· Call to Order/Roll Call – The regular meeting of the Chewelah Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Tom Bristol on April 20, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. The following planning commission members were present: Chairman Tom Bristol, Vice Chairman Daniel Voltz (arrived at 7:07 P.M., Kadya Hugus, Irv Schick, Bill Davies, Kevin Herda, and Alice Crowley. Excused absence: Doug Sassman. City Staff present: Chaz Bates, Planner, Studio Cascade; Gaylea Nolander, Executive Secretary; and Jon Lind, City Administrator, present during City Administrator’s Report.
· Agenda, Additions, Deletions, and/or Changes – At the request of Jon Lind, City Administrator the City Administrator’s Report will be heard before the public hearing.
· Minutes – Irv Schick moved with a second from Kadya Hugus to approve the March 16, 2006 minutes. All in favor. Minutes approved.
· City Administrator’s Report – Jon Lind, City Administrator, – Mainly it is a State of the City Report from things that are going on this year that weren’t going on last year, things that are going on this year at about ten times the pace that were going on last year at this time. When I came to the City in early 2003 as the City Administrator, I thought I knew something, but I found out quickly I didn’t, and discovered that this is a very busy community. In those days we were getting a land use question about one a month maybe. A normal day now between Gaylea, and I, and Clancy, we will handle anywhere from 5 to 10 or 12 per day on any given date. Everything from people wanting to know what we can do with this lot over here, I am looking for a place to put a commercial building and is there anyplace to do that, and things of that nature; or I have a piece of property and I want to sell it and what really could be done with this thing…realtors… are great resolution folks, they take all of these people and somehow get them together and either get things bought or sold. These questions are coming in at a very rapid pace. One other question that comes into City Hall a lot lately is, we are just moving here and we don’t have any place to live, do you know of any rental properties. All of the rental properties are clear full. I don’t know if it was a real serious request, but recently a fellow who identified himself as being from Spokane, and said he wanted to know where all of the rental properties were because he wanted to buy all of them…Property is moving pretty fast and if you have been paying attention to what is going on up at the Golf Course Development, some of those lots are going for pretty good money today compared to what they were 3 or 4 years ago, or 5 or 6 years ago.
Three weeks ago the Mayor and I were at an Economic Development Conference in Post Falls. Just to give you a whiff of what it is like to do business in North Idaho today, the City of Post Falls approved 34 subdivisions in 2004 and 2005 for 6,150 lots. Now when anyone wants to be annexed in Post Falls, and I have heard the other communities there, they are requiring that they bring water rights with them.
(Daniel Voltz arrived at 7:07 P.M.)
Here in our community…I got our local tax distribution report from the State of Washington for 2005. Our sales tax revenues increased in Chewelah 7.5% in 2005 over 2004; the portion that goes to our criminal justice program increased by 11.5% from 2004 to 2005. The County’s sales tax collections increased by 11.8%; and our hotel/motel tax increased in 2005 by 22.6% over the previous year, which is an indicator of the visitors we have had in town…
If you will notice downtown we have a new look, it is not completed, but it will be completed soon. I have heard from several of the businesses that they are looking to do a total facelift this year…In the community of Republic, with its downtown revitalization, it took one business, like The Independent, to do a facelift and all of the rest of them did it…Most of our storefronts are occupied or are about to be. We don’t have many places to put businesses in existing buildings right now, there is not much choice.
As a Planning Commission and as a City we need to be thinking about, as we do our Comp Plan update, the Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board asked us to be done with it by the end of April next year. we need to be thinking about where it is going to be most appropriate for some of these business locations, because we are kind of hurting for business locations. To give you an idea of how important it is, in North Idaho the mix of residential properties versus business properties in its community, the City of Post Falls is about 80% residential properties as far as its tax base, and 20% business. In Coeur d’Alene it is about 50/50. So guess which community is the healthiest, Coeur d’Alene is, simply because the businesses are paying a much bigger portion of the tax revenue.
Once the Stevens County Comprehensive Plan is approved…that sets in motion automatically the Master Planned Resort at 49 Degrees North…that is going to mean opportunities and headaches for us, because we are going to have people in here that are looking for places to situate, to help build that up there…For us, the State, of course, with the Growth Management Act is interested in promoting infill wherever possible, and Chaz can give you all kinds of details on what infill means, but basically it means making a more dense community, more people per acre than we have known in the past, and there are ways to do that. I personally think that we need more apartment spaces, more places to live…the Coeur d’Alene School District and the Post Falls School District cannot get teachers very easily unless they have got double or triple incomes in the family because they can’t qualify for housing, and that has happened in the Seattle area before. In Kellogg, Idaho…it is turning green again after a hundred years, there has been a lot of interest up there, you have probably seen some of the news articles about how fast the condos are selling up there, in just a matter of hours, condos valued at $250,000 to $900,000 sell, all of them. In Kellogg the average residential sales price eight months ago was about $30,000 and today it is $180,000, and if you have seen some of the housing up there it is pretty bad, pretty dilapidated. This is a very beautiful place here, so people are going to be coming.
We have distributed zoning maps to the realtors, and to the banks, and to our attorney, two realtors in Colville, and I am going to get another one to Tri-County Economic Development. We have taught some of the personnel in those offices how to look for the zoning codes, municipal codes, on the city website. We are going to help people help themselves as much as possible, because a lot of the questions that come in are what are the zoning guidelines, the setback requirements, and that kind of thing, so that is going to help with better information now. If you have any pointers, any words of advice, I am open, because I have about reached up to here, the overflow point with all of that additional traffic everyday…and it takes a lot of research…any questions for me?
Chairman Bristol – At one point, not tonight, earlier, you talked about maybe a full time planner, or full time building inspector, or some combination, what is the current thought on that?
Jon Lind – ...We are talking about it, and I will be talking with Bill Grimes and Chaz about that sometime very soon because we have to find some ways to deal with some of that. Our building official is here Tuesday and Thursday afternoons and he is very busy, and that is going to get a lot busier. I have talked to quite a few of the contractors around too, and they are all booked up, overbooked…There will be a piece in the City Administrator’s Report every month from here on out talking about water issues, and water conservation…we have to update our Water Comp Plan, we are starting a study on that now, comparing what was proposed however many years ago the Water Comp Plan was proposed, what the expected population would be today, and how much water we would be using today. It needs to be updated dramatically because none of those projections were even close, and in fact we are using a lot more water on the average than we predicted we would be…we have got some water users that irrigate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for no reason whatsoever, it is just simply because water is so available, and we have got to find ways to get people to conserve.
Kevin Herda – Jon, can you continue to mention what the planning commission is working on in your City Administrator’s Report because I think that is helpful in the public participation.
Jon Lind – Yes, I will more than happy to do that…I think it is also important to find a way to get commission members and council members together again, we may have to get creative because Saturday mornings probably isn’t going to cut it, find some other way to get an hour in here and an hour in there…have commission members and council members come an hour before the planning commission meeting and city council meeting…The council members who have been able to attend the previous sessions were very interested in the dialog.
Bill Davies – Jon, there was supposed to be one water right becoming available, anything cooking on that?
Jon Lind – No, not that I am aware of…I am assuming you mean the Golf Course Development?
Bill Davies – Yes.
Jon Lind – I have not been involved in any of those discussions…The Department of Ecology did an water right transfer for us a couple of years ago…The City has no plans on any water rights or water rights negotiations upstream from the Golf Course. We are talking about where we are going to put a new well and what to do about our current reservoir, whether to expand it or build an additional one…
Irv Schick – I would like to compliment you on the speediness of getting those zoning maps out to the realtors, because that came up during our joint workshop (with city council), and here it is a month later, and it is done, and the information is out there…
Jon Lind – Our City website also has a map source on it.
· Public Hearing
Site Plan Review
Applicant: Alan Gorst
Project Location: 1117 W. Robert Avenue
Project Description: Construct one single-family home and garage on a crawlspace foundation at 1117 W. Robert. Project site is within 200 feet of designated floodplain for Paye Creek.
Exhibits 1 through 6 are attached hereto, incorporated herein and made a part of these minutes as though fully set forth.
Exhibit List
(1) Application (Attachment 1)
(2) Site Plan Map (Attachment 2)
(3) Flood Insurance Rate Map (Attachment 3)
(4) Notice of Application, Public Hearing, and Sepa Determination (Attachment 4)
(5) Staff Report (Attachment 5)
(6) Public Hearing Sign-In Sheet (Attachment 6)
SUMMARY
(Decision: Planning Commission unanimously approved the Site Plan Review with the following condition: No construction or development activities shall be allowed within the flood plain as identified on the site plan.)
Chairman Bristol opened the public hearing at 7:23 P.M. and set forth the format that would be followed. There were no objections to his participation as Chairman. There were no objections to any Planning Commission’s participation in the proceedings. No Planning Commission Member acknowledged any gain or interest with regard to this matter. No Planning Commission Member acknowledged any communication outside of this hearing with opponents or proponents in regard to this matter.
Staff Report
Chaz Bates presented the Staff Report dated April 20, 2006 attached hereto as Exhibit 5 (attachment 5) and incorporated herein as though fully set forth.
Background
The applicant is proposing building a single-family home and garage at 1117 West Robert Avenue. The application also includes a possible storage building located on the northwest portion of the lot. The property is designated as Single Family Residential and zoned Single-Family Residential 1 and is approximately 1.5 acres.
The City’s official critical areas map indicates that the property is within 200 feet of designated floodplain for Paye Creek. In accordance with Section 18.08.140 of the Chewelah Municipal Code (CMC) requires a Site Plan Review permit, when a proposal involves development activities within 200 feet of identified critical area. A site plan review requires the planning commission to hold a public hearing for the purpose of taking testimony, hearing evidence, considering the facts pertinent to the proposal, and evaluating the proposal for consistency with the requirements of this title and other applicable plans and regulations. The planning commission may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the permit based on the testimony and findings made.
Notice
In accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act, Chewelah Municipal Code, state law, and the Chewelah Public Participation Policy a Notice of Completion, Environmental Determination, and Public Hearing for a Site Plan Review located at 1117 West Robert Avenue were given as follows:
§ Notice was published on April 6, 2006 in the Chewelah Independent.
§ Notice was posted on April 7, 2006 on the Chewelah website and at the following locations: both entrances to city hall, the official city bulletin board, American West Bank, Chewelah Post Office, and Chewelah Library.
§ Notice was posted on April 10, 2006 on the property site (2 postings on Court Street and Robert Street).
§ Notice was given by mail on April 6, 2006 to property owners within three hundred feet of the proposed project. The names of the property owners within 300 feet were taken from a certified list prepared by a title company showing the most recent county assessor’s records.
Beginning on April 6, 2006 a copy of the proposed project and supporting documentation was available at city hall, room 107 for review. Copies of those items are available for public review at the planning commission meeting on April 20, 2006.
No public comment was received.
Analysis
The R-1 zone permits single-family housing provided that they meet the zoning district’s development standards. The proposed project meets the R-1 zoning district standards for building separation, lot coverage, setbacks, and use provisions.
In accordance with Section 18.08.140 Critical Area Resource Overly Zone of the Chewelah Municipal Code, the applicant identified the floodplain boundary from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain map panel number 530186 0001. According to FEMA map and the draft SMP map the building location is outside the 100-year floodplain. The floodplain is approximately 60 feet away from the proposed home and 15 feet away from a possible storage building. The center of Paye Creek is approximately 115 feet away from the proposed home and 50 feet away from a possible storage building. Neither the critical areas map nor the draft SMP identified any additional critical areas on this site.
The project as proposed on the submitted site plan has been designed to avoid impacts to Paye Creek and its floodplain area. The single-family home and associated accessory uses is consistent with the comprehensive plan and is compliant with all development regulations. To ensure the protection of the health and safety from impacts related to flooding, the approval of this permit should limit permanent structures within the 100-year floodplain. No other comments regarding the applicant’s site plan was received from city staff.
Findings
The project is consistent with the Chewelah comprehensive plan and meets the requirements and intent of the Chewelah Zoning and Land Division Ordinance, including land use and intensity of development.
Single-family homes and accessory structures are permitted outright in the R-1 zoning district. The project as presented conforms to the zoning standards for setbacks, lot area, lot width, and lot coverage. The project is also consistent with the single-family comprehensive plan land use designation.
1. The physical location, size and placement of proposed structures on the site and the location of proposed uses within the project minimize impacts to any critical resource or floodplain area to the greatest extent possible.
The proposed buildings are located approximately 60 and 15 feet from the floodplain. This location of structures avoids impacts to the frequently flooded area in accordance with CMC section 18.08.140.
2. The project is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the surrounding area.
The proposed single-family home and accessory structures is consistent with the area. Further, the stated purpose of the R-1 zone is to provide for single family housing. The proposed design should not conflict with the surrounding neighborhood.
3. The project will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety or general welfare.
The proposal has no foreseeable detrimental impacts effect on the public interest, health, safety or general welfare. Public services are adequate to meet the proposed home.
4. The project adequately mitigates any identified impacts.
There are no identified environmental impacts identified. This proposal was categorically exempt from a State Environmental Policy Act threshold determination.
5. Adequate setbacks and buffering have been provided. Any reduction to setbacks or buffer widths is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable economic use of the lot and does not impact the functional value of the critical resource area.
The proposed location of the structures is outside the floodplain boundary. The Floodplain Management Overlay zone does not require setbacks or buffers. The proposed structures are likely to not impact the flood zone of Paye Creek.
Condition of Approval
The following condition is suggested to ensure that the project is completed and managed in a manner consistent with this site plan review approval.
1. No construction or development activities shall be allowed within the floodplain as identified on the site plan.
Irv Schick – What is the character of the of the stream bank for Paye Creek in that area?
Chaz Bates – I believe, and please correct me if I am wrong, I think it is Reed Canary Grass. I don’t think it is steep at all.
Irv Schick – No native vegetation and no trees?
Chaz Bates – No.
Alice Crowley – Is there any thought about Robert Street being extended?
Chaz Bates – I kind of skipped over it, I didn’t receive any such comment from any of the different department heads, this was routed as typically all applications are that come to a public hearing in front of the planning commission, actually all applications are routed to all the different departments, and I didn’t receive any comments from any of the departments in regards to the extension of Robert. Basically, the department heads signed off on it, they said everything looked okay to them, and they had no problems with the site plan.
Chairman Bristol – Is there any requirements for heights for the house in regards to Paye Creek?
Chaz Bates – It is actually outside the floodplain area, so I don’t believe the ordinance, the …overlay applies to it, I think their site plan actually does, is going to elevate the structure anyway, but I didn’t see the requirement.
Chairman Bristol – And the 100 year floodplain on this is reasonably accurate?
Chaz Bates – Yes.
Chairman Bristol – On the site plan map…to the north end, is that where the property line is?
Chaz Bates – It actually is.
Chairman Bristol – That is just an odd configuration for a lot. Maybe you can answer that when you come up (applicant).
Chaz Bates – Actually I was speaking with the applicant before the meeting and I didn’t think about it when I saw this, but they have to actually maintain the other side of the creek because the property owners for the…don’t cross the creek to maintain it.
Chairman Bristol – That is just a unique boundary line.
Chaz Bates – I am not sure, it is there, there was another party that was interested in looking for some land to develop duplexes and I saw this on the other side…
Petitions or Letters of Communication
Chairman Bristol – I think we have already figured out that there are no petitions or letters of communication.
Gaylea Nolander – No, we did receive any.
Gaylea Nolander read the exhibit list into the record.
Applicant
Property Owners, John and Donna Geiges were present in the audience.
Alan Gorst, Applicant and general contractor who is speaking on behalf of John and Donna Geiges who are the property owners. To answer the question concerning Robert Street, the way the creek goes after it leaves their property, it would require a bridge across the creek to extend Robert Street, and there is another house just to the west of that, so this is kind of a unique piece of property where it is a fairly large acreage inside the city limits but the northern part is accessed by Robert Street and the southern would be accessed by Court Street if that were to be extended. It does have sewer currently in place on Court Street to the south. Regarding that property boundary on the north end, there is a subdivision on King Street that has been put in and the way they did that, there are two lots to the north of this single lot that we are looking at and it was somebody’s idea to give everyone access to the creek, and that is why that strange jog is in the property boundary, and it makes not very much sense, but it is there, we found all of the pins and that is the way it is I guess. Are there any other questions or anything we can answer? It is a single level home, it is consistent with what is in the area already, it has considerably more setback than houses that are in the area near it.
Irv Schick – I guess that brings a question to my mind, there is 185’ by 185’ outside there with a small setback, it almost looks like it would be suitable for a later subdivision or something of the sort, has that been envisioned?
Alan Gorst – There was a lot of discussion with the Geiges’ about that, and given the state of the growth management planning, the goal with some of that is to more intensively develop property that already has infrastructure, and so, it did make sense to allow for a possibility that in the future by putting this house on the north portion of this property, there would be an available potential two lots on the southern end of the property if Court Street were to ever be extended, so it was a future consideration for the happening, yes.
Chairman Bristol – Are there other questions for Mr. Gorst?
Irv Schick - Only one comment, so far until we hear more, but I would encourage the property owner, that the City and Commission are particularly interested in ecology of all three creeks in this community, and I guess if this was to go, I would heartedly encourage the owner to the keep the stream bank as natural as possible and not mow down to the waterline and things like that, and encourage some native vegetation for re-vegetating the stream bank appropriately as it would have been natively.
Alan Gorst – The creek where it goes through there is actually kind of a cut, I mean it is down probably 2 ½ , 3 feet from the mean grade of the surrounding area, and the house that has been in existence there to the west, they have some trees along the bank, and that would great. They do have some willows along there and some kind of low vegetation that would be native would be a good thing.
Irv Schick – Some stream bank stabilization and things like that, setback from lawn…affluent from lawns and things like that out of the creek.
Chairman Bristol – We are just fresh from walking the creeks with Doug Pineo, from Department of Ecology, today. The recommendations and the problems he saw primarily were with where people tried to make it beautiful in their minds, but it was detrimental to the creek, where you mow right down, and you put weed and feed right down into the creek, and instead of leaving some nice access places and some native, and being cautious what goes into those, and still giving yourself access to the creek, but maybe not the whole…property lines…I think it is probably good every time we do a site plan review, to point those options out to see if we can strengthen the beautiful creeks that we do have. Most people buy them because they are pretty, and with that comes a responsibility to help keep them to help keep them nice and healthy.
Planning Commission concurred – Don’t use our City Park as an example.
Public Testimony
At this time, the floor is open for comments from the audience. In fairness to all in attendance, each person will be given an opportunity to address the Planning Commission for an initial period not to exceed five minutes. If more time is needed, it will be made available after everyone has had a chance to speak. Questions from the Planning Commission to the Public will be held until everyone is done.
Public Testimony – None.
Applicant/Staff Rebuttal – None.
The Public Testimony Portion of the public hearing was closed at 7:40 P.M.
Discussion – No Discussion.
Motion
Daniel Voltz - I move that we approve the Site Plan Review subject to the Facts, and Findings located in the Staff Report dated April 20, 2006 with no changes.
Bill Davies seconded the motion.
Gaylea Nolander asked Daniel Voltz for clarification, did you also include the condition, no construction or development activities shall be allowed within the floodplain as identified on the site plan?
Daniel Voltz responded with yes.
Chairman Bristol called for a roll call vote on the motion.
Roll Call Vote: Kadya Hugus, Irv Schick, Bill Davies, Kevin Herda, Alice Crowley, Daniel Voltz and Tom Bristol all voted yes, unanimously approving the Site Plan Review.
Decision
Planning Commission unanimously approved the Site Plan Review with the following Findings and Condition:
Findings for Site Plan Review
The project is consistent with the Chewelah comprehensive plan and meets the requirements and intent of the Chewelah Zoning and Land Division Ordinance, including land use and intensity of development.
Single-family homes and accessory structures are permitted outright in the R-1 zoning district. The project as presented conforms to the zoning standards for setbacks, lot area, lot width, and lot coverage. The project is also consistent with the single-family comprehensive plan land use designation.
1. The physical location, size and placement of proposed structures on the site and the location of proposed uses within the project minimize impacts to any critical resource or floodplain area to the greatest extent possible.
The proposed buildings are located approximately 60 and 15 feet from the floodplain. This location of structures avoids impacts to the frequently flooded area in accordance with CMC section 18.08.140.
2. The project is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the surrounding area.
The proposed single-family home and accessory structures is consistent with the area. Further, the stated purpose of the R-1 zone is to provide for single family housing. The proposed design should not conflict with the surrounding neighborhood.
3. The project will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety or general welfare.
The proposal has no foreseeable detrimental impacts effect on the public interest, health, safety or general welfare. Public services are adequate to meet the proposed home.
4. The project adequately mitigates any identified impacts.
There are no identified environmental impacts identified. This proposal was categorically exempt from a State Environmental Policy Act threshold determination.
5. Adequate setbacks and buffering have been provided. Any reduction to setbacks or buffer widths is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable economic use of the lot and does not impact the functional value of the critical resource area.
The proposed location of the structures is outside the floodplain boundary. The Floodplain Management Overlay zone does not require setbacks or buffers. The proposed structures are likely to not impact the flood zone of Paye Creek.
Condition of Approval
The following condition is suggested to ensure that the project is completed and managed in a manner consistent with this site plan review approval.
1. No construction or development activities shall be allowed within the floodplain as identified on the site plan.
Daniel Voltz – Thank you for putting that package together...Before we move on, with the information that we had today, and with the steams of local significance plan we are putting together, once we do have a plan, and the applicant comes forward, I would like to have that applicant, in agreement with what Irv was saying, that we need to explain to them at this process what we would like to see at the City with the…native areas, so that we don’t have to come in after the fact and ask them to change.
Chairman Bristol – I agree and I am glad that Irv brought that up…I do think that every time that we do a site plan review on the creek, we should bring up the direction that would be helpful to the creek, and I don’t know if that is something that could be put as a condition on site plan reviews.
Chaz Bates – The Draft Shoreline Master Program and also the regulations that apply to the local streams of significance actually have a riparian buffer requirement in there. Those desires will actual become a requirement.
Chairman Bristol – What we can do at this stage is encourage you to do natural vegetation. If you don’t have good information, the Department of Ecology, will give it to you really freely, they will even come up and talk to you and show you what good things to plant, and what does well.
Irv Schick – They will help you lay out a re-vegetation plan…to bring it back to as normal and as stable a bank set up as possible with natural without having to bring in riprap…
Mrs. Geiges said they had plans to turn it into a park setting and a bird sanctuary.
· Public Comments
Bob Playfair – 905 E. Stingy Lane, Chewelah, Washington – Mr. Playfair asked that the letter containing his comments to city council that he left at city hall earlier in the month be distributed to the planning commission. Gaylea will make copies for the planning commission.
Mr. Playfair – My comments (in the letter) come right back to Jon’s comments tonight. In some ways, my feeling is that the City of Chewelah has got their cart ahead of your pony in terms of the job that the planning commission now has ahead of them, because you have got to redo the comprehensive plan, 25 year plan for the City, you have got a water plan to do before that, how many parts are there to that, the comprehensive plan?
Chaz Bates – There are 5 required elements.
Mr. Playfair – Right, and you have only got a year to do it in. Good luck. I am glad I am sitting here and not there. The biggest question that I have, and this is related to the City extending Main Street across our property at the end of Main over to Flowery Trail, the City is actually cutting a swath right through a two acre tract that would make good multi-family homes, but if you cut diagonally across a two acre piece with a 80’, 90’ road right-of-way, what have you got left in the two corners? That is the first one, and the second one that Jon mentioned was the amount of tourist traffic that you are planning on having coming through the City. The question that I have had voiced and still have is that a new transportation count has not been made as far as the truck traffic coming over Flowery Trail, and I pointed out in my comments, some of the changes that have happened in the fifteen years since the last count was done. My thought is, and my suggestion to the Council was, you have the downtown revitalization part, stop right now, do the comp plan, look at the possibility of a truck bypass, here again, on the east and south city limits that gives you a…street, complete with sewer/water, and the other one that you are going to have is I am sure that somewhere along the line in the comp plan you are going to be looking at urban growth areas, which are going to go towards the cemetery, along with some of the other areas, and that drops right back into water. The City, two years ago, took the water right that was for the south part of the City and administratively transferred it to the Golf Course, now, as Jon said, the south part of the City needs a new well, except that we don’t have a new water right, so how is the south part of the City going to get a new well without a new water right, and especially when the water rights are closed in Department of Ecology. Just some of the problems that you, the planning commission, are going to face in the next year, and I just wanted to bring those up front. If anybody has any questions on this, I will be glad to talk to anybody about it. If anybody wants to send me something in writing, I will put my answer in writing and send it back to all of you.
· Communications and Announcements
Shoreline - Chaz Bates reported as follows: Planning Commission Members Irv Schick, Tom Bristol, Daniel Voltz, and Planner Chaz Bates accompanied Doug Pineo, Department of Ecology, on a walk from Mi Casita’s to the north end of the park along Chewelah Creek. Irv Schick summarized the highlights of the walk during the previous site plan review.
Irv Schick – It was really an interesting walk through, looking at the vegetation, identifying the vegetation, identifying where things are going well for the stream, also identifying areas where the stream is seriously in danger or being harmed, and identifying remediation techniques/tactics to repair the damage and minimize further damage and I thought it was a really interesting tour. I did voice disagreement with some things, because he (Mr. Pineo) would like to see more remediation in the park, than I would agree to, but the idea is to get that stream to the point where it is healthy, where it has got its sediment reduced and the amount of nitrogen and phosphates, and things like that reduced, where it is more suitable habitat for the fish, and in some of the very sheltered areas along the creek where it can stay cool and shady, crustaceans are normally in there. He introduced us to a visual of what we are going to be heading for on all three creeks in our plan and what we are trying to achieve.
Chaz Bates suggested that planning commission members that took the walk, pair up with people that were not able to attend, to share the information.
Planning Commission Members were appalled by the amount of trash that is in the creek and along the stream banks.
Chairman Bristol – The City does own a lot of the stream bank and on the side where the sun hits it on the east side…if the City is going to have requirements…that they be their own test case…develop a plan to do some restoration in that area. A committee may be formed to work on that with DOE.
Irv Schick – Mr. Pineo said the stream is very unique in that it isn’t a flash flood and then dry up…it runs all year.
Short Course in Local Planning – Chaz Bates announced the City of Colville will be hosting a Short Course on May 10, 2006. Chaz encouraged Planning Commission Members to attend. Gaylea has sent a notice to Planning Commission and City Council inviting them to the Short Course.
Response to Mr. Playfair’s Comments - Chaz Bates – We will be doing all of those things that Bob is talking about, and we haven’t really moved into the inventory phase, I am just getting the electronic copy of the comprehensive plan, and getting the amendments that have been made since 1997 into the comprehensive plan. The County…is digitizing all the parcels in the City of Chewelah, we will be using that for an actual land use inventory, so we will have pretty solid data about existing land uses, have a parcel map that will show land use designations by parcel, zoning districts by parcel…The comp plan has to be done by April 2007…will move forward with the comp plan after the shoreline management plan…we will take it element by element.
Comp Plan - Chairman Bristol – You are also developing a list of things that have come up. It might be nice at this stage to develop an outline that we can add to.
Planning Commission encouraged Chaz to start working on the comp plan, since the Planning Commission doesn’t have much left to do on the Shoreline, and they are ready to start working on the comp plan.
Chaz Bates updated planning commission on recent legislation in regard to growth management planning. Chaz will advocate starting work on the comp plan immediately.
City Council/Planning Commission Workshop – The workshop scheduled for April 22, 2006 has been cancelled due to low attendance. Planning Commission discussed the importance of workshops with city council. After discussion, Chairman Bristol advised that he will write a letter requesting a workshop with city council right before their next meeting on May 3, 2006 from 6:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. The following topics were suggested for the agenda: (1) Shoreline Master Plan
(2) Comp Plan Update
(3) Code Enforcement
(4) Goal Setting
Comp Plan Update/Shoreline Master Plan – Chaz reported that he will try to have the Shoreline Master Program ready for hearing next month…He will try to have a comp plan update outline for planning commission by the next meeting and suggested appointing a Technical Review Committee.
· Reports from Members and Committees – Addressed under Communications and Announcements.
· Reports from City Administrator and Staff – Report given earlier on the agenda.
OLD BUSINESS
· Draft Shoreline Master Program – Discussion – Public Comments Welcome
Gaylea Nolander advised that notice of discussion on the Draft Shoreline Master Plan was published in the legal section of the Chewelah Independent, posted as an agenda item and posted as an individual notice. The agenda and notice was posted on the website, at the library, city hall, AmericanWest Bank, and Chewelah Post Office. A copy of the Shoreline Inventory and Draft Shoreline Master Plan was available at City Hall, Room 107, for review.
Also see Site Plan Review, Communications and Announcements for Shoreline update.
Chaz Bates advised that he is still working with Doug Pineo in regard to the buffer situation in that urban/commercial zone. He encouraged public and planning commission to get comments to Chaz for the Shoreline Master Program. Timeline – Try to schedule a hearing for the planning commission in May, and depending on planning commission’s recommendation, the council would probably hold a public hearing in July. City Council adopts it and then it gets sent to Department of Ecology for final approval.
· Planning Commission Purpose, Development of Mission Statements, and Planning Commission Evaluation – No discussion. Will discuss at workshop.
NEW BUSINESS
· Election of Officers
Chairperson – Chairman Bristol opened nominations for Chairperson. Daniel Voltz moved with a second from Kevin Herda to nominate Tom Bristol for Chairperson. No further nominations. Roll Call Vote: The following planning commission members voted yes: Kadya Hugus, Irv Schick, Bill Davies, Kevin Herda, Alice Crowley, and Daniel Voltz. Tom Bristol abstained.
Vice Chairperson – Chairman Bristol opened nominations for Vice Chairperson. Irv Schick moved with a second from Kevin Herda to nominate Daniel Voltz for Vice Chairperson. No further nominations. Roll Call Vote: The following planning commission members voted yes: Kadya Hugus, Irv Schick, Bill Davies, Kevin Herda, Alice Crowley, and Tom Bristol. Daniel Voltz voted No.
· Public Comments – Pat Abbott commented that you all do a great job.
· Adjournment – Irv Schick moved with a second from Bill Davies to adjourn the meeting. All in favor. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted by:
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Gaylea Nolander, Executive Secretary Thomas Bristol, Chairman
Attachments to these minutes may be viewed at City Hall, Room 107
