Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/15/2011 PACKET(DRAFT) AGENDA Regular Meeting - Bremerton Planning Commission (Subject to PC approval) February 15, 2011 5:30 P.M. th 345 – 6Street Meeting Chamber – First Floor I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL (quorum present) III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA IVAPPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 18, 2011 Regular meeting. o V. PUBLIC MEETING A. Call to the Public: Public comments on any item not on tonight’s agenda B. Public Hearing 1. A mend BMC 20.42 entitled “Definitions” and BMC 20.48 entitled “Off-Street related to electric vehicle infrastructure. Parking Requirements” (L. Sehmel, City Planner) VI. BUSINESS MEETING A. Chair Report: Chairman Hoell B. Director Report: Andrea Spencer. C.Old Business: D.New Business VII.ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is March 15, 2011 Planning Commission meeting packets are available on-line at www.ci.bremerton.wa.us DRAFT FOR APPROVAL ON 2/15/11 Minutes for City of Bremerton Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 18, 2011 I. Call to Order Commissioner Hoell The meeting was called to order by at 5:31 p.m. II. Roll Call Those present were: Commissioner Cockburn, Commissioner Hoell, Commissioner Streissguth, and Commissioner Tift. Commissioner Kosusko had resigned prior to this meeting. Quorum certified. Also present: Andrea Spencer, Nicole Ward, and Pam Bykonen (DCD staff), Dave Sherrard (Parametrix), and Barbara Nightingale (Washington State Department of Ecology). III. Elections Commissioner Streissguth nominated Commissioner Hoell for the position of Chairman. Commissioner Tift seconded the nomination. The vote was unanimous in favor of Commissioner Hoell as Chairman of the Bremerton Planning Commission for 2011. Commissioner Hoell nominated Commissioner Cockburn for the position of Vice-Chairman. Commissioner Streissguth seconded the nomination. The vote was unanimous in favor of Commissioner Cockburn as Vice-Chairman of the Bremerton Planning Commission for 2011. IV. Approval of Agenda Chairman HoellA motion was made by Commissioner Cockburn introduced the agenda. and seconded by Commissioner Streissguth to approve the agenda as presented . It was agreed by general consensus to approve the agenda as presented. IV. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the Regular Meeting held on November 16, 2010 were presented for approval by A motion was made by Commissioner Streissguth and seconded by Chairman Hoell. Commissioner Tift to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of November 16, 2010 as presented. Called for a vote: Commissioner Cockburn: Abstain; Commissioner Streissguth: Yes; Commissioner Tift: Yes; Chairman Hoell: Yes. The motion carried. VI. Public Meeting A. Call To The Public. (public comments on any item not on tonight’s agenda) Chairman Hoell asked if there were any comments from citizens. Seeing none, she closed this portion of the meeting. Planning Commission Meeting January 18, 2011 Page 1 of 3 DRAFT FOR APPROVAL ON 2/15/11 1. Workshop – Shoreline Master Program Update: Nicole Ward, City Planner , introduced Barbara Nightingale from the Washington State Department of Ecology Ms. Nightingale (DOE). gave a PowerPoint presentation on the DOE’s requirements for a successful Shoreline Master Program update. The guidelines for a Shoreline Master Program are in the 2003 Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173.26. These guidelines are applicable to all Washington state jurisdictions. Bremerton is within the guidelines set for due dates of each step in the update process. As Bremerton completes each step, documentation is sent to the DOE for review and comment; Bremerton then incorporates those comments into a revised document. The first step of a SMP update is the shoreline inventory and characterization; future regulations and designations are based on what is in the inventory and characterization. The goal of the Shoreline Master Program is “no net-loss” of shoreline use and function based on what level of functionality the shorelines are at present time. Once the inventory is complete, Bremerton can move forward to creating future planning, policies and regulations, and a restoration plan by using the inventory as well as technical memos created by Parametrix (SMP consultant). The final SMP document cannot be adopted until it is approved by DOE.The Bremerton SMP regulates not only shorelines within the city limits, but also in Bremerton’s Urban Growth Areas (UGA) that will eventually be annexed into the city. Ms. Nightingale showed several samples of shoreline within Bremerton, highlighting “difficult to classify” areas and offered examples of what methods other jurisdictions have utilized. She also reviewed items such as shoreline restoration incentives and alternatives, and new federal regulations for docks. It is anticipated that it will take at least ten years of monitoring, planning, and documenting to achieve the goal of no net- loss. Larry Taylor asked where someone could get the federal standards for docks and piers. Ms. Nightingale said they were available through the Army Corps of Engineers and she will provide the information to Nicole Floyd to post on the Bremerton shoreline website. Commissioner TiftMs. asked for examples of incentives to remove bulkheads. Nightingale gave an example of reducing a buffer requirement to expand a home in exchange for removing a bulkhead. She added that incentives are site specific. A member of the audience asked of neighbors could “trade” incentives. For example, one neighbor removes a bulkhead so the other could reduce a buffer. Ms. Nightingale said that if that was something that would work for those neighbors they could use it. Commissioner Tift asked if there were ever a monetary incentive to remove a bulkhead. Ms. Nightingale said there was no money available from the state, but there are other agencies like a land trust that might have that type of resource, especially if the bulkhead removal benefits the habitat for native species. It is also possible for local jurisdictions to create a conservation fund that landowners who don’t have the ability to mitigate their shorelines can pay into for use on sites that can be restored. Sunny Wheeler asked about the requirement of a 100-foot buffer when a lot depth may Ms. Nightingale be far less than 100 feet. explained that during the SMP update process, each jurisdiction has the ability to develop alternatives for property that would not meet Planning Commission Meeting January 18, 2011 Page 2 of 3 DRAFT FOR APPROVAL ON 2/15/11 Nicole the minimum buffer requirements. added that some jurisdictions determine the buffer requirement as a percentage of the lot depth. Chairman Hoell closed the Public Meeting. VI. Business Meeting A.Chairman’s Report:None . B. Director’s Report: Andrea Spencer, Director of Community Development, said that the February meeting will be a public hearing on zoning code amendments allowing electric vehicle charging stations in the city. She explained that the amendments were minor and didn’t require a full workshop prior to the public hearing. C. Old Business:None D. New Business: None. VII. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 6:14 p.m. The next Regular Meeting is scheduled for February 15, 2011. Respectfully submitted by: _______________________________________ Andrea L. Spencer, Executive Secretary Approved by: _______________________________________ Lois Hoell, Chairman Planning Commission Meeting January 18, 2011 Page 3 of 3 Commission Meeting Date: February 15, 2011 Agenda Item: V.B.1 CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing for Zoning Code amendments – supporting electric vehicle infrastructure. DEPARTMENT: Community Development PRESENTED BY: Lindsey Sehmel, City Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2009 the Washington State Legislature passed and the Governor signed into law SSHB 1481 an Act relating to electric vehicles (EV). This law mandates that affected jurisdictions plan for EV infrastructure and modify zoning regulations to allow the infrastructure to be built. SSHB 1481 “finds the development of electric vehicle infrastructure to be a critical step in creating jobs, fostering economic growth, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, reducing our reliance on foreign fuels and reducing the pollution of Puget Sound attributable to the operation of petroleum-based vehicles on streets and highways.” Electric vehicle infrastructure consists of facilities where EV motorists can plug a vehicle into an electrical source to recharge a depleted EV battery or exchange one for a battery that is fully charged and ready to go. There are two different levels of charging stations, with the most common at 110-220 volts, and rapid charging stations that would likely operate at 440+ volts. There will also be battery swap-out stations where vehicles would drive in with a depleted battery and have it exchanged for a fully charged battery. While charging stations that utilize standard voltage (110-220) could be sited in publicly owned parking lots, park and rides, grocery stores, etc., the rapid charging stations and battery swap-out stations are similar to gas stations and “quickie-lube” facilities. Currently the City of Bremerton does not specifically address electric vehicle charging or battery exchange facilities in its regulatory code. The City’s Comprehensive Plan does contain policy direction that supports the proposed regulatory code amendments (see policies T1, T3, T8A, T10A). The law requires that local government development regulations allow electric vehicle infrastructure as a use in all zones except those zoned for residential, resource, or critical areas. The City of Bremerton is required to adopt this amendment by July 1, 2011. It is important to note that the city’s code is silent on matters of EV infrastructure and therefore this infrastructure is not clearly permitted without a special Director’s code interpretation. An amendment is proposed now to identify the use specifically, and to make clear that the use is allowed without the need for any administrative code interpretation. To best integrate the new provision, and apply it broadly throughout the development regulations, staff recommends adding and amending text in the Definitions chapter of the BMC as well as adding a new section in the Off-Street Parking Requirements chapter. To see the Attachment I actual text amendments please review . The proposed amendments are shown in legislative format with additions “underlined” and deletions shown in “strikethrough.” STAFF RECOMMENDED MAIN MOTION: Move to recommend that City Council adopt the amendments to BMC 20.42 “Definitions” and Attachment I BMC 20.48 “Off-Street Parking Requirements” as detailed in , based on the Attachment II Findings and Conclusions presented in . ANALYSIS: City staff reviewed the requirements from RCW 35A.63.107 and the BMC for consistency. Staff concluded that the best approach for EV infrastructure to be included into the City’s commercial districts (Low Density Residential, Multiple Residential, City Utility Land, and Watershed zones are exempt from the mandate) was to complete the following three amendments: 1) Amend existing definitions and, 2) Add new definitions for BMC 20.42. and, 3) Include a new Attachment I Subsection into BMC 20.48, Off-Street Parking Requirements, () and the following discussion. 1) Amend existing definitions City staff analyzed all zones within the BMC for compatibility of EV infrastructure. The logical approach to include EV infrastructure appears to be minor modifications to the following definitions: Automobile Service & Repair Gas Station Transportation Facility The recommendations, if adopted, will amend the zones that allow automobile service and repair to also include battery exchange stations. The amendments will allow gas stations to also serve as electric vehicle rapid charging stations, and the zones that allow transportation facilities will now be allowed both battery charging stations and electric vehicle charging stations. Amending the above existing definitions allows for the majority of Bremerton’s required zones to be brought into compliance with the mandate. The remaining zones are covered by amendment three. 2) Add new definitions The following definitions will be added to BMC 20.42 for support and clarification of the amendments: Battery Charging Station Battery Exchange Station Electric Vehicle Charging Station Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Rapid Charging Station 3) Include a new Subsection into BMC 20.48 Companies and businesses will be allowed, through the proposed amendment in chapter 20.48 Attachment I “Off-Street Parking Requirements” (), to provide charging stations in their parking lots, if the business is an allowed use in an allowed zone. This amendment will provide coverage City wide (allowed use in allowed zone) for level one and two charging stations. Staff have reviewed these standards and compared them with the guidance document provided by Puget Sound Regional Council and the Department of Commerce. Staff concludes that the proposed amendments to the BMC are compliant with the requirements of adopting EV infrastructure as described by SSHB 1481. ATTACHMENTS Attachment I – Proposed Text Amendments Attachment II – Findings and Conclusions Attachment I Proposed Text Amendments 20.42.040 DEFINITIONS. (Amend existing definitions) "Automobile service and repair" means an establishment primarily engaged in repairing, maintaining, or servicing automobiles, including battery exchange station. "Gas station" means a land use involving the retail sale of gasoline or other motor vehicle fuel or oil, including electric vehicle rapid charging stations. Gas stations include self-service and full-service operations. "Transportation facility" means facilities in support of mass transit or multimodal forms of transportation, including transit stations, transit stops, taxicab stands, transportation services, bicycle facilities, battery charging stations, electric vehicle charging station, and similar. 20.42.040 DEFINITIONS. (New definitions) “Battery charging station” means an electrical component assembly or cluster of component assemblies designed specifically to charge batteries within electric vehicles, which meet or exceed any standards, codes, and regulations set forth by chapter 19.28 RCW and consistent with rules adopted under RCW 19.27.540. “Battery exchange station” means a fully automated facility that will enable an electric vehicle with a swappable battery to enter a drive lane and exchange the depleted battery with a fully charged battery through a fully automated process, which meets or exceeds any standards, codes, and regulations set forth by chapter 19.27 RCW and consistent with rules adopted under RCW 19.27.540. “Electric vehicle charging station” means a public or private parking space that is served by battery charging station equipment that has as its primary purpose the transfer of electric energy (by conductive or inductive means) to a battery or other energy storage device in an electric vehicle. An electric vehicle charging station equipped with Level 1 or Level 2 charging equipment is permitted outright as an accessory use to any principal use. “Electric vehicle infrastructure” means structures, machinery, and equipment necessary and integral to support an electric vehicle, including battery charging stations, rapid charging stations, and battery exchange stations. “Rapid charging station” means an industrial grade electrical outlet that allows for faster recharging of electric vehicle batteries through higher power levels and that meets or exceeds any standards, codes, and regulations set forth by chapter 19.28 RCW and consistent with rules adopted under RCW 19.27.540. Attachment I 20.48 “Off-Street Parking Requirements” (New subsection) 20.48.150 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS. Where parking is provided, for uses in allowed zones, electric vehicle charging stations are encouraged and shall comply with City Building Code and Washington State Electrical Code (WAC 296.46B). AttachmentII FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION Summary: Proposed amendments relate to the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) 20.42. Off Street Parking Requirements. Generally amendments are to allow electric vehicle infrastructure (EVI) within the City, as mandated by SSHB 1481. Additionally amendments are to clarify language about EVI and define the new language. I. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Project Description: Proposed amendments to the Zoning Code include the following: Amend the following definitions: o 1. Automobile service and repair 2. Gas station 3. Transportation Facility Add the following definitions: o 1. Battery charging station 2. Battery exchange station 3. Electric vehicle charging station 4. Electric vehicle infrastructure 5. Rapid charging station Add a new subsection in Off-Street Parking Requirements: Establish that where o parking is provided for uses in allowed zones, electric vehicle infrastructure is encouraged. 2. Procedural History 2.1 February 1, 2011 – SEPA DNS 2.2 February 5, 2011 – Notice of Public Hearing 2.3 February 15, 2011 - Planning Commission Public Hearing 3. Public Comment Individuals providing verbal testimony at Planning Commission public hearing: A. _______________________ B. _______________________ C. _______________________ 4. SEPA Determination A Determination of Non-Significance was issued on February 1, 2011, with a comment deadline of February 15, 2011, and an appeal deadline of March 2, 2011. No comments or appeals have been filed to date. AttachmentII 5. Consistency Zoning Code text amendments shall meet the decision criteria outlined in BMC 20.18.020 (d). The Planning Commission may recommend, and the City Council may adopt or adopt with modifications, an amendment to the Zoning Code text if the criteria outlined below are met. BMC 20.18.020(d)(1) allows text amendments if they are consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The amendments are minor and continue to uphold the objectives and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. These amendments do not change the intent or purpose of the Zoning Code. BMC 20.18.202(d)(2) allows text amendments if they are consistent with other City, State, and Federal codes, regulations and ordinances. Analysis: The proposed amendments to the Zoning Code do not conflict with any other regulations. II. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings above, Planning Commission concludes that the Zoning Code amendments meet the requirements in BMC 20.18.020, text amendments to the Zoning Code, and therefore recommends the adoption of the amendments to the Zoning Code. Respectfully submitted by: __________________________ Andrea L. Spencer, Executive Secretary Approved by: __________________________ Lois Hoell, Chair