029-10 - Ordinance - Adopting the 2010 Amendments to the Comp PlanIntroduced by:
Development Director
Requested by:
Development Director
Drafted by:
Development Director
Introduced:
December 14, 2010
Adopted:
December 14, 2010
ORDINANCE NO. 029-10
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2010 AMENDMENTS TO THE
PORT ORCHARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PURSUANT TO THE
STATE OF WASHINGTON'S GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT
WHEREAS, with the passage of the Washington State Growth Management Act in 1990
(GMA), Chapter 36.7oA RCW, developing communities are required to adopt a comprehensive
plan that outlines strategies to accommodate the needs of a growing population. It is intended for
this comprehensive plan to be updated to reflect the changes in growth and boundaries of that
growth including changes to zoning; and
WHEREAS, in December 2oo8, the City Council adopted, via Ordinance 042-08, a major
update to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Port Orchard and its urban growth area pursuant
to the requirements set forth in the GMA; and
WHEREAS, State law requires that each city planning under the GMA must periodically
review, and, if needed, revise its comprehensive plan and development regulations to ensure
compliance with the GMA; and
WHEREAS, the City of Port Orchard seeks to be in compliance with the goals, policies,
and procedures of the Growth Management Act; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the GMA, non -emergency amendments to a comprehensive plan
can be considered no more than once each year; and
WHEREAS, both site -specific and city-wide amendments have been submitted to the
City for its consideration; and
WHEREAS, the City of Port Orchard has actively sought citizen input utilizing several
public informational media, including stakeholder and subcommittee group meetings, flyers,
press releases and newspaper articles, in addition to the regularly noticed public meetings and
public hearings; and
WHEREAS, Port Orchard issued an Environmental Checklist, signed on September 1o,
2010, pertaining to the 2010 amendments to the Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 17, 2olo, a Determination of NonSignificance was issued for
the adoption of the 2010 amendments to the Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan. The appeal
period closed at 4:30 PM on October 1, 201o, and no appeals were filed; and
Ordinance No. 029-10
Page 2 of 32
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2010, Port Orchard issued proposed 2olo amendments to
the Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan. The document was posted on the cityofportorchard.us web
page and made available to the public and agencies; and
WHEREAS, on October 12, 201o, notice of all 2olo amendments to the Comprehensive
Plan was sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce at least sixty days before the
amendments were adopted, in accordance with RCW 36.7oA.1o6; and
WHEREAS, after proper notice, the Port Orchard Planning Commission conducted a
public hearing on Monday, November 15, 2010, in accordance with RCW 35.63.100, considered
public testimony, and after discussion and deliberation recommended approval of the proposed
2010 Comprehensive Plan amendments.
WHEREAS, after proper notice, the Port Orchard City Council conducted a public
hearing on Tuesday, December 14, 2olo, and considered public testimony regarding the proposed
2010 amendments to the Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the proposed 2010 amendments as set forth in this
ordinance are consistent with the Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan the Countywide planning
policies, and the goals and policies. of the Growth Management Act; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the cumulative effects of the proposed 2010
amendments is not significant and the 2olo amendments will not adversely affect public health,
safety, or welfare in any significant way; now, therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION i. In support of the actions taken in this ordinance, the City Council hereby
adopts as its own the following findings and conclusions:
1. The recitals set forth above;
2. The findings, conclusions, and analysis set forth in Planning Commission
Resolution No. 007-10 and the findings and conclusions set forth in the Hearing
Examiner's Recommendation dated August 18, 2oio, attached as Exhibit A,
regarding the Coy site -specific land use re -designation and rezone request; and
3. The findings and conclusions set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No.
oo8-1o, attached as Exhibit B regarding the city-wide amendments.
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby amends the text and map of the Port Orchard
Comprehensive Plan by approving and adopting the following:
Ordinance No. 029-10
Page 3 of 32
r. The re -designation of the Coy property located at 1710 Pottery Avenue from the
comprehensive land use designation of Low Density Residential to Commercial and
from the R4.5 zone to the Business Professional zone, as depicted in Exhibit C.
2. The revisions to the Comprehensive Plan text and Land Use and Zoning Maps as set
forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. oo8-ro, attached as Exhibit B and
depicted in Exhibit C.
SECTION q. The 2010 Comprehensive Plan text and map amendments, zoning
designations, and appendices shall be effective January r, 2011.
SECTION 4. If any sentence, section, provision, or clause of this ordinance or its
application to any person, entity or circumstance is for any reason held invalid or
unconstitutional, the remainder of the ordinance, or the application of the provision to other
persons, entities, or circumstances is not affected.
SECTION S . This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after posting
and publication as required by law. A summary of this Ordinance may be published in lieu of
the entire ordinance, as authorized by State Law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Port Orchard, APPROVED by the Mayor and
attested by the Clerk in authentication of such passe
A ST:
Patricia J. Kir atrick, MC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Gregory A. a by, CH Attornev
Sponsored by:
Rob Putaansuu, Councilmember
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
CITY OF PORT ORCHARD
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 007-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF THE 2010 AMENDMENT, REQUESTED
BY KIM COY, TO THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WHEREAS, The Growth Management Act (GMA), RCW 36.70A requires that each city planning
under GMA must periodically review, and, if needed, revise their comprehensive plans and
development regulations every seven years to ensure compliance with the Growth Management
Act; and
WHEREAS, with the passage of the Washington State Growth Management Act in 1990,
developing communities are required to submit a comprehensive plan that outlines strategies to
accommodate the needs of a growing population. It is intended for this comprehensive plan to
be updated to reflect the changes in growth and boundaries of that growth including changes to
zoning; and
WHEREAS, in December 2008, the City of Port Orchard has adopted a Comprehensive Plan
update to the June 1995 Comprehensive Plan to satisfy the requirements set forth in the Growth
Management Act to implement the goals and objectives of the Cites Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Port Orchard seeks to be in compliance with the goals, policies, and
procedures of the Growth Management Act; and
WHEREAS, Kim Coy, submitted a timely request for an amendment to the City of Port Orchard
Comprehensive Plan for a property at 1710 Pottery Avenue to a Land Use Designation of
Commercial and seeks to be in compliance with the goals, policies, and procedures of the Growth
Management Act; and
WHEREAS, after proper notice, The Port Orchard Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on Monday, November 15th, 2010 and considered public testimony to review, discuss,
and deliberate on the proposed draft Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Planning Commission Resolution 007-10 Page 1 of 3
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON,
MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO THE PORT ORCHARD
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
1. This amendment was developed in consideration of the goals of the GMA for the
development of local comprehensive plans, as codified at RCW 36.70A.020, and reflect a
careful balancing of these goals within the local conditions of the City of Port Orchard.
2. This amendment was developed from and is consistent with the Kitsap Countywide
Planning Policies (CPPs).
3. The Planning Commission bases its finding and conclusions on all the testimony, oral or
written, and exhibits submitted to the Commission. Any finding that should be deemed a
conclusion, and any conclusion that should be deemed a finding, is hereby recommended
as such.
4. The Planning Commission has considered the following criteria consistent with the Port
Orchard Municipal Code and makes the following findings;
a. Circumstances in Port Orchard have substantially changed since the adoption of
the 2008 Comprehensive Plan;
b. The applicant has requested a Comprehensive Plan designation change fof the site
located at 1710 Pottery Avenue.
c. During the testimony in front of the Hearing Examiner the applicant is requesting a
concurrent zoning designation of Business Professional,
d. Business Professional zoning is a transitional zoning designation between
Residential and Commercial and is appropriate for the site.
e. New information is available that was not considered in the adoption of the 2008
Comprehensive Plan;
f. The proposed amendment is consistent with or supports other plan elements
and/or development regulations.
g. The proposed amendment reflects the goals, objectives, and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan;
h. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Countrywide Planning Policies;
and
i. The proposed amendment is compliant with the requirements of the Growth
Management Act.
BASED UPON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY;
1. The Port Orchard Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend approval to the
City Council of the 2010 Kim Coy, fn: CA35-10, Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan change
request for the parcel at 1710 Pottery Avenue. Update dated November 15, 2010;
Planning Commission Resolution 007-10 Page 2 of 3
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions: The Planning Commission finds that the proposed change to the Comprehensive
Plan, including revisions approved at the November 15, 2010 Planning Commission meeting, is
consistent with the objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
A recommendation from the Hearing Examiner supporting either Commercial or Business
Professional Zoning was issued on August 18th, 2010. In support and in addition to the
recommendation of approval for zoning by the Hearing Examiner, the Planning Commission
considered the appropriate zoning for the transition between Commercial and Residential
designations and recommended that Business Professional (BP) would be the most appropriate
for the site;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Port
Orchard hereby recommends that the City Council approve and certify the Kim Coy, fn: CA-35-
10, Comprehensive Plan Amendment request for the City of Port Orchard, the Planning
Commission recommends to the City Council that a zoning designation of Business Professional
be applied to the parcel as well as a Comprehensive Plan Designation of Commercial,
concurrent with this Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
PASSED by the Planning Commission of the City of Port Orchard this 15th day of November, 2010.
ATTEST:
Weaver, City Development Director
b-- Lu,
Bek Ashby, Chairman
Planning Commission Resolution 007-10 Page 3 of 3
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER
FOR THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD
In the Matter of the Application of )
Kim Coy )
For Approval of a Rezone )
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
RECEIVED
AUG 18 2010
No. R-1173 CITY OF PORT' ORCHARD
Coy Rezone PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS,
AND RECOMMENDATION
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION
The Hearing Examiner recommends that the City Council APPROVE the request for a rezone
from R 4.5 to either Commercial or Business Professional for a 0.68-acre parcel located at 1710
Pottery Avenue, in Port Orchard, Washington.
SUMMARY OF RECORD
Request:
Kim Coy, Conner Hearing Aid Clinic, requests a rezone of a 0.68-acre parcel from R4.5 to
Commercial. The property is located at 1710 Pottery Avenue, in Port Orchard, Washington.
Hearing Date:
The Hearing Examiner held an open record hearing on the request on August 5, 2010.
Testimony:
The following individuals presented testimony under oath at the open record hearing:
Tom Bonsell, City Planner
James Weaver, Planning Director
Attorney David Horton represented the Applicant at the hearing.
Exhibits:
The following exhibits were admitted into the record:
1. Pre -Application letter, dated January 4, 2010
2. Application submittal, including the following documents:
A. Application, dated June 7, 2010
B. Contact Information, dated June 7, 2010
C. Legal description
D. Project narrative, dated June 7, 2010
E. Property owners list verification, map, and mailing list, dated June 7, 2010
F. SEPA Checklist
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Port Orchard Hearing Examiner
Coy Rezone, No, R-1173
Page I of]]
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
G. Statement addressing decision criteria
H. Site Plan
1. Vicinity Map
J. Site photos
3. Kitsap County Property Report and Parcel Map, dated June 9, 2010
4. Application transmittal letter, dated June 10, 2010
5. Notice of complete application, Determination of completeness, dated June 15, 2010
6. Comments from South Kitsap Fire & Rescue — Greg Rogers, dated June 23, 2010
7. Notice of Application — SEPA Threshold Determination, dated June 25, 2010
8. Affidavit of publication: NOA/SEPA threshold determination, dated June 25, 2010
9. Affidavit of mailing & posting: NOA/SEPA threshold determination, dated June 25, 2010
10. Record of distribution to Agencies: NOA/SEPA Threshold Determination and SEPA
Checklist, dated June 25, 2010
11. Determination of Nonsignificance, dated July 13, 2010
12. Record of distribution to Agencies and Interested Parties: DNS, dated July 13, 2010
13. Acknowledgement letter from CTED: receipt of DNS, dated July 13, 2010
14. Affidavit of publication: Hearing notice, dated July 23, 2010
15. Affidavit of mailing and posting: Hearing notice, dated July 23, 2010
16. Staff report, prepared for August 5, 2010 hearing
The Hearing Examiner enters the following Findings and Conclusions based upon the testimony
and exhibits admitted at the open record hearing:
FINDINGS
Kim Coy (Applicant), owner of Conner Hearing Aid Clinic, requests a zone
reclassification (rezone) of a 0.68-acre parcel from R 4.5 to Commercial. The property is
located at 1710 Pottery Avenue, in Port Orchard, Washington.' Exhibit 2.A; Exhibit 2.D;
Exhibit 2.G; Exhibit 16, .Staff Report, page !.
2. The City of Port Orchard (City) accepted the rezone application on June 9, 2010, and
transmitted notice of the application to relevant agencies on June 10, 2010. The City
determined that the rezone application was complete on June 15, 2010. On June 25,
2010, the City mailed notice of the application and threshold environmental
determination to owners of property surrounding the subject property; posted notice on
the subject property; and published notice of the application in the Port Orchard
Independent. On July 23, 2010, the City posted notice of the open record hearing
associated with the application; mailed notice to surrounding property holders in
accordance with City ordinances; and published notice of the hearing in the Pori Orchard
The subject property is identified by tax parcel nwnbers 342401.4-028-2007. Exhibit 1.A; Exhibit 2.C; Exhibit 16,
Staff Report, page /. A legal description is included with the rezone application. Exhibit 2.C.
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Port Orchard Hearing Examiner
Co), Rezone, No. R-1/ 73
Page 2 of I I
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
Independent. Exhibit 4; Exhibit 5; Exhibit 7; Exhibit 8; Exhibit 9; Exhibit 10; Exhibit 14;
Exhibit 15; Exhibit 16, Staff Report, pages 2 and 5.
3. The City acted as lead agency to analyze the environmental impacts of the proposed
rezone, as required by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). After review of the
Environmental Checklist and other information on file, the City determined that with
compliance with federal, state, and local regulations, the rezone would not have a
probable significant adverse impact on the environment. The City issued a Determination
of Nonsignificance (DNS) on July 13, 2010. City Planner Tom Bonsell testified that City
did not receive any comments or appeal of the DNS. Exhibit 11; Exhibit 12; Exhibit 16,
Staff Report, pages 2 and 5; Testimony of Mr. Bonsell.
4. The property is currently zoned R 4.5, as are surrounding properties to the north and
west. Properties to the east are zoned R 8. Properties to the south are zoned Commercial.
The City's Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and surrounding
properties to the north and west as Low Density Residential. Properties to the east are
designated Medium Density Residential. Properties to the south are designated
Commercial. Properties to the north, east, and west are developed with single-family
residences. Properties to the south are developed with commercial uses and health care
services. Exhibit 2.A; Exhibit 21D; Exhibit 2.G; Exhibit 3; Exhibit 16, Staff Report, pages
2 and 5; See also City Comprehensive Plan Tremont Corridor Land Use Map.
5. The current R 4.5 zone allows for development at a density of up to 4.5 dwelling units
per net usable acre.2 The primary purposes of the R-4.5 zone are to "(a) Provide for an
urban residential environment that is consistent with the traditional image of the Port
Orchard area; and (b) Implement comprehensive plan goals and policies for housing
quality, diversity, and affordability, and to efficiently use residential land, public services,
and energy." Port Orchard Municipal Code (POMC)16.13.120(1). The Applicant
submitted a Project Narrative describing the proposed use as a hearing aid clinic. The
City Staff Report classifies the proposed use as "office/patient clinic." This use is not
permitted within the R 4.5 zone. POMC 16.30.040; Exhibit 2.D; Exhibit 16, Staff Report,
pages 1 and 4.
6. The purpose of the Commercial (Co) zone is to "provide for the broadest mix of retail,
service, office, and commercial recreation/cultural uses serving the Port Orchard and
surrounding market areas and offering significant employment opportunities." POMC
16.13.150(1). These purposes are accomplished by "Providing for office uses as well as
a wider range of the retail, professional, governmental, and personal services than are
found in neighborhood and community business areas." POMC 16.13.150(2)(a). The Co
zone is appropriate where designed by the comprehensive plan when such areas are
' Net usable site area is defined as "the total site area less sensitive environmental features (equal to gross useable
site area) and dedications as these areas are dermed elsewhere in this code" POW 16A0.040.
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Port Orchard Hearing Examiner
Coy Rezone, No. RJ173
Page 3 of 11
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
served by adequate public sewers, water supply, roads, and other needed public facilities
and services; and where "Areas are provided convenient, visible, and safe access by
vehicle, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation systems located on minor and major
arterial roads." POMC 16.13.150(3). The Co zone mandates maximum lot coverage of
85 percent, and minimum landscaping coverage of 15 percent. The Co zone requires a
ten -foot wide street right-of-way setback, and a five-foot wide setback from adjacent
residential zones and from adjacent nonresidential zones. The City Code does not specify
a minimum lot size for the Co zone. POMC 16.40.025. The proposed hearing aid clinic,
classified as "office/patient clinic" is a permitted use in the Co zone, as are other health
services, including nursing and personal care facilities, medical/dental lab, and
miscellaneous health. Hospitals are not permitted in the Co zone. POMC 16.30.040;
Exhibit 16, Staff Report, pages 4 and 5.
Govemmentlbusiness service land uses permitted in the Co zone include construction and
trade; transportation service; automotive rental and leasing; research, development and
testing; and commercial/industrial accessory uses. POMC 16.30.030. General services
land uses permitted in the Co zone include daycare; veterinary clinic; automotive and
boat service and repair; and health services. POMC 16.30.040. Manufacturing land uses
permitted in the Co zone include food processing; furniture and fixtures; printing and
publishing; and fabricated metal products. POW 16.30.050. Recreational and cultural
land uses are permitted in the Cc zone, including theaters; bowling centers; and
amusement arcades. POW 16.30.060. Hotels/motels, bed and breakfasts, and accessory
residential living quarters are permitted residential land uses in the Co zone. POMC
16.30.080. A wide range of retail land uses are also permitted in the Co zone. POW
16.30.100. In addition to the permitted land uses, a wide range of land uses are allowed
as a conditional use or with an administrative permit. POMC 16.30.030 - .100.
8. City Planner Mr. Bonsell testified that the Business Professional zone might be more
appropriate to the property. Testimony of Mr. Bonsell. The purpose of the Business
Professional (BP) zone "differs from general commercial designations in that business
professional limits the amount, size and type of retail uses. This designation is intended
to support major employment centers such as Harrison Hospital and surrounding
hospital/medical district and the Kitsap County administration campus, while serving as a
transition with adjacent residential neighborhoods." POMC 16.13.200(1). The purposes
of the BP zone are accomplished by "providing for office uses as well as a wider range of
the retail, professional, governmental, and personal services than are found in
neighborhood and community business areas." POMC 16.13.200(2)(a). The BP zone is
appropriate where designated by the comprehensive plan; where areas are provided safe
vehicle, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian access; and where traffic management is required.
POW 16.13.200(3). Attorney David Horton spoke on behalf of the Applicant to agree
that the BP zone could be an appropriate zone for the subject property. Statement of Mr.
Horton.
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Port Orchard Hearing Examiner
Coy Rezone, No. R-1173
Page 4 of 11
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
9. Chapter 36.70A Revised Code of Washington (RCW) mandates that zoning
classifications should be consistent with Comprehensive Plan designations. Mr. Bonsell
testified that the City Council will review the Applicant's request to amend the
Comprehensive Plan designation as part of a docket of Comprehensive Plan amendments.
He explained that the rezone would not be approved if the City Council does not approve
the Comprehensive Plan change by the end of the year 2010. Testimony of Mr. Bonsell.
10. According to the December 2009 Final Comprehensive Plan, the economic centers of the
City provide centralized retail, professional office facilities, tourist and related services.
The commercial zoning designation provides the most comprehensive list of uses that
support the goals and policies of not only economic sections of the Comprehensive plan
and also supports a portion of the housing goals by providing the framework for creation
of affordable housing units. The Commercial Comprehensive Plan designation includes
zoning designations of Mixed -use, Commercial and Business Professional. City
Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element (December 2009).
11. The City Staff Report states that proposed rezone would be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, and with the City's long-term Comprehensive
Plan direction. Exhibit 16, Staff Report, pages 2 and 4. Planning Director James Weaver
testified that in 2008, the surrounding area was designated Commercial, along with an
overlay area for intensive development. The intent was to locate health care services in
the same area. However, Sunset Lane residents objected to a change in the
Comprehensive Plan designation. Testimony of Mr. Weaver. Sunset Lane West runs east
/ west to the north of Clay Lane. The Sunset Lane residential area is now surrounding by
commercial and business professional zones to the north and south. Harrison Hospital
lies to the north of Tremont Street West, north of Sunset Lane West, and is on property
designated Community Facility. See, City Comprehensive Plan, Tremont Corridor
District Land Use Map. Thus, the residential area is now an island which will become
commercial as ownership changes or in 2012, when the Comprehensive Plan review is
scheduled. Mr. Weaver testified that the transition to a commercial zone is consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies for the Tremont area, where the subject
property is located. Mr. Weaver identified Tremont Corridor Overlay District Goal 14
and Policy POI.U-61 as particularly relevant to the rezone request. Testimony of Mr.
Weaver.
12. City Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Goal 14 for the Tremont Corridor Overlay
District encourages development within the area that supports the major hospital and
medical installations (Harrison Hospital and Group Health) and assists the emergency
response agencies in the corridor (South Kitsap Fire District). Policy POI.U61
encourages professional and office uses that support the medical industry and create
pedestrian oriented health care focus. City Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 2. Land Use,
page 2-28.
Findings, Conchisions, rind Recommendmton
City of Port Orchard Nearing Ermniner
Coy Rezone, No. R-1/ 73
Page 5 of 11
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
13. Clay Street runs east / west along the northern property boundary. Pottery Avenue runs
north / south along the eastern property boundary. The property is developed with a
single-family residence, a garage, a covered storage area, and a gravel parking area. No
changes to the existing structure are proposed. The Applicant would provide five parking
spaces, including handicapped access parking, as described in the proposed site plan. Mr.
Bonsell testified that adequate parking would be provided on the site. The Applicant
anticipates that two people would work in the proposed hearing aid clinic. There are no
critical areas on -site. Exhibit 2.D; Exhibit 2.F; Exhibit 2.H; Exhibit 3; Testimony of Mr.
Bonsell.
14. City Planner Mr. Bonsell testified that landscaping is necessary to buffer adjacent
residential uses from the proposed use. The Applicant would provide a landscaping plan
in conformance with POMC Section 16.50.100 prior to approval of a Certificate of
Occupancy.3 Exhibit 16, Staff Report, page S; Testimony of Mr. Bonsell.
15, Greg Rogers, Fire Prevention Manager, wrote a letter to Mr. Bonsell, dated June 23,
2010, in response to the proposed rezone. The letter included comments and stipulations
regarding any future construction and requiring final inspection of the property prior to
' POMC 16.50.100 provides that:
(1) Perimeter landscaping along interior lot lines and between zones shall be as provided within Table 16.50.296,
Landscape Design Requirements. Perimeter landscaping may be modified where appropriate by the planning
director to account for aboveground subregional utility developments and distribution or transmission corridors
or other utilities and infrastructure.
(2) Urban buffers shall be landscaped based on the extent to which the activity is to be screened from adjacent uses
in accordance with the categories identified below. However, common standards applied to all buffer areas
include:
(a) Within the landscape buffer areas about the property, particularly along secondary access roads and
around parking lots that do not abut the public pedestrian walkway or trail corridors, site plantings
should be grouped to simulate natural stands and should not be planted symmetrically or of even
spacing.
(b) Landscape designs should reflect natural planting materials and settings that are representative of the
local and regional landscape.
(c) Where practical and feasible, buffer areas should retain existing larger trees and vegetation to maintain
continuity with adjacent greenways and natural areas.
(d) Within higher density residential developments, buffers or open spaces may be grouped into common
open space areas that define building placements, provide visual accents, preserve landscape or
landform features, or house common activity areas.
(3) Urban Buffers with Filtered Screening. Urban buffers to be filter screened are the perimeter landscape areas
provided between nonresidential land uses within the commercial (Co), mixed use (Mxd), employment (Eo),
and community facilities (Cf) zones. These buffers shall function as a visual separator between uses within
these zones. The plant materials and design may mix evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs to create a
filtered screen effect.
(4) Urban Buffers with Full Screening. Urban buffers to be fully screened are the perimeter landscape areas
provided between residential and nonresidential zones. These buffers shall function as a visual barrier to
obscure views of incompatible activities and improvements. The plant materials and design may include a mix
of primarily evergreen trees and shrubs to form an effective full screen effect.
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Pot Orchard Hearing Examiner
Coy Rezone, No. R- i 173
Page 6 of 11
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The City Staff Report states that future
development on the property would be reviewed for compliance with the City code and
development standards, including stormwater, parking, and other requirements. Exhibit
6; Exhibit 16, Staff Report, pages 3 and d.
16. The Applicant's Environmental Checklist slates that the proposed use would not result in
an increased need for public services, and that no utility construction is required. Exhibit
2.F. The Applicant addressed the rezone criteria, stating that approving the rezone would
allow a business that would contribute to public health and welfare and would provide a
necessary service to the community as a whole. Exhibit 2.G.
17. Mr. Bonsell testified that the area where the property is located is in transition from
residential to commercial uses. Harrison Hospital is nearby to the north, and the area will
eventually become a commercial zone. Properties in the area have been sold for health
care purposes. Mr. Bonsell noted that Sunset Lane to the north is a truly active
residential area that wishes to remain residential. Property owners to the east and west
are not opposed to the Comprehensive Plan amendment to Commercial designation. An
office complex with health services lies to the south of the property. The City Staff
Report describes Harrison Hospital as an anchor for health care uses. The area contains
numerous health clinic and health services. Adjacent property to the south contains two
buildings leased to doctors, eye clinics, and dentists. Mr. Bonsell testified that the
property feels like a commercial zone, in which single-family residential use is unusual.
Exhibit /6, S/ajf Report, page 3; Testimony of Mr. Bonsell.
18. Mr. Horton testified for the Applicant that the property was purchased at the time the
Commercial designation was proposed. He noted that there has been no opposition to the
rezone of the subject property, as it is located adjacent to property zoned Commercial.
Testimony of Mr. Horton. Mr. Bonsell testified that the Planning Department considered
the proposed rezone to be consistent with City criteria. The Planning Department
recommends approval of the proposed rezone. Exhibit 16, Staff Report, page 5;
Testimony of Mr. Bonsell.
CONCLUSIONS
Jurisdiction
The City of Port Orchard Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to hold a hearing on rezone
applications that are not part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process. Based on the
evidence in the record, the Hearing Examiner may recommend that the City Council approve,
approve with modifications, or deny the application. Port Orchard Municipal Code (POMQ
2.76.080; POMC 2.76.100; POMC 2.76.110; POMC 16 01.02](3).
When reviewing a rezone application, the Hearing Examiner does not review development
proposals. Rather, the role of the Hearing Examiner is to review the rezone request to ensure
compliance with the rezone criteria found in POMC 16.25.060. The City Council then reviews
Findings, Conclusions, and Reconmiendation
City of Port Orchard Hearing Examiner
Coy Rezone, No. R-1173
Page 7 of 11
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
the Hearing Examiner's recommendation in a closed record hearing to ensure that no mistakes
have been made by the Hearing Examiner. An "open record hearing" is defined as a "hearing,
conducted by the hearing examiner that creates the City's official record through testimony and
submission of evidence and information." POMC 16.08.520. In contrast, the closed record
hearing to be held by the City Council does not allow for the submittal of new evidence or
testimony. See POMC 16.08.138. If the City Council determines that no mistake has been
committed by the Hearing Examiner, the City Council would likely approve the Hearing
Examiner's recommendation. If the Council amends or rejects the findings of the Hearing
Examiner, it should do so only with specific reference to exhibits or testimony in the record that
support the rejection or amendment. If the Council believes a mistake was made in a conclusion,
it is suggested the Council also review the underlying support for that conclusion to determine
specifically how it fails to provide support. Conclusions should only be modified or rejected if
the reference in support of the conclusion fails to provide substantial evidence in support of the
conclusion.
Criteria for Review
Port Orchard Municipal Code (POMC) 16.25.060 sets forth the standards and criteria the
Hearing Examiner must use to evaluate a request for a rezone. A request for a rezone shall only
be granted if:
(1) The reclassification is substantially related to the public health, safety, or welfare; and
(2) The reclassification is warranted because of changed circumstances or because of a
need for additional property in the proposed land use zone classification or because
the proposed zoning classification is appropriate for reasonable development of the
subject property; and
(3) The subject property is suitable for development in general conformance with zoning
standards under the proposed zoning classification; and
(4) The reclassification will not be materially detrimental to uses or property in the
immediate vicinity of the subject property or incompatible with such uses; and
(5) The reclassification has merit and value for the community as a whole; and
(6) The reclassification is in accord with the comprehensive plan; and
(7) The reclassification complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of the
Port Orchard Municipal Code.
POMC 16.25.060.
Either substantially changed conditions or a substantial relationship to public health, safety, or
welfare, may alone justify a rezone. Although community opposition may be considered, it may
not be the underlying reason for denial of a rezone. Parkridge v. Seattle , 89 Wn.2d 454, 573
P.2d 359 (1978).
Proof of changed circumstances are not required for a rezone if the proposed rezone and
associated development implement policies contained in the comprehensive plan. Bjarnson v.
Kitsap County, 78 Wn. App. 840 (Div. I, 1995); Henderson v. Kittitas County, 124 Wn. App.
747 (Div. III, 2004). Property may be rezoned consistent with the comprehensive plan even
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
Chy of Part Orchard Hearing Examiner
Coy Rezone, No. R-1173
Page 8 of I l
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
when the ordinance implementing the comprehensive plan amendment allowing the proposed
use has not yet been adopted. Homeowners Assn v. Cloninger & Associates, 151 Wn.2d 279
(2004).
Conclusions
1. The rezone is substantially related to the public health, safety, or welfare. The City
provided appropriate notice of the rezone application and associated open record hearing.
The proposed rezone would allow for development with a broad range of uses to support
the nearby hospital and health care services, in compliance with the City Comprehensive
Plan goals and policies for the Tremont Corridor. The City Council will review the
potential impacts of an increased range of uses with review of the Commercial land use
designation. The proposed rezone will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
assuming the City Council adopts the requested amendment. Property may be rezoned
consistent with the comprehensive plan even when the ordinance implementing the
comprehensive plan amendment allowing the proposed use has not yet been adopted.
Homeowners Assn v. Cloninger & Associates, 151 Wn.2d 279 (2004). The City
analyzed the potential environmental impacts of the proposed rezone, and determined that
it would not result in probable significant adverse environmental impacts. Any future
development of the property would be reviewed for compliance with City requirements,
including transportation, fire safety, public utilities, erosion control, and stormwater
drainage standards. Findings 2, 3, 6, 8, 12, and 16.
2. The rezone is warranted because of changed circumstances. The Applicant, City
Planner, and City Staff Report all describe the subject property as located in an area of
transition from residential to commercial uses. Neighboring properties have been leased
to health care clinics and services that support and complement Harrison Hospital to the
north. City staff testified, and the Applicant agreed, that the Business Professional zone
may be more appropriate to the subject property. The Commercial zone would allow the
broadest mix of retail, service, office, and commercial recreation/cultural uses. The
Business Professional zone is intended for transitional areas from residential to
commercial, and would allow development that supports major employment centers such
as Harrison Hospital. With either the Commercial or Business Professional zones, the
proposed rezone would allow professional and office uses that support the medical
industry and Harrison Hospital, consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan goals and
Policies for the Tremont Corridor Overlay District. The area in which the subject
property is located has experienced changed circumstances, and a rezone to Commercial
or Business Professional would recognize this. Furthermore, proof of changed
circumstances is not required for a rezone if the proposed rezone and associated
development implement policies are contained in the comprehensive plan. Bjarnson v.
Kilsap County, 78 Wn. App. 840 (Div. I, 1995); Henderson v. Kittitas County, 124 Wn.
App. 747 (Div. III, 2004). The proposed rezone would implement policies contained in
the comprehensive plan. Approval of the rezone is conditioned upon City Council
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Port Orchard Hearing Examiner
Coy Rezone, No. R-1173
Page 9 of I
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment before the end of 2010. Findings 4 —
12, 17, and 18.
3. The subject property is suitable for development. The subject property currently
contains a single-family residence, which would be retained and converted to office use.
Vehicles would access the property through Pottery Avenue. Adequate parking would be
provided on -site. There are no critical areas on the property. The City reviewed the
environmental impacts of the proposed rezone and determined that approval would not
result in probable significant adverse impacts. Future development would be reviewed
for consistency with City code and development standards. Findings 3, 13, 15, and 16.
4. The rezone will not be materially detrimental to or incompatible with uses and
properties in the immediate vicinity. The area in which the property is located is in
transition from residential to commercial uses. Although nearby residential owners have
objected to the transition to commercial uses in the past, there has been no opposition to
the present rezone request. The area appears to observers as if it already carries a
Commercial zoning: uses and properties in the immediate vicinity of the subject property
cater to health care related services. Harrison Hospital is located nearby to the north.
Adjacent property to the south is developed to provide health care services. The
Commercial zone would provide the broadest mix of uses. The Business Professional
zone would limit potential uses to allow transition from residential to commercial uses.
The Applicant would provide landscaping to buffer the property from adjacent residential
uses. Findings 4, 6, 8, 10 —12, 14 —18.
5. The rezone has merit and value for the community as a whole. Rezone to
Commercial would allow development with the broadest mix of uses. Rezone to
Business Professional would allow development to support Harrison Hospital while
providing a transitional area between nearby residential uses and commercial uses.
Approval of a rezone to either Commercial or Business Professional would allow
professional and office uses that support the existing medical industry and Harrison
Hospital. The proposed use would provide a needed hearing aid clinic to the community.
Future development would be reviewed to ensure compliance with the City code and
development regulations. Findings 1, 5 — 8, 10, 11 —13, 15 —18.
6. The rezone is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and complies with the
City code. The Comprehensive Plan goals and policies encourage professional and
office uses in the Tremont Corridor to support the medical industry, and Harrison
Hospital in particular. Approval of the rezone to either Commercial or Business
Professional would allow uses to support health care services. Approval of the rezone is
conditioned upon City Council approval of the associated Comprehensive Plan
amendment by the end of this year. Future development would be reviewed at the time
of application to ensure compliance with City code and development regulations in effect
at that time. Findings 5, 6, 8 —12, 15 —18.
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Port Orchard Hearing Examiner
Coy Rezone, No. R-1173
Page 10 of/1
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit A
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above findings and conclusions, the Hearing Examiner recommends that the City
Council APPROVE the request for a rezone from R4.5 to either Commercial or Business
Professional for a 0.68-acre parcel located at 1710 Pottery Avenue, in Port Orchard, Washington.
The recommended approval of the rezone request is conditioned upon City Council approval of a
Comprehensive Plan amendment Land Use Designation to Commercial by the end of the current
2010 docket year.
Recommended this day of August 2010.
THEODORE PAUL HUNTER
Hearing Examiner
Sound Law Center
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Port Orchard Hearing Examiner
Coy Rezone, No. R-I173
Page I l of I I
01
---
Ordinance Nl
B �
qq
oeY.
z�
I a�
8
R
azr?®
n R
a e
/
"t 3f W MV AH1 Od
3
I
i
Z�Z I
o �
Q = = Z
_v
0=�
Zzx
0"
w
N
U0
0
a
a
;I•
g Y —
I�
r
� C
I
sa §
ILI— -.
IS
kk
a�
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit B
CITY OF PORT ORCHARD
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 008-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF THE 2010 AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY
OF PORT ORCHARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WHEREAS, The Growth Management Act (GMA), RCW 36.70A requires that each city planning
under GMA must periodically review, and, if needed, revise their comprehensive plans and
development regulations every seven years to ensure compliance with the Growth Management
Act; and
WHEREAS, with the passage of the Washington State Growth Management Act in 1990,
developing communities are required to submit a comprehensive plan that outlines strategies to
accommodate the needs of a growing population. It is intended for this comprehensive plan to
be updated to reflect the changes in growth and boundaries of that growth including changes to
zoning; and
WHEREAS, in December 2008, the City of Port Orchard adopted a Comprehensive Plan update to
the June 1995 Comprehensive Plan to satisfy the requirements set forth in the Growth
Management Act to implement the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Port Orchard seeks to be in compliance with the goals, policies, and
procedures of the Growth Management Act; and
WHEREAS, after proper notice, The Port Orchard Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on Monday, November 15th, 2010 and considered public testimony to review, discuss,
and deliberate on the proposed draft Comprehensive Plan amendments.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON,
MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO THE PORT ORCHARD
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
1. These amendments were developed in consideration of the goals of the GMA for the
development of local comprehensive plans, as codified at RCW 36.70A.020, and reflect a
careful balancing of these goals within the local conditions of the City of Port Orchard.
2. These amendments were developed from and are consistent with the Kitsap Countywide
Planning Policies (CPPs).
Planning Commission Resolution 008-10 Page 1 of 3
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit B
3. The Planning Commission bases its finding and conclusions on all the testimony, oral or
written, and exhibits submitted to the Commission. Any finding that should be deemed a
conclusion, and any conclusion that should be deemed a finding, is hereby recommended
as such.
4. The Planning Commission has considered the following criteria consistent with the Port
Orchard Municipal Code and makes the following findings;
a. Circumstances in Port Orchard have substantially changed since the adoption of
the 2008 Comprehensive Plan;
b. New information is available that was not considered in the adoption of the 2008
Comprehensive Plan;
c. The proposed amendments are consistent with or support other plan elements
and/or development regulations.
d. The proposed amendments reflect the goals, objectives, and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan;
e. The proposed amendments are consistent with the Countrywide Planning Policies;
and
f. The proposed amendments are compliant with the requirements of the Growth
Management Act.
BASED UPON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY;
The Port Orchard Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend approval to the
City Council of the 2010 Amendments of the Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan dated
November 15, 2010;
2. The Port Orchard Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend approval to
the City Council of the following amendments to the 2008 Port Orchard Comprehensive
Plan Update:
a. The Port Orchard Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend
approval of an amendment to the 2008 Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update
to update Zoning and Comprehensive Plan maps.
b. The Port Orchard Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend
approval of an amendment to the 2008 Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Update,
adopting amendments to Appendix G: Plans Adopted by Reference, including the
2010-2015 South Kitsap School District Capital Facilities Plan and the McCormick
Village Park Master Plan.
Planning Commission Resolution 008-10 Page 2 of 3
Ordinance No. 029-10
Exhibit B
Conclusions: The Planning Commission finds that the proposed changes to the
Comprehensive Plan, including revisions approved at the November 15, 2010 Planning
Commission meeting, are consistent with the objectives of the City s Comprehensive Plan;
now, therefore
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Port
Orchard hereby recommends that the City Council approve and certify the 2010
Comprehensive Plan Amendments for the City of Port Orchard, as expressed in 2. a — b above.
PASSED by the Planning Commission of the City of Port Orchard this 15th day of November, 2010.
ATTEST:
City Development Director
k-�V
Bek Ashby, Chairman
Planning Commission Resolution 008-10 Page 3 of 3
.401
d
0
o
R7
d
py Q
c p
C
p
f+
O
U
W
2 tq
x
LL
Z• m << SID a u 2 m m &�# � $tip.
da U x u LL IL S 5 6 " Q i 0 S Fit £g���� � y
I
Appendix G: Pl ptjql W(ftow
Exhibit C
Appendix G.
Plans Adopted by Reference
Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Draft Update: October 2010
Appendix G: Pl0jzRI4gptz;l hJoRgjQ@w$
Exhibit C
PLAN OR DOCUMENT
City of Port Orchard 2009 Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan Update
City of Port Orchard 2009 Sidney / Pottery Corridor Plan
South Kitsap School District 2010 - 2015 Capital Facilities Plan
West Sound Utility District / Joint Wastewater Treatment Facility 2009 Capital
Facilities Plan
City of Port Orchard 2008 Water System Plan
City of Port Orchard: 2008 Comprehensive Parks Plan
2006 Kitsap County Comprehensive Plan 10-Year Update
Kitsap County 2006 Port Orchard/South Kitsap Sub -Area Plan
City of Port Orchard 2006 Economic Development Plan
Kitsap County 2003South Kitsap UGA/ULID#6 Sub -Area Plan 8: EIS
Downtown Port Orchard: 1999 Suggestions for Revitalization
City of Port Orchard 1998 Pedestrian Plan
City of Port Orchard 1994 Shoreline Master Program
City of Port Orchard 1994 Ross Creek Comprehensive Management Plan
City of Port Orchard 1994 Capital Facilities Plan
City of Port Orchard 1992 Tremont Corridor Specific Plan
City of Port Orchard 1987 Blackjack Creek Comprehensive Management Plan
City of Port Orchard 2010 McCormick Village Park Plan
Port Orchard Comprehensive Plan Draft Update: October 2010
N].11)4�le1�IN4
The following is a summary of an Ordinance approved by the Port Orchard City Council at their regular
Council meeting held December 14, 2010.
ORDINANCE NO. 029-10
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE
2oio AMENDMENTS TO THE PORT ORCHARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PURSUANT TO
THE STATE OF WASHINGTON'S GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT
Copies of Ordinance No. 029-10 are available for review at the office of the City Clerk of the City of Port
Orchard. Upon written request a statement of the full text of the Ordinance will be mailed to any
interested person without charge. Thirty days after publication, copies of Ordinance No. 029-10 will be
provided at a nominal charge.
City of Port Orchard
Patti Kirkpatrick
City Clerk
Publish: Port Orchard Independent
December 24, 2010