Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/15/2005 MINUTESMinutes for City of Bremerton Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 15, 2005 I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Cockburn at 5:33 p.m. 11. Roll Call Those present were: Commissioner Cockburn, Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf, Commissioner Hoell, and Commissioner Kennedy. Quorum certified. Also present: Chris Hugo, Andrea Spencer, Geoff Wentlandt, Nicole Ward, and Pam Wilson (City staff). III. Approval of Agenda Commissioner Cockburn introduced the agenda. A motion was made by Commissioner Kennedy and seconded by Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf to approve the agenda as presented. It was agreed by general consensus to approve the agenda as presented; the motion carried. IV. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the Regular Meeting held on October 18, 2005 were presented for approval by Commissioner Cockburn. A motion was made by Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf and seconded by Commissioner Hoell to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of October 18, 2005, as presented. Called for a vote: Commissioner Cockburn: Abstain; Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf: Yes; Commissioner Hoell: Yes; Commissioner Kennedy: Yes. The motion carried. The minutes of the Special Meeting held on November 1, 2005 were presented for approval by Commissioner Cockburn. A motion was made by Commissioner Kennedy and seconded by Commissioner Hoell to approve the Special Meeting Minutes of November 1, 2005, as presented. Called for a vote: Commissioner Cockburn: Yes; Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf: Abstain; Commissioner Hoell: Yes; Commissioner Kennedy: Yes. The motion carried. V. Public Meeting A. Call To The Public (public comments on any item not on tonight's agenda ). L Planning Commission Meeting November 15, 2005 Page 1 of 9 Commissioner Cockburn asked if there were any comments from citizens. Rebecca Maguire, 2520 E. North Highland Drive, Shelton: "I own seven apartments � in Bremerton. This is concerning an area between Warren and Chester, across from Kitsap Credit Union on Burwell, and then the next block behind it on 4 Avenue. They discussed this last meeting; they elected not to keep the zoning and to down -zone this to R -10 based on several points that were made. They said that this was predominantly single - family, which it's not. These brown here [indicated to the chart she brought with her] are all four or more units and several of them are six or more and even a 20 -unit complex here. The red is parking, which has, in the past, been considered a commercial use. And the orange is actually parking for Kitsap Credit Union, so again., a commercial use. If you took at the existing uses, the yellow is single - family; there is very little yellow. The light green are duplexes; a few, again. What the report said is this was, you know, had duplexes and triplexes between single - family. Actually, it's not the case; it has a few single - family and duplexes between multi- family, commercial pay parking lots, and commercial parking for Kitsap Credit Union. Now, the next block on 5 as you can see, actually meets the description of the Planning Commission. It's mostly yellow, which is single - family, with one triplex and a few duplexes. Again, if you go further out on 4 you're seeing the same pattern: mostly single- family. But this area has been designated multi - family in the past, has been developed at multi- family; investors have counted on that when they made these investments, including me, and I have a few other investors, interested investors, here with me. So, we would like to see this at least to continue multi- family. Thank you." [Ms. Maguire gave a copy of her notes and area map to City staff.] Olivia Voigt, Clear Channel Outdoor, 3601 Sixth Avenue South, Seattle: I'm here , tonight to talk about Chapter 20.52 proposed in your zoning code amendment. It came to my attention through this zoning code amendment that actually in 2003 billboard amortization was passed in the City which was never brought to our attention. That's an entirely different subject, but I just wanted to submit into public record this evening a letter that I've written to the Planning Commission and as well, just wanted to reiterate that Clear Channel holds all 24 billboards within the City. We have a vested interest in this community, obviously, and that all other jurisdictions, if research is done, all other jurisdictions within Washington have never successfully completed' an amortization program. It's resulted in very lengthy, expensive legal bills for both parties. So, I just kind of wanted to extend the olive branch, give you my name, and let you know that I'd like to open up discussion. I'll be leaving a letter with the Secretary. [The Planning Commission had already received copies of the letter faxed to DCD earlier in the day.] Will it be submitted into public record? [Yes] Thank you very much." Chris explained that the letter would be forwarded to the City Council before they take action on the new zoning code and not the Planning Commission as they did not have this on their agenda. Cindy Crenshaw, 6400 SW Old Clifton, Road, Port Orchard: "I would also like you to reconsider the zoning on 4 Street. I know that there may be plans on putting a police station in on 4 Street and I think it would be very prudent to have supporting services r surrounding that police station. You could have coffee shops, and you could also have, Planning Commission Meeting November 15, 2005 Page 2 of 9 you know, lawyers, bail bondsmen, things that would support that public entity. I think that would be very important. If you go to other cities, around their police department you do not have single - family dwellings. You usually have some sort of supporting services for that public entity. Thank you." Dave Rubie, 3450 Circle Way, Bremerton: 1, too, have some issues with the proposed zoning changes brought before the City Council so I thought I'd enter some of those into record this evening. One was the lack of notification to the property owners. Property owners are pretty much completely unaware of a lot of these zoning changes. It seems to me it's a kind of a `midnight change' on what's going on and I just happened to stumble across the proposed changes. When I did stumble across it, I found a major error in the zoning: zoning a commercial use property that I own in Bremerton to a single- family dwelling. Needless to say, this was quite shocking to me. If there's one error in this stuff, chances are there are many, many other errors in the zoning; we've heard some of those this evening. I talked with someone in the Planning Department; they indicated to me that there was a need for about 1,500 to 2,000 people to move into the Charleston area to help support that mixed -use area and help support the businesses and keep them very prosperous. They're taking multi -use, multi - family properties and rezoning them to single - family. This doesn't seem to make much sense to me, if you want more people to move to. the area, to actually reduce the number of housing units in the area. I do have a problem with the amortization of the outdoor signs. I think you're taking away property and income from families in the area that, in good faith, they purchased the property. You're changing it and you're taking away their livelihoods. I don't think that's right. I think the Planning Department should have given written notification to all property owners that the zoning affects. They need to reassess the need. for such restrictive changes. That way we can get more small businesses in the area. I'd be happy to submit this for public record. Thank you." David Butcher, 1749 Gregory Way: "I'm also part owner of part of the property on 4th Street. I also agree with the last gentleman who says that you don't provide notice. You need to tell the people that their property is going to be rezoned instead of publishing it only in the newspaper. That's unacceptable to me, totally unacceptable, and it's already happened to that property before when the City zoned it from commercial to multiple -use residential. There was a store there that cannot now be used because of your zoning; that took away livelihood and several thousand dollars out of my pocket. I don't think that you can just come along and publish it in the newspaper and everybody gets it unless you make sure that every single person in that zoning change gets a copy of the Bremerton Sun with a note attached to the front that says `This affects you; it's not normal Sun garbage'. That's totally `catch me if you can' type thing and I don't think that a public entity should be able to do that. Come in and say, `Eh, I'm sorry. You didn't catch it. Your fault.' Not the way business is — if I come down and I don't know the law and the City wants to deal with me, well then I'm guilty because I didn't know the law. That's the same kind of thing. Nobody knows all the laws. Nobody knows that you're rezoning this stuff unless you tell us, and you need to tell us, and you don't tell us. Until you put a posting — if we want to rezone the area, we got to post a notice; the City requires us to post it on the property for public comment and everything else. But the City don't have to do that. They just post it in the paper and say, `That's good'. So I agree with the gentleman before that you guys do a poor job of notifying the people so that we can Planning Commission Meeting November 15, 2005 Page 3 of 9 comment and then let's dictate what we can do. That's not acceptable to me. Thank you." Chris responded to the last public comment, explaining that the public had been notified of the City's new planning direction over the last four years through legal advertisements and articles in the newspaper. According to State law, once planning is complete the City has to follow through with those plans adopted. Over 1,000 citizens participated in the planning process. Chris explained further that every parcel in the City was affected by this zoning change and no city that has had a citywide rezone has ever notified each individual property owner because the cost of that would be in the tens of thousands of dollars. The City not only provided notification through the local paper, but also hosted informational meetings to raise public awareness of the rezone and to encourage citizens to be involved in the planning of Bremerton's future. [There was some discussion between Chris and Dave Ruble regarding the rezone, the Growth Management Act, and the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Rubie was at the back of the meeting room and his comments could not be heard on the recording. Chris invited Mr. Rubie to the come into the Community Development office to discuss further zoning information related to Mr. Rubie's property.] Seeing no further comments corning forward, Commissioner Cockburn closed this portion of the meeting. B. Public HearinLx: 1. Zoning Package #5 — Considering revision to the Master Development zoning district: Andrea Spencer, Planning Manager, began with the Staff Report on this item.. which had been distributed to the Commissioners prior to the meeting. She gave an overview of the Master Development (MD) zone and explained how it could be modified to facilitate the sub -area planning process. Staff believes the MD zone should be applied to the East _Park and Westpark developments which are designated Public Sector Redevelopment Site in the Comprehensive Plan. Changes in the text would put in place the direction that, if a sub -area plan is not used, then the R -10 zoning designation would be applied. Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf asked to replace the word "may" with "shall" in §20.80.020. Andrea replied that it would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. There was no further discussion or deliberation from the Commissioners on this item. Commissioner Cockburn asked for public comment on this item. Seeing none, he closed this portion of the meeting. A motion was made by Commissioner Kennedy and seconded by Commissioner Hoell to recommend to the City Council 1) MD zoning for the sites designated "Public Sector Redevelopment Site" on the 2004 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map as shown in the attachments I and II in the Staff Report and 2) the revised language for the BMC Chapter 20.80, Master Development as shown in Attachment III of the staff report, including replacing the word "may" with "shall" in §20.80.020. .` Planning Commission Meeting November 15, 2005 Page 4 of 9 Called for a vote: Cockburn: Yes; Friedberg -Nerf: Yes; Hoell: Yes; Kennedy: Yes. The motion carried. Commissioner Cockburn then opened the public hearing on the Zoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment for the East Park sub -area plan. Nicole Ward, City Planner, reviewed the Staff Report on this item. After giving a brief history of the East Park area, Nicole gave an overview of the Staff recommended changes to the text of the East Park sub -area plan. She also brought a packet from the City of Bremerton's Fire Chief, Al Duke, to the attention of the Commissioners. This packet explained the code requirements for street widths, per the International Fire Code. Mike Mecham, City Engineer, spoke to the Commissioners on modifications to the queuing lanes. The City engineers do not feel that a street width of 16 feet is not adequate for the traffic generated in the development by cars, garbage trucks, and emergency vehicles. The Engineering department recommends the street width be increased to a minimum of 18 feet. Mike also recommends having sidewalks on both sides of the country lanes. Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf asked Mike if his recommendation for another sidewalk would result in the removal of the bio -swale shown in the proposed plan. He said it did not; he was just making the recommendation of having another sidewalk. Commissioner Cockburn asked if there was adequate clearance for garbage trucks throughout the development. Mike said that Waste Management had been involved in discussions on East Park and they were comfortable with the widths. Commissioner Cockburn asked for public comment on this agenda item. Glen Godfrey, YMCA: "We just want to make sure we get on record that some provisions are made for our sign, which is right in the corner there. I don't know what the plan is for our sign but it's there and we just want to know what's going to happen to it - if it's going to get moved, if we're moving it, if somebody else is moving it, is there going to be a whole different sign, is it going to be part of something else, are we going to have the same square footage, are we going to have the reader -board capability -- all those kinds of things. All those questions, I want those on the record. The other things that we're concerned about is what's going to happen to Horner Jones, which, if you don't know, is kind of off the map [referring to the architect's drawing of East Park]. We're concerned that the access doesn't change; that it continue to be a one -way street. That it have parking on it. That we don't change the access of it. We're concerned that it be limited access to the facilities that are up that road and not a thoroughfare because there's kids playing, going back and forth across there; we have speed bumps there, signs, and that kind of thing. We don't want that to be a main thoroughfare. Other concerns we have is to be notified about utility interruptions and that kind of thing before they happen so we can plan ahead and not have them the same day. I know that same kind of thing is true for the pool, the skating rink, and Kitsap Community Resources. They all have the same kind of concerns. The other thing is we would like to see, because the traffic is going to get so much greater there irregardless if the access is Planning Commission Meeting November 15, 2005 Page 5 of 9 limited through the `recreation corridor', it would be nice to see Homer Jones paved; it's pretty well shot right now. So, that would be something we'd like to keep. Thank you." Lon Overson, 1035 Callahan: "I've attended the other [East Park] meetings; it's been encouraging to see the progress of this plan. This process is working. I applaud you people for putting the time and effort that you do to make this work. It is working and I appreciate it. Thank you. One concern of those of us living in this area is that it's going to affect, what we've had in the past is, some pretty stellar views, and I'm going to give you some pictures here to show you what we've been looking at. At previous meetings, had discussed encouragement whatever the developer can do to preserve some of this; recognize there's going to be an impact. That's where I comment that the plan, as it's changed, seems to have been either intentionally or without thought helping this and I appreciate that. I was hoping we could see something comparable to what was put in on the amendment for the animals. We did good for the animals; we gave them a good presentation. I was hoping that humans would get somewhat the same good presentation. But again, corridors, a view, would be a nice addition if you can. Also, they probably can't do too much relative to the animals and their movement up there, but as you can see in the pictures, they move along the northern border because there are hedges and fences that provide them some protection. We see deer and stuff moving around — I haven't gotten any pictures of them yet — we see evidence of them eating apples and roses which they appreciate. I don't know where they're going but they're up there somewhere. I suspect they will use the riparian open space that's been provided. Various people in the Callahan area are concerned about what this will do and I think your process is addressing it as best you can: thousands of people, thousands of cars — it's going to be quite an affect but we hope it's agreeable for everyone. Thank you." Ailene Mueller, 2215 Winfield Avenue: "I live directly across from the ice arena on the other side of the canyon. I really hope that you're all truly sincere about protecting the wildlife. I live probably 60 feet from the eagle nest and they're back. I wanted to say, on Sunday I saw four raccoon in our back field, four pheasants, two squirrels, two coyotes — that's a first I've seen them this year — and we have at least sic deer. They were in our yard this afternoon. I don't know how, in your corridor that you're planning, you'll keep 50,000 kids out of there. I mean, how do you think that they'll, you know. I love them. It's a joy of my life to look out there and see that and I would think it would enhance a community, too, but I don't know how you'd protect them, but I hope that you can. I brought some pictures to prove it. Thank you." Dick Bruskrud, 1102 Shore Drive: "I'm here representing Mithun [Architects] and the applicant, the East Park developers. We have a couple of things we would like to address here. To begin with, going through the Staff recommendations. I think I'll start at the very back of this list if I may. Starting off with the affordable housing element: this kind of took us a little bit of a surprise. We are attempting to provide housing in all price ranges, but affordable housing was never something that we were trying to do, as far as low - income type housing. Our research has shown that the median income in Bremerton - Silverdale area is about $56,000. That would allow that person to purchase a home of approximately between $260,000 and $300,000. We are attempting to sell homes as low as $200,000 which would be approximately at 80% of the median income of the residents. The list that we got from the Planning staff shows a considerably lower price { Planning Commission Meeting November 15, 2005 Page 6 of 9 range, in the $150,000 range, and we just cannot do that. [Chris suggested that the Commissioners return to that item during deliberations.] The eagle habitat, we are well aware of that and we have been attempting to contact the Department of Ecology. They have not returned our phone calls at this particular point in time, but we have procured a copy of the bald eagle report from the State of Washington and we are approximately 630 from the eagle's nest which would put us into some measures of deforestation that should not occur within 800 feet. We have planned on no deforestation type techniques in that area at this particular point in time. As far as the YMCA's concerned, we are more than willing to work with them, in fact, it hasn't gotten back to them but informally I've talked to the Director of the Board of Directors, who's a relative of mine. And I've been a member of the YMCA since I've been a resident of Bremerton, 17 years ago. There are a couple of issues, another issue on the SEPA, determination about the turn lanes. We'd planned on turning on the turn lanes but I think that it should mention that the turn lanes on Schley should be to the sub area standards and then the turn lanes obviously on Wheaton would be to the City of Bremerton standards since those are different. We are proposing different standards. The other issues concerning the roads and the fire sprinklers: this is a big issue for us. We have just gotten, this morning, bids back on similar buildings that we're planning on putting into this development. This is a $4,000 ticket; significant prices, running about $2 a square foot to put this type of system in. I'm not sure that we can afford that so we would like to be able to work with the Fire Department staff to try and work out some type of arrangement that could be done at less cost to the homeowner. The final thing, I think, I would like to bring up right now was the sidewalk along the country lane. Our intention here on that particular street was to create kind of this pedestrian — it's kind of a cross between the woonerf and a real street. It's very similar to the street I live on, Shore Drive, where there are no sidewalks. People walk down the street. It's kind of a rural and urban setting, together. This is what we were intending on that particular street. We do have a sidewalk on one side of the street, on the urban side. The other side that borders the forest is broken up by driveways and such where we access these lots so it really isn't as good a spot to walk and then the parking for those units, we expect to be in their driveways. Thank you." Adam Brockus, 1146 Perry Avenue: "Just looking at the plan today, only one really thing caught my mind and that was on the page (I don't have it in front of me) on the mixed -use area. It had a zero -foot setback it was requesting. I think if you look right there, it's at the corner of Schley and Wheaton Way and I would have concerns about the visibility that turning traffic would have to see other cars in just that particular area. The zero -foot setback should be OIL for the other three corners of that mixed -use area. Beyond that, I want to thank the staff of the Planning Commission; it looks like you've done a lot of good work in working on this and thank you very much." Commissioner Cockburn asked for any other public comment. Seeing none, he closed this portion of the Public Hearing. Chris recommended to the Commission to continue this item to the next regular meeting to give the Commissioners and the developer time to review the information and comments and come up with a plan that can be supported by both sides and to be able to make a recommendation that won't have a lot of qualifiers. Planning Commission Meeting November 15, 2005 Page 7 of 9 Commissioner Kennedy asked if the affordable housing development standards came from Staff. Chris replied that it derives from the basis for the publicly owned redevelopment site; developers choose how they want their development plan and set their standards, and in exchange, the Comprehensive Plan allows this when there is a public benefit such as the public housing need. Chris invited Dick Bruskrud to discuss this item. Dick explained three different housing types that could address this issue. These would be rental units, but would offer affordable housing for lower incomes in an owner - occupied neighborhood. Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf asked about the mixed -use area at Wheaton Way and Schley Boulevard. She wanted to know if both condominiums and apartments would be available there. Dick replied that there are only condominiums planned for that area with commercial on the corner. Dick talked about sprinkling the homes and the cost of that. He also explained that it was intended for the development to have narrower streets with parking on both sides to induce the residents to drive slower, reviewing the thought behind the narrow streets and their ability to accommodate emergency vehicles. Chris reminded Dick of the memorandum from the City Fire Chief outlining the responsibility of the City to follow the International Fire Code which requires 20 -foot wide streets with no exceptions. He explained that the Commissioners have to take that into consideration, as well as the knowledge that sprinklers could help solve the problem but the applicant may not want to proceed with that solution because of the cost, when they are deliberating on what action to take. Referring to an e -mail from Commissioner Streissguth, Commissioner Kennedy asked about the use of natural vegetation in the development. Dick said that a wildlife biologist had been consulted to ensure the correct vegetation will be used in the 60 -foot greenway. He reminded the Commissioners that the riparian area was not included in the East Park development and may change in character because East Park does not control it. A motion was made by Commissioner Kennedy and seconded by Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf to continue deliberation and discussion on the amendment to the East Park sub -area plan to the next regular meeting on December 26, 2005. Called for a vote: Cockburn: Yes; Friedberg -Nerf. Yes; Hoell: Yes; Kennedy: Yes. The motion carried. VI. Business Meeting A. Chairman's Report: None. B. Director's Report: Chris Hugo reported that some of the Planning staff attended the State Planning Conference in Bellevue earlier this month. A more complete report will be presented to the Commissioners at a later date. Planning Commission Meeting November 15, 2005 Page 8 of 9 The Mayor's office is still working on finding a suitable replacement for the vacant Planning Commission seat. Currently, the only applicants are from the Manette area and a more diverse commission is desired. C. Old Business: None D. New Business: Pam Wilson, City Staff, reminded the Commissioners that the 2006 elections would be taking place at the next regular meeting and to be thinking about nominations, etc. VII. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. The next Regular Meeting is scheduled for December 20, 2005. Respectfully submitted by: Chris ugo, Executive cretary Approved by: L--i- rr Streissgr / }f l�..Y }�� "..Ik . ➢1r Planning Commission Meeting November 15, 2005 Page 9 of 9