JANUARY, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JANUARY 25, 2005
1. Call to Order and Roll Call: Chair
Balen called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Chair Balen and Commissioners
Perry, Milligan, Cowie, Cutter and Cvar answered the roll. Commissioner Meatzie
arrived at 6:35 p.m. A quorum was present.
2. Citizen Comments and Concerns: None.
3. Commission Comments and Concerns: Commissioner Cutter noted recent events in
SE Asia have served to confirm the need for addressing tsunami concerns. The
Marine Science Center recently did an informal training, and he has DVD videos
of the training that he would be willing to provide to the City for citizen
review. Commissioner Cvar suggested providing a copy to the Library as well.
4. Minutes: The Commission considered the minutes from the December 13, 2004
meeting. Commissioner Cowie moved to approve the minutes as presented.
Commissioner Perry seconded, and the motion carried unanimously on a voice vote.
5. Correspondence: None.
6. Public Hearings:
A. Case File 3-CU-PC-04, Dahl and Dahl: Chair Balen opened
the Public Hearing, calling for abstentions, conflicts of interest, bias or ex
parte contact. None were announced.
Staff Report: Mr. Lewis reviewed the staff report, explaining
that the applicant was requesting a conditional use to erect a mini-storage
complex in the Industrial Park. Chair Balen asked about the minimum height of
the screening requirement, and Mr. Lewis responded 6 feet, either in low
vegetation or chain link fence. He also noted that he was unsure where water
runoff would be dissipated, maybe some sort of retention facility. Commissioner
Milligan asked about the zoning on the adjacent residential property, as there
is apparently a business conducted there.
Applicant presentation: Nic Dahl, Dahl & Dahl Inc., addressed
the Commission. He indicated that a catch basin would be installed to direct
runoff to the natural gully to the south of the property. The number of units
may change as buildings are installed, depending on things like fire distance
requirements and preferred sizes of storage units. He noted that they would like
to start with 250 units, and then adjust the unit sizes and numbers as demand
increases. There will be no uncovered open storage areas. The ground cover will
be rock until all buildings are in position, then the area will be paved. They
will not offer 24-hour access without special accommodations, the plan was that
the area would be locked up from 10:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m, and security cameras
will be installed. The office will be the same as for the transfer station, and
Mr. Dahl noted that there is a public restroom available at that facility.
Additionally, there will be porta-potties on site. Commissioner Cowie asked
about an estimate on the number of vehicles per day, and Mr. Dahl responded that
there were 5-12 vehicles per day at their Toledo site, where they have 145
units. Commissioner Cutter asked about the type of fencing being proposed, and
Mr. Dahl responded that they were anticipating on installing a cyclone fence
with 3 strands of barbed wire on top. They would put in vision strips on the
residential and the school side if requested. Mr. Dahl noted that this was a
quiet use of property, and would offer screening of the industrial park from the
school.
Chair Balen closed the Public Hearing and reopened the
Planning Commission meeting. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding landscaping.
Chair Balen noted that there is not a requirement for landscaping in the
Development Code, but it would be nice if some planting could be done in key
areas for the benefit of customers and neighbors. Commissioner Cowie commented
that increased traffic may eventually become an issue, not necessarily with this
application but with additional development of the area. Mr. Lewis responded
that the Transportation System Plan does recommend a new access to the
Industrial property, though it does not include a specific route. There are
several possibilities at this point, but no concrete plans. Commissioner
Milligan moved to approve the Dahl & Dahl application as written. Commissioner
Meatzie seconded. Commissioner Cvar offered an amendment to the motion, to
include the suggested conditions in the staff report. Commissioner Cutter
seconded the amendment. Mr. Lewis noted that the drive surfaces were not
addressed, but the applicant had stated in the presentation that once the
buildings were completed, the area would be paved. The City’s Public Works
department will also ensure that the drainage is installed properly. The
amendment carried unanimously on a voice vote. The main motion, as amended, then
carried unanimously on a voice vote. Mr. Lewis asked the will of the Commission
in regard to the findings, and consensus of the Commission was that if there
were changes in the proposed conditions it would be good to bring the findings
back to a subsequent meeting for approval, but if no changes are proposed, the
Chair could sign the findings upon completion.
B. Case File 4-CU-PC-04: Johnston/Joy Conditional Use: Chair
Balen opened the Public Hearing, calling for abstentions, conflicts of interest,
bias or ex parte contact. None were announced.
Staff Report: Mr. Lewis reviewed the staff report, explaining
that these applicants were also requesting a conditional use to erect a
mini-storage complex in the Industrial Park.
Applicant Presentation: Dan Johnston addressed the
Commission, noting that they were planning to leave some vegetation along with
the screening fence, and will also try to put in other amenities such as rock or
brick work on the sides of the buildings facing Kathleen Street. They were
proposing a gravel driving surface at present, though eventually it will be at
lease partially paved. They were proposing 24-hour access, as there would be a
manager’s residence on-site and good security. They were planning on building in
two phases, with 180 units in the first and 120 units in the second. They were
proposing some open storage for boats or RV’s, but only a small area, which will
be screened by existing vegetation.
Chair Balen closed the public hearing and reopened the
Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Cutter moved to approve the
conditional use permit with the proposed conditions in the staff report and
added two requests, that the open storage area be reasonably obscured by
vegetation and that the applicant use attractive building material on the
Kathleen Street side of the buildings, as offered in the presentation.
Commissioner Cvar seconded. Following a brief discussion, the motion carried
unanimously on a voice vote. It was noted that the findings could be expedited.
C. Case File 2-S-94 (2005 Amendment): Modification to
Whispering Woods Subdivision: Chair Balen opened the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Perry noted he is one of the surrounding property owners, but did
not feel it would particularly bias him. The applicant indicated that he had no
problem with Commissioner Perry’s participation in the hearing. There were no
other declarations of bias, conflict of interest, or ex parte contact.
Staff Report: Mr. Lewis reviewed the staff report, noting
that the applicant was asking for a modification and time extension to the
tentative approval of the subdivision. He explained that the application had
submitted a revised plot plan and was also asking to reduce the sidewalk
requirement to one side. Commissioner Perry noted that if this were a new
application, the requested modification to the sidewalk requirement might be
considered a variance, and wondered if the Commission had the authority to grant
a variance at this stage. Commissioner Cutter explained that the original
application predated the sidewalk requirement, and Mr. Lewis clarified that the
sidewalk requirement was a condition of the 2002 extension.
Applicant’s Presentation: Buzz Schulte addressed the
Commission. He clarified that the subdivision was initially approved with 62
lots, which was the actual density allowed under current zoning requirements. He
had voluntarily changed it from 62 to 48 lot for several reasons, mostly because
he felt it would not be appropriate for the neighborhood or property. The plan
before the Commission was the result of meeting with surrounding property owners
to ensure their concerns were addressed. It provided for more open space and a
buffering zone between existing developed properties and the proposed
development. Mr. Schulte explained that the engineer had erred slightly in the
rendition of the plan, as Lot 25 would also contain open space. Mr. Schulte
noted that a homeowner’s association will be set up to ensure the open spaces
are maintained, and that his intent was to maintain as many of the existing
trees as possible. He would also agree to prohibit manufactured homes, as
stick-built homes would be more adaptable to the site conditions. The request
for the reduction in the sidewalk requirement was to allow for a more rural
nature, and Mr. Schulte pointed out that there were no other sidewalks in the
area. The original subdivision, as approved, did not have any sidewalks. Mr.
Schulte explained that he had originally offered to assist in the realignment of
Norwood Drive but had never been able to ascertain whether the City had the
right to use a particular piece of property through which the alignment could
have taken place. During a previous approval process the Commission at the time
had decided they had no need to hold him to the commitment to realign the
street. Mr. Schulte’s latest offer to the City was to designate $500 per lot
when sold to either the realignment process or to a fund for parks if the City
obtains funding for the realignment from another source. Mr. Schulte assured the
Commission that he will develop CC & R’s which will be recorded to ensure that
the proposed subdivision will be developed as he has outlined, regardless of
whether he personally develops it or not.
Alan Canfield noted that he had previously spoken in
opposition to Mr. Schulte’s plan, but Mr. Schulte had revised his plans in
response to the concerns of the neighborhood. Mr. Canfield indicated that he
heartily supported the revised plan, and felt that he spoke for the other
neighbors in his endorsement. Howard Uhl, Charles Church and Shirley Hanes all
spoke of concerns regarding the additional traffic that would be generated as a
result of this development. Chair Balen noted that increased traffic might
promote the need for the City to look at correcting the situation. Mr. Lewis
informed the Commission that the City has applied for a Scenic Byways grant
specifically to address the intersection of Norwood, Starr and Highway 101. The
City will find out toward the end of February whether it was successful in
obtaining the grant. Doug Robinson added his support to the statement from Mr.
Canfield, and noted that he felt the issue of the intersection was not something
which could be solved by the Planning Commission. Bruce Bishard expressed
concern regarding the availability of water and sewer to serve the proposed
subdivision, and Public Works Director McClintock assured him that the capacity
of the existing infrastructure was adequate.
Chair Balen closed the Public Hearing and reopened the
Planning Commission meeting for deliberation. A lengthy discussion ensued. The
applicant withdrew the request for sidewalk modification. Commissioner Cutter
moved to approve the request with the following conditions: sidewalks on both
sides, and a one-year extension to April 5, 2006 as per the current code
requirements. Commissioner Milligan seconded. Commissioner Cvar moved to amend
the motion to include leaving as many trees as possible and not allowing
manufactured homes. Commissioner Milligan seconded the amendment. Discussion
ensued. It was determined that the Commission could not regulate site-built vs
manufactured homes, but they could encourage the developer to implement CC&R’s
that could regulate them. Following this discussion, Commissioner Cvar withdrew
his motion, Commissioner Milligan withdrew her second. Mr. Lewis noted that he
will bring the findings back to the next Commission meeting for approval, and
will include all current conditions that are placed on the subdivision from
previous planning actions. The motion to approve the request then carried, with
Commissioner Cvar dissenting. Mr. Schulte indicated that he will resubmit a
corrected plot plan, and will develop and implement the CC&R’s as stated.
7. Discussion/Action Items:
A. Planning Report: Mr. Lewis distributed his written report.
B. Memo re Term Expirations: It was noted that the terms for
Commissioners Meatzie, Milligan and Cvar were expired. Commissioners Meatzie and
Milligan consented to serve for another term. Commissioner Cvar declined, but
indicated he would serve until a replacement was found.
C. Other issues: None.
8. Adjournment: At 9:25 p.m., there being no further business to come before the
Commission, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Reda A. Quinlan
City Clerk
APPROVED by the Planning Commission this 22nd day of February, 2005.
SIGNED by the Chair this 22nd day of February, 2005.
Samuel Balen, Chair