Loading...
018-14 - Resolution - Exemption from View Protection Overlay District RegulationsIntroduced by: Development Director Requested by: Development Director Drafted by: Development Director Introduced: July 8, 2014 Adopted: July 8, 2014 RESOLUfiON NO. 018-14 A RESOLUfiON OF THE CllY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, GRANTING AN EXEMPTION FROM THE VIEW PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS UNDER POMC 16.20.712 AND ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS WHEREAS, exemptions from the View Protection Overlay District (VPOD) regulations are authorized in POMC 16.20.712; and WHEREAS, the city received a request for exemptions from Paul Berg on July 1, 2014 with the application and supporting materials attached to this resolution; and WHEREAS, on July 8, 2014 the City Council conducted a public hearing on the proposal after publishing a public hearing notice in the city's designated newspaper, mailing notices to all residents within 300 feet of the subject properties, and posting a notice of the hearing onsite; now, therefore, THE CllY COUNCIL OF THE CllY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: In order to approve a View Protection Overlay District exemption, the City Council must find that the proposal meets 4 criteria as listed in POMC 16.20. 712 (2) (a-d). Based on the materials attached to this Resolution and the testimony and materials submitted at the public hearing, the following findings and conclusions are made concerning the criteria for granting an exemption: (a) The granting of the exemption would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or create significant adverse effects to other properties and improvements in the view protection overlay district; Finding: Photographic evidence and a site visit performed by city staff has revealed that no significant view is present at the site and that the construction of 2-story single-family structures at this location will not block any significant views from neighboring properties. Conclusion: After considering the above finding and public testimony offered at a public hearing, the City Council has concluded that the granting of the exemption would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or Resolution No. 018-14 Page 2 of 3 welfare or create significant adverse effects to other properties and improvements in the view protection overlay district. (b) The granting of such exemption would be in conformance with the policies and goals of the comprehensive plan; Finding: The proposed use to be constructed upon granting of the exemption are 4 single family residences which is consistent with the Residential Medium Density land use designation found in the comprehensive plan. The view protection overlay district is not addressed in the city's comprehensive plan. Conclusion: The granting of the proposed exemption would be in conformance with the comprehensive plan. (c) The view of adjacent property owners would not be obstructed or reduced if the property to be exempted were developed to maximum height and dimensions allowed by the underlying zone; Finding: City staff visited the site and reported to the City Council that the very limited views of adjacent property owners would not, in staffs opinion, be obstructed or reduced if the property to be exempted were developed to the maximum height and dimension as allowed by the underlying zone. Public testimony provided at a public hearing conducted by the city council on the proposal did not indicate that the proposed exemption would obstruct or reduce views of adjacent property owners. Conclusion: The granting of the proposed exemption would not cause the view of adjacent property owners to be obstructed or reduced if the property to be exempted were developed to maximum height and dimensions allowed by the underlying zone. (d) The granting of such exemption would not reduce the solar access of neighboring lots. Finding: The city's setback and height restrictions would ensure that solar access is not impacted. Public testimony provided at a public hearing conducted by the city council on the proposal did not indicate that the proposed exemption would reduce solar access from neighboring lots. Conclusion: The granting of the proposed exemption would not reduce solar access from adjacent properties. SECTION 2: Consistent with the Findings and Conclusions in section 1, exemptions from the requirements of the View Protection Overlay District are hereby Resolution No. 018-14 Page 3 of3 granted for 823, 829, 835, and 841 Smalley Lane on parcels 262401-4-060-2006, 262401-4-061-2005, 262401-4-062-2004 & 262401-4-063-2003. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Port Orchard, SIGNED by the Mayor and attested by the Clerk in authentication of such passage this 8th day of July 2014. ~~em~ Timothy C. Matthe Mayor ATTEST: