Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 - Minutes March 4, 2025CITY OF PORT ORCHARD Planning Commission Minutes 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366 Phone: (360) 874-5533 • Fax: (360) 876-4980 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 4th, 2025 Hybrid Meeting — Council Chambers/Zoom Teleconference COMMISSIONERS: Present: Tyler McKlosky (Chair), Annette Stewart (Vice Chair), Paul Fontenot, Joe Morrison, Wayne Wright, Tiffiny Mitchell Absent: Stephanie Bailey STAFF: Community Development Director Nick Bond, Principal Planner Jim Fisk, Associate Planner Connor Dahlquist 1. CALL TO ORDER: Commissioner McKlosky called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There was one member of the public present in the chamber and none attending remotely. Chamber audience member Tyler Danielson provided comment on agenda item 5A, Parking and Circulation — LR24 — Code Amendment 01. Danielson shared with the Commissioners that parking code should be a recommendation instead of a requirement, as Port Townsend currently does. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM JANUARY 13, 2025: Commissioner McKlosky asked if the other commissioners reviewed the minutes from the January 13th, 2025 meeting and if anyone had any issues or proposed amendments. Seeing none, a motion was entertained to approve the minutes. Commissioner Stewart moved to approve the minutes and Commissioner Fontenot seconded. The motion passed unanimously with abstention from Commissioners Wright and Morrison. 5. BUSINESS ITEMS A. DISCUSSION: Parking and Circulation - LR24 - CODE AMENDMENT 01 Principal Planner Fisk presented amendment considerations to the City's parking and circulation standards in POMC Chapter 20.124. The amendment was introduced to Commissioners at the February meeting as a proactive measure to align the City's standards with the evolving State legislation, specifically Senate Bill 5184. If enacted the bill would limit off-street parking that cities with a population of over 20,000 residents could require for residential and commercial developments. Although Port Orchard is not yet at 20,000 residents, staff is addressing these requirements now as population nears that threshold. Staff is requesting the Commission's feedback on the proposed amendments. Following Commission comments, staff will proceed with a public hearing to gather additional public feedback before forwarding a recommendation to City Council. Fisk shared that comments from Commissioners within the next two weeks would be ideal so that revisions can be presented at next month's Planning Commission meeting. Commission Wright asked staff if they have assessed the net results of parking if proposed amendment was implemented. Fisk shared that the code amendment is not a parking maximum but allows developers to implement the amount of parking needed for their properties as they see fit using their knowledge of market conditions, instead of the City dictating an arbitrary number requirement. Wright clarified asking if this amendment would exacerbate current conditions of minimal available parking during large events downtown and shared concerns that it would disrupt walkability as residents would need to park farther way to find available spots. Director Bond shared that parking analysis is based on day-to-day function and not for special events. Daily parking availability in the downtown area is often open and ample. With the county's parking lot project happening nearby, it may present an opportunity for additional special event parking if it were needed. Director Bond shared that Planning may work with Public Works in setting standards of when on -street public parking is required or optional, as public parking is a public good. In all other aspects, the market will advise developers how much off-street parking they will need to satisfy their service. Fisk shared insight on the concern of walkability and that parking minimums tend to create large amounts of open pavement space which reduces buildable area and incentives single occupancy vehicles. Extensive surface parking lots create a hostile pedestrian experience which discourages the option of walking. Wright shared that parking lots serve as a great resource for community farmer's markets and other weekend events as well as an important resource for growing businesses as the city continues to grow. Fisk informed Commissioners that in the downtown area, there already is no ground floor use minimum parking requirements. Commissioner Mitchell thanked staff for the clarifications. Mitchell had similar concerns whether the city would have enough parking but now understands that the amendment addresses off-street parking and not on -street parking. Commissioner McKlosky agreed with the concerns brought up by the other Commissioners and that there is a balance to be met. McKlosky shared that the amendment offers enough flexibility that it may be able to adapt to the neighborhood that it was being applied to. Commissioner Fontenot shared support for the amendment and agrees with the state's push to limit off-street parking. Fontenot shared that he sees this amendment as being less restrictive than what is currently in place as it takes away a minimum mandate and allows flexibility for the developer. Fontenot also shared that off-street parking doesn't mean that it will be available for public parking when special events occur so it wouldn't be helpful to rely on them for that need. Commissioner McKlosky reminded Commissioners to get comments back to Fisk as soon as possible, preferably in the next two weeks. B. DISCUSSION: SEPA Threshold Levels - LR24 - CODE AMENDMENT 01 Principal Planner Fisk introduced the proposed amendment to the Port Orchard Municipal Code Title 20.160 to increase the SEPA threshold exemption for residential development from four dwelling units to nine dwelling units. The amendment aligns with the allowances established in the Page 2 of 5 Washington Administrative Code 197-11-800 and ensures consistency with the City's current short plat procedures which already allows for the creation of up to nine lots through an administrative approval process. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires environmental review for certain projects, however under state law, local laws may adopt higher categorical exemption thresholds to streamline permitting for small-scale residential projects that are unlikely to have significant environmental impacts. By increasing the exemption threshold, it would eliminate unnecessary review timelines and better align the City's SEPA and land division processes. This amendment is part of a broader effort to increase middle housing options by reducing permitting timelines. Staff is requesting the Commission's feedback on the proposed amendments. Following Commission comments, staff will proceed with a public hearing to gather additional public feedback in conjunction with the middle housing amendments. Fisk shared that comments from Commissioners within the next two weeks would be ideal so that revisions can be presented at next month's Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Wright asked staff what the typical acreage is for current four unit exemptions. Fisk shared that it does not concern the amount of acreage. Wright shared that critical areas and impact mitigation involved acreage and asked for clarity if there was an acreage issue for larger projects as SEPA review is reduced. Fisk shared that all critical areas are subject to the Critical Areas Ordinance 20.162. SEPA serves as a "safety net" for environmental impacts that city code would not capture, especially when city code was not as detailed in the past. Critical areas reports will still be required if a property is within 300 feet from a mapped critical area. Commissioners Fontenot and Morrison shared that they support the streamlined process to support new housing projects. C. DISCUSSION: Accessory Dwelling Units - LR24 - CODE AMENDMENT 05 Principal Planner Fisk presented amendment considerations to the City's accessory dwelling unit, or ADU, ordinance POMC 20.68 to ensure compliance with recently enacted state law through HB 1337. The proposed amendments allow property owners to build two ADUs where single-family homes are permitted. The amendment also established dimensional standards setting a maximum size of 1,000 square feet and a height of 24 feet, unless the principal home is subject to a lower height restriction. Detached ADUs may be built up to a lot line when adjacent to an alley. Design standards may also not be more restrictive than the principal dwelling unit. Existing structures may also be converted to additional dwelling units, even if they do not meet current zoning requirements. The proposed amendment also updates reducing parking requirements, impact fees, and street improvements which will allow for more accessibility in creating an ADU. ADUs will continue to be not allowed in critical areas and geologically hazardous areas. Commissioner Wright asked staff how utilities are tracked between an ADU and a primary residence. Director Bond shared that the City is responsible for stormwater, water, and sewer in most parts of the city. Current water and sewer standards allow for up to one ADU may be permitted on the same water and sewer connections and that a separate connection will be required for the second ADU. When an ADU is subdivided and ceases to be an accessory to a principal Page 3 of 5 unit, it will trigger the requirement of adding it as its own connection. Puget Sound Energy already installs a second meter on an ADU. Wright asked whether the city should make a comment in the amendment that if local HOAs restrict ADUs in their communities, that they are restricted outright rather than ignoring the HOA policy. Director Bond shared that the City should not be inserting itself into a civil matter between the HOA and a home owner as the state law is clear on ADU standards. Fisk shared that when staff is assisting a resident on a property question, they encourage the resident to always go check their CC&Rs as it is incumbent on the applicant to ensure that they are adhering to their agreed standards. Commissioner Mitchell asked if it would be beneficial to address the utility standards now to align with the proposed ADU ordinance amendments, instead of waiting in the future to do so. Director Bond shared that it is not a land use regulation and is through a separate approval process all together. Water systems plans are done every six years and sewer is every 10 years so the City will look at those rate policies in the next few years as they are updated. Current policies do not prevent an ADU being built right now. Council may prioritize those rate studies if they were interested in acquiring a consultant to assist. Commissioner Stewart asked whether or not there was a standard for physical organization of ADUs on a lot to prevent inconsistent aesthetics. Director Bond shared that there is not and it is prohibited to require additional design standards on an ADU per state lot so there is a possibility of having varying architectural styles and colors. Bond also shared that these projects are not cheap so it is not likely that they would end up looking out of place. Commissioner Fontenot shared that through his experience of living in an ADU, he has not had an issue with utility divisions. Fontenot also shared that there shouldn't be a concern with unaesthetically looking ADUs as the owners are wanting to provide an attractive product to a renter or buyer. Commissioner Morrison asked staff how many ADUs have been permitted in the City. Director Bond shared that outside of the large amount currently being built in McCormick Villages, only about four or three have been permitted. Morrison said there hasn't been a rush of ADU building so it is unlikely aesthetics will be an issue. D. DISCUSSION: 2025 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Principal Planner Fisk shared an information item to Commissioners, the 2025 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket. Staff encouraged Commissioners to review the docket to prepare for future discussion. Commissioner Wright asked if staff could provide hyperlinks to the docket items. Fisk shared that staff will create a webpage on the City's website for quick docket item access. E. DISCUSSION: DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director Bond shared that the Comprehensive Plan was not appealed during the appeal time period and that it is also in line for the Puget Sound Regional Council's certification as it was Page 4 of 5 recommended by the policy board to be approved by the full board. Commerce has also reviewed the plan and had no comments but are waiting for the development regulation update which has a part of the middle housing policy work being addressed currently and wrapped up in June. Bond also shared that the pre -approved ADU project is up on the City's website. In partnership with KRCC, anyone in the county is able to use a set of pre -approved ADU plans free of charge. By April full plans should be available to the public to use. ADJOURN: Commissioner McKlosky adjourned the meeting at 7:19 pm. Tyler -Klosky. Chair Nick Bond, Community Development Director Page 5 of 5