.66.060(2) to include public art, public display case or board. 9. Rewrite §20.66.060(B)(2) to make a reference to the current tree standards in the Landscape code. 10. Add to §20.66.060(A)(6) the language, "... the view from right -of -ways or common parking areas" as well as the ph=e, "other architectural devices" at the end of the section. 11. Parking section to be amended to make it identical to the District Center. Planning Commission Meeting February 15, 2005 Page 4 of 6 District Center — 1. Sarre changes where possible as the Neighborhood Center. 2. Add new subsection (A) to §20.70.050 that states building size will be based on sections 3. Change parking section in the INCC and the IDCC to include the following: "6. Reduction in number of required parking spaces. The Director may reduce the number of required parking spaces on a site by up to ten when a remodel, expansion, alteration, or change in the use or tenancy of an existing building occurs, provided: a. For sites with multiple uses or structures, the reduction shall be applied to the entire site and not to individual uses. b. When a use is non - conforming to the required number of off-street parking spaces, it shall not be allowed to reduce the number of existing spaces." 4. Amend §20.70.060(8)(1) to read, "No less than thirty per cent of the lineal frontage foot of a site shall be occupied by commercial structures that are set back no less than ten feet from the public right-of-way." Commissioner Streissguth reminded staff of typographical errors that need correction as well. A motion was made by Commissioner Kennedy and seconded by Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf to recommend moving forward for Council action Chapter 20.66 and Chapter 20.70, including the amendments as read by staff. Called for discussion. A motion was made by Commissioner Kosusko and seconded by Commissioner Cockburn to amend the original motion changing §20.66.050(3) to read "There are no setback requirements except where abutting residential uses in which a twenty foot minimum setback is required." This motion passed unanimously. The amended original motion was called for a vote: Cockburn: Yes; Hoell: Yes; Kennedy: Yes; Kosusko: Yes; Nelson: Yes; Streissguth: Yes; Friedberg -Nerf. Yes. The motion carried. Dri Ralph, Environmental Planner, gave an update on the Critical Areas Ordinance. The first meeting on the Critical Areas Ordinance will be on Thursday, February 17 at 5:30 in the Mayor's Conference Room. Representatives from the Department of Ecology, the Department of Natural Resources, the Tribe, as well as City of Bremerton Forestry will be at the meeting. Dri is confident much will be accomplished with this group. VI. Business Meeting A. Chairman's Report: Commissioner Streissguth and Commissioner Cockburn met with Pat. Wilson regarding Parliamentary Procedures and they will be working toward updating the Plaiu Conmiission By -laws by the next meeting. Planning Commission Meetiryg February 15, 2005 Page 5 of 6 B. Director's Report: Paul Rogerson reported that the first initial zoning package will be going before the City Council on February 16, 2005. As of February 1, 2005, City Council has one hearing before adoption. Chris Hugo will be making a presentation to the Kitsap County Realty Group at A.lderbrook Resort for the Prudential NW area wide conference on the Comprehensive Plan and Initial Zoning Package. Commissioner Streissguth will also attend. Kitsap County will be filing an appeal on Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan with the Growth Management's Hearing Board. There are discussions planned to try and mediate this before it goes before the board. C. OId Business: None. D. New Business: Commissioner Streissguth presented to Dri Ralph a gift of thanks, along with this sentiment: "On beha f of the Bremerton Planning Cor7 Missior7, I want to drank you for your support and dedication and tireless ser i4ce to the citizens of Bremerton. As our E77141-017177ental Planner, you've gently reininded its of the importance of steivardship to the natural beauty that our city possesses. Your service to the conzinunioa reminds its that, as Teru Tempest 17'illian?s believes, `The ability to stand fain at the center of our convictions, our capacity to face the harsh 777easures of life — comes from the deep, quiet listening to the land, the rifer; and the rocks. ' The Commissioners also presented Dri with a Certificate of Appreciation which Commissioner Streissguth read aloud. VII. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 7:41 p.m. The next Regular Meeting is scheduled for March 15, 2005. Respectfully submitted by, Executive Secretary Appro by: 4 Lda issguth,-Vic-- C) airman Planning Commission Meeting February 15, 2005 Page 6 of 6