HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/20/2005 MINUTESMinutes for
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
September 20, 2005
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Streissguth at 5:34 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Those present were: Commissioner Cockburn, Commissioner Friedberg- -Nerf, Commissioner
Kosusko, and Commissioner Streissguth. Quorum certified.
III. Approval of Agenda
Commissioner Streissguth introduced the agenda. 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 August 16, 2005 were presented for approval by
Commissioner Streissguth. A motion Was made by Commissioner Kosusko and seconded by
Commissioner Cockburn to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of August 16, 2005, as
presented. Approved unanimously by general consensus; 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:
1. Zoning Package #5: Chris Hugo, Director of Community Development,
introduced Zoning Package #5, noting that this was the last package to be presented to
City Council for workshop the following week. Chris also reminded the Commissioners
that it had been hoped to have this package to a public hearing for City Council by
October 19, 2005, but because of the 60 -day notification to state agencies, the final
adoption of the zoning proposal will not take place until December.
City Planners, Geoffrey Wentlandt and Robert Grumbach, gave the Staff Report on
the proposed zoning Package 45 to forward to City Council for approval. Copies of the
Planning Commission Meeting September 20, 2005 Page 1 of 7
Staff Report had been distributed to the Commissioners prior to the meeting. It was
decided to cover all chapters before opening the forum to public discussion.
Geoff began by explaining the summary of public comments which had been distributed
to the Commissioners; he gave an overview of the text with Community Development's
response for each, and asked if the Commissioners had any questions. Commissioner
Kosusko asked for clarification of the fence /wall portion, which Geoff provided.
Regarding dry boat stacking in the Marine Industrial Zone, Commissioner Kosuslco
proposed that a greater set -back from residential zones be included in the conditions of a
Conditional Use Permit. Robert Grumbach, City Planner, explained that set -back
requirements are addressed through the Conditional Use Permit process.
Geoff started the staff report with a brief review of the substantive changes made to
Chapter 20.60, R -10 Zone, Residential Infill Density, Chapter 20.44, General
Development Standards, and Chapter 20.46, Special Development Standards.
Commissioner Streissguth noted that in Chapters 20.60 and 20.74, plus a third chapter,
there was still a reference to a utility definition that required deletion from the text.
Geoff also summarized maximum/minimum front yard setbacks and what percentage of
the building would have -to be within that setback. Chris gave an explanation of how
lighting requirements to regulate potential light pollution would be enforced.
Using the proposed zoning map, Geoff began discussing the Oyster Bay area which is
proposed to be zoned NCC (Neighborhood Center Core). He outlined several options to
handle the conflict of having a Neighborhood Center along Kitsap Way.
Geoff moved on to the Park Avenue area of the proposed zoning map. He indicated there
had been comments from the Commissioners regarding the appropriateness of the area
being designated Commercial Corridor and offered two alternatives to correct the
proposed designation. Geoff also touched on a mapping error near Tony's Pizza on
Kitsap Way.
There were no comments from the Commissioners on the staff report.
Commissioner Streissguth opened public comment on this item.
Tom Houha, Architect: "My clients are Rob and Audrey Powell, and Audrey Powell is
here with me today. The reason we're here is because the Powells purchased a piece of
property approximately twenty years ago that had a gas station on it and they've owned it
since then. For seventeen years, the property has been vacant; the gas station was torn down
some time ago and basically it's been just been sitting idle. During that twenty years the
zoning has ultimately become `Neighborhood Business' and the Powells would like to do a
[sic] espresso stand with a drive -up window and I'm sure everyone knows that Neighborhood
Business would not allow a drive -up window. But we're wanting to propose it to you
because we think that it would be a very worthwhile thing to build there. That may wean that
we might be asking for a rezone to be `General Business'. The bottom line, the basic reason
why we'd like to do this is because it would be a definite improvement to the existing
situation. Right now, that property has been basically a nuisance; it's been attracting some
people to just dump wrecked cars. I guess I could tell you where it is first: it's on North
Planning Commission Meeting September 20, 2005 Page 2 of 7
Callow Avenue at 15 Street. Most of you will know that Callow Avenue has all kinds of
commercial up and down it and this is at the north end of that commercial strip. The
neighbor immediately to the north of our property is a grocery store right about where Callow
makes a kind of a dog -leg, there's a kind of a tee intersection. The owners, Rob and Audrey
Powell, have done all they can to get some consensus of the neighborhood - how they feel
about this -- and they've ended up with a petition, basically, that's been signed by nearly 400
of the local homeowners, in addition to some property owners including the nearest
commercial business which is the grocery store immediately north of us. And they've all
said this would be something that would be definitely good for the neighborhood. They think
it's going to help clean up what is now a very kind of unsightly vacant lot, and rather than
having it sit idle and empty for another seventeen years, this way the Powells can actually
start a business. The building will be a twelve foot by twenty -four foot drive -up espresso
stand, so we're talking a very small footprint. Right now there are three existing curb cuts on
that property. The property is, for the most part, paved with asphalt right now and there's
three curb cuts and we hope we only really need to use two of them so in a sense we'd be
reducing the amount of kind of traffic circulation /pedestrian conflict. It seems to most people
that that would be something that would be worthwhile. and beneficial for that
neighborhood."
Jim Fee, 2708 — 15 Street: "I own Rob's QuickStop [on 15 I've been there about a year
and I'm one of the collectors of signatures on this informal petition. Now I've looked at that
lot for this whole year. I've taken some steps, including having cars towed away, policed the
area. About 30 years ago I was a police officer. I guess it comes back after a while, in a
sense. I've talked to other business owners; that little strip there, we have a beauty shop, we
have Mike's Meats, we have a union that just moved in, we have a young fellow and his wife
that are starting a full- service restaurant, all of it complementary to the neighborhood. And
on this neighborhood, you know, it's kind of unique, almost like a separate city up there in a
lot of ways. People that are residing there come through and they stop at my store; it's their
regular routine in the morning — coffee, conversation -- like it used to be in another time. I
grew up in Bremerton; I remember. I'm almost 60 years old now so I have kind of a long
memory. We have a situation I thought about; you know, a lot of people are concerned about
traffic going in and out of there, but it might actually divert some of the traffic away from the
southern part of Callow, also. It's pretty darn congested down there. They might stop at my
store; they might get their coffee in this proposed coffee stand; they might go get their hair
cut at the beauty shop, so on and so forth, and go eat at the restaurant. It would kind of
diversify traffic, defray it in a better manner, I would say. I've talked to people that have
come into the store, that have signed this petition I had laid out for them to sign, and it's, for
the most part, 99% has been favorable. They want something else there that would
complement that neighborhood and the other businesses. So it's a desired thing. I believe in
that neighborhood enough to have invested there. I'll tell you straightforward, I had to lay
out a cashier's check for a little over $200,000.00 to get into that store, and I plan on staying
there about ten years or more if I can. Until I poop out. By that time, of course, I'm going to
be retirement eligible. There's not much more I can say except I think it's a good idea, I
really do. And I don't think it'll hurt at all to have it there; it'd probably help us. Though,
God willing, and you folks willing with Him, I hope we see it there soon. Thank you."
Mark Warns, 19631 — 2' Avenue NE, Poulsbo: "I'm half of the Mark and Katarina Warns
team that was mentioned .. people had stopped in at the Planning Department. We own a
piece of property located at 2838 — 36 Clare Avenue; it's a vacant lot in East Bremerton and
it's on the west side of Clare, and I wanted to talk to you today about zoning. It's been
Planning Commission Meeting September 20, 2005 Page 3 of 7
down - zoned; under the new zoning it'll become R -10 where previously it was zoned multi-
family. It's a .47 acre chunk and [staff brought up the zoning map of the Clare Avenue area
on the screen] it's the second one up on the right. If you take a look at those you'll see a lot
that's been subdivided on the right -hand side, the east side of Clare Avenue and it's the next
lot above it. The property is really defined by two, what you could call services of
neighborhood pollution let's say. On the east side of the property there's the Warren Avenue
right -of -way, and the noise associated with that. On the west side of the property is the main
electrical transmission line for the southwest part of East Bremerton. The property is roughly
105 feet wide and 200 feet deep, and, under R -10 zoning, would be eligible, and I'm going to
confine my comments to the R -10 zoning, would be eligible for approximately four units.
But there's apparently something having to do with other densities throughout the
neighborhood. If you take a look at the properties across the street — first, the property to the
south is subdivided, it was a short -plat on a lot that's smaller than our size lot, and that's
currently being used by two duplexes, so that would support the four units for the half acre
that we have. But the properties on the opposite side of the street, I would ask you to
consider a change to your neighborhood zoning; to consider actual utility. The unoccupied
portion to the west of Clare Avenue is a canyon. Those properties that are on the west side of
Clare drop off into that canyon. Although those lot sizes vary from 1I6, let's say, to a quarter
of an acre, they are actually used only on the eastern half of those properties so the actual
utility of them is between 1112 of a [sic] acre for a lot size and 118 of an acre for a lot size. It
would also support the use that we would like to put our property to. I didn't have time to
put together this wonderful display, and I don't know if it's appropriate to step forward to
talk about what we would like to do on the property. I have a drawing ..."
At this time, Commissioner Streissguth reminded Mr. Warns he was out of time for
verbal comments, but if he had a drawing lie would like the Commissioners to consider,
he could submit it to them. Mr. Warns gave a brief description of what the drawing
depicts and explained that they would like to construct a development similar to The
Narrows Condominiums.
Commissioner Streissguth asked for further comments. Seeing none, she closed this
portion of the meeting.
Moving on to discussion and deliberation, it was decided to keep text and reap issues
separate with staff responding to public comments. Commissioner Kosusko noted that
the two public comments regarding zoning were clearly addressed in the Comprehensive
Plan and a change in zoning would require a change in the Comprehensive Plan. Chris
reminded everyone that a change- to the Neighborhood Center designation for that
particular area would dictate a change in all areas in the City designated Neighborhood
Center. Also, making an amendment to the zoning code or the Comprehensive Plan
could potentially go against the City's GMA. Commissioner I {osusko suggested that
the property owners research what is allowed in the proposed zoning and alter their
development plans to comply with it. Discussion continued along the lines of zoning
density and potential resolutions for existing lots as well as future lots gained through
annexation. Chris recommended that no major changes regarding the Comprehensive
Plan or the proposed zoning map be made at this late a date; staff will note concerns and
work on changes after adoption.
Planning Commission [Meeting September 20, 2005 Page 4 of 7
Commissioner Streissguth began with the section, Definitions. There was discussion of
the term "building line ". It was thought that having the word "allowable" after the term
would add clarification. It was decided to leave the term as is.
Commissioner Kosusko asked for clarification of "bay window ", specifically what the
maximum height would be. Staff reported that there was no maximum height
requirement, only that a bay window could only extend into a front or rear yard.
There was a staff recommendation to revise the definitions of "minimum density" and
"maximum density" to read "DENSITY, MINIMUM means the minimum number of
required dwellings per net buildable acre as stated for each zone. Where not specified in
a zone chapter, no minimum density shall apply" and "DENSITY, MAXIMUM means
the maximum number of dwellings allowed per the net buildable acre as stated for each
zone. Where not specified in a zone chapter, no maximum density shall apply ".
For the definition for "maximum setback ", it was decided to add "... or the height of the
building, whichever is less."
Commissioner Streissguth noted that the word "special' still appeared where there is
mention of a Conditional Use Permit and needed to be deleted for consistency.
In Chapter 20.46.020 it was decided to strike §20.46.020(b)(2) and move it to
§20.46.020(g).
Commissioner Streissguth noted that in §20.48.060(1), it had been previously
determined that the phrase ". except as modified per §20.48.050" would be added.
Commissioner Kosusko asked about §20.52.050(1). The Commissioners decided that ".
. other than those identifying the franchise product" would be added. There was some
discussion regarding signage on a vehicle. Chris suggested returning to that subject after
adoption.
The discussion moved to side and rear yard setbacks in the District Center Core. The
Commissioners decided to change §20.70.060(b) & (c) be changed from twenty (20) feet
to ten (10) feet.
Moving on to mapping issues, the Commissioners discussed the alternatives provided by
staff to deal with the area near Oyster Bay. It was decided to pursue Alternative #C as an
interim pleasure.
Commissioner Kosusko moved on to the Park Avenue area of the proposed zoning map.
Kitsap Community Resources is interested in building a new office building in that area
with residential as a possible secondary use. The proposed zoning designation of
Commercial Corridor does not support any residential use, so Commissioner Kosusko
suggested Business Core. It was agreed to make that change.
The discussion turned to a lot on Wheaton Way which is extremely deep in comparison
to surrounding lots. There was concern of what type of development would occur on a
Planning Commission Meeting September 20, 2005 Page 5 of 7
lot that deep, especially how it could affect the surrounding residential neighborhoods. It
was decided that the sentence, "Non- residential uses shall not extend beyond 200 feet
from the west side of Wheaton Way" would be added to §20.64.070.
A motion was made by Commissioner Kosusko and seconded by Commissioner
Friedberg -Nerf to recommend moving forward to City Council for consideration
and recommendation to adopt Zoning Package #5 with the following amendments:
1. Definitions for Maximum Density, Minimum Density, and setbacks, per
staff recommendation;
2. Chapter 20.46..020 — strike subsection (a)(3)(b) and move to subsection (g);
3. Remove the word "Special" from the Condition Use language;
4. Chapter 20.48.060(h) — add the language, "except as modified per
§20.48.050 ";
5. Chapter 20.52.050(i) — add the language, "other than those identifying the
franchise product ";
6. Chapter 20.60.020(k) and 20.74.020(dd) — strike both;
7. Chapter 20.70.060(b) & (c) change rear and side yard setbacks from
twenty (20) feet to ten (10) feet;
8. Chapter 20.62.140(g) — -add the language, "residential as a secondary use ".
Called for a vote: Cockburn: Yes; Friedberg -Nerf: Yes; Kosusko: Yes; and Streissguth:
Yes. The motion carried.
A motion was made by Commissioner Kosusko and seconded by Commissioner
Cockburn to recommend moving forward to City Council for consideration and
recommendation to adopt the Draft Zoning Map with the following amendments:
1. Staff is to pursue Alternative #C for the Oyster Bay area;
2. Change the Park Avenue area from Commercial Corridor (CC) zone to
Business Core (BC) zone.
Called for a vote: Cockburn: Yes; Friedberg -Nerf. Yes; Kosusko: Yes; and Streissguth:
Yes. The motion carried.
Because of an accidental omission of a portion of the amendments, a motion was made
by Commissioner Cockburn and seconded by Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf to
rescind the approved Zoning Package 45 in its entirety and all amendments.
Called for a vote: Cockburn: Yes; Friedberg -Nerf: Yes; Kosusko: Yes; and Streissguth:
Yes. The motion carried
A motion was made by Commissioner Kosusko and seconded by Commissioner
Friedberg -Nerf to recommend moving forward to City Council for consideration
and recommendation to adopt Zoning Package #5 with the following amendments:
1. Definitions for Maximum Density, Minimum Density, and Setbacks,
Maximum, per staff recommendation;
2. Chapter 20.46..020 — strike subsection (a)(3)(b) and move to subsection
20.46.020(g);
3. Remove the word "Special" from the Condition Use language;
Planning Commission Meeting September 20, 2005 Page 6 of
4. Chapter 20.48.060(h) — add the language, "except as modified per
§20.48.050 ";
5. Chapter 20.52.050(i) — add the language, "other than those identifying the
franchise product ";
6. Chapter 20.60.020(k) and 20.74.020(dd) — strike both;
7. Chapter 20.70.060(b) & (c) — change rear and side yard setbacks from
twenty (20) feet to ten (10) feet;
8. Chapter 20.62.140(g) —.add the language, "residential as a secondary use"
9. Chapter 20.64,070 — add the language, "Nan - residential uses shall not
extend beyond 200 feet from the street frontage Wheaton Way ", per staff
recommendation;
Called for a vote: Cockburn: Yes; Friedberg -Nerf: Yes; I {osusko: Yes; and Streissguth:
Yes. The motion carried
VI. Business Meeting
A. Chairman's Report: Commissioner Streissguth reported that the City Council
unanimously approved Zoning Package 94.
B. Director's Report: Chris Hugo introduced the new Planning Manager, Andrea Spencer
and the newest City Planner, Nicole Ward. Clu also thanked Robert Grumbach for his
work here in Bremerton. Robert will be moving on to a Senior Planner position for the
City of Edgewood.
C. Old Business: None.
D. New Business: Commissioner Streissguth presented Robert Grumbach with a
certificate of appreciation.
VIL Adjournment
Meeting was adjourned at 8:43p.m. The next Meeting is scheduled for October 18, 2005.
Respectfully submitted by:
Chris Hugo, Executive Sec etary
r
d by:
.r —_f! air � �
Streissguth, Chair
Planning Commission Meeting September 20, 2005 Page 7 of 7