RES 87-24 CUP ROGER EVENS FINDINGS OF FACTRevised September 17, 1987
RESOLUTION NO. 87-24
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ROGER JAMES EVANS APPLICATION
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, RECOMMENDATIONS
AND DETERMINATION, AND DECISION ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Winslow, Washington,
had determined it to be in the public interest to adopt the enclosed
Roger James Evans Findings, Conclusions & Determination, as amended,
in Hearing Examiner File #11-7-86-1, shown as Exhibit "A" hereto, and
herein, and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to conclude the Roger James
Evans applications so as to provide for such changes, as indicated and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Winslow incorporates
as amended herein Exhibit "A" attached for the adoption of all such
changes,
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Council of the City of
Winslow, Washington, as follows:
That the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Recommendations
and Determination and Decision, in Hearing Examiner File #11-7-86-1,
as set forth in Exhibit "A" hereto and incorporated herein by reference,
as amended below, are herewith adopted and placed in effect as the
final decision of city council except as they are inconsistent with
the following amendments herewith made by city council:
I. Add to page 2 of Exhibit "A" as the concluding paragraph
in the introduction:
The City Council considered this application at its
September 3, 1987 meeting; which was continued to September
8th. Limited input from the proponent and his attorney was
allowed as was limited input from various members of the West
Winslow Neighborhood Association.
II. Add to the Findings of Fact, paragraph XVII, on page 6,
the following:
Numerous cards, letters and petitions have been received
by the City from both opponents and proponents of the project.
A very significant percentage (well over 50%) of the residents
in the area have indicated opposition to the project.
The City Council held that since there is such a volume of
opposition to the project that careful consideration of opponents
concerns was important. Thus, the City Council considered all of
the additional conditions submitted by the West Winslow Neighbor-
hood Association in its letter received by the City on August
27, 1987.
III. Amend the Recommendations and Decisions on pages 13 and 14
so as to delete same and adopt the following: Order
The shoreline substantial development permit and conditional
use permits are hereby approved with the following conditions:
1)
Trail easement for public use
a) An easement for a trail for public use along the
Waterfront of the subject property for eventual tie in
to the City Waterfront trail, shall be granted to the
City prior to the opening of the pub.
b) The trail shall be not less than 5' wide and shall
traverse the entire width of the property.
c) This trail shall be developed and maintained by the
property owner.
2) Fire Access
a) Clear delineation of fire access through the
3)
4)
adjacent Bar Harbor Marina parking lot and enforcement
of a fire access zone so that emergency vehicles shall
not be impeded in reaching the pub location. A covenant
binding such use on the Bar ttarbor Marina property and
successors in interest, to run with the land, shall
be filed with the County Auditor.
b) Strict compliance with all fire safety requirements
specified in the building code and specified by the City
Fire Marshall.
Parking.
a) Complete plans for the parking lot and truck
turn around shall be submitted for site plan review
by the planning agency prior to issuance of a building
permit.
b) Such plans shall include improvement of the parking
area to comply with Winslow Municipal Code 18.56.070-
18.56.160 including surfacing and maintenance to
eliminate dust, proper landscaping, lighting and
provision of facilities for collection and separation
for surface water run-off.
c) The number of parking stalls shall be determined by
Winslow Municipal Code 18.56.080.E. All seats to be
occupied by customers, including those on a deck, or
anywhere else on the premises, shall be included in the
seat count.
d) An area for truck turn around and garbage
collection shall be designated on the plans. This area
shall be designed for turn around by trucks up to 30'
e) Access to the parking lot and truck turn around
area shall be from Parfitt Way only.
f) All supply deliveries shall be made from Parfitt Way.
g) Signs shall be posted in the Bar Harbor Marina parking
lot prohibiting parking for the pub.
h) If parking is expanded to accommodate additional
seating, it shall be confined to the area covered by
this shoreline substantial development permit
application (see Findings of Fact). Any such expansion
of parking shall be reviewed by the Planning Agency in a
site plan review process. Such review shall treat the
additional parking as an integral part of the total site.
i) Screening of the parking lot on the east side shall
be in accordance with Washington Municipal Code
18.56.130. At the discretion of the Planning Agency,
screening plantings shall be allowed in lieu of a fence
if they are sufficient height and glare blocking quality.
j) Screening along Parfitt Way shall be designed to:
- minimize headlight glare onto Parfitt Way and into
neighbors years across the street
- maximize visibility of Parfitt Way from the driveway
entrance and visibility of the driveway entrance from
Parfitt Way, so that vehicles leaving the pub parking
area will be able to see pedestrians and vehicles along
Parfitt Way and vice versa.
Pedestrian Amenities
a) An improved pedestrian walkway from Parfitt Way to
the pub, separate from the parking lot and the driveway,
shall be required.
b) The property owner shall be required to install at
his cost or contribute the cost for installation a
(2)
5)
6)
this
sidewalk along the Parfitt Way edge of lot 127.
Further, the property owner shall not protest the
formation of a future LID including sidewalks along
the south side of Parfitt Way.
Site Plan Review
a) A detailed site plan and landscaping plan including
a plan for the deck shall be reviewed by the Planning
Agency prior to application for a building permit under
Winslow Municipal Code 16.72,010.E.
b) Notice of this site plan review and details of the
site plan shall be given to the West Winslow Neighborhood
Association through Richard Bowen or their attorney,
John McCullough at least one week prior to the review.
Use of Building
a) No music or live entertainment shall be allowed
on the deck.
b) The type of food and beverage service allowed shall
be determined by the liquor license approved for the
site.
c) Any uses of the building other than those proposed
by this application shall require an additional
shoreline substantial development permit or conditional use
permit or a revision to the permit issued herein.
d) No public access allowed on the west side of the
building.
SSED BY THE COUNCIL of the City of Winslow, Washington,
/~ da of September, 1987.
/ Y
ALICE B.
ATTEST:
~DO N~A~.~ UXTON, Cl~r~k Treasurer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROBERT O. CONOLEY, City ~t~
BEFORE THE
HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF WINSLOW
RECEIVED
JUL 2 8 1987
BY CITY OF
/
In the matter of the
Application for a
Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit and
Conditional Use Permits,
Roger James Evans, Applicant
File ~11-7-86-1
Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law,
Recommendations on,
Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit
and Decision on
Conditional Use
Permits
On June 29, 1987, at 7:00 P.M., Winslow Hearing Examiner
RObin Hunt conducted a public hearing to consider Roger James
Evans' application for a Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit and Conditional Use Permit for a non-water related
commercial development at 321 Parfitt Way S.W. in Winslow.
Applicant wishes to convert an old house into an English
style "pub" to be located on the Eagle Harbor waterfront.
Thirty-five persons artended the hearing in addition to the
Hearing Examiner~ City Land Use Administrator Mike Regis, and
Renee Hauge, who monitored the recording of the hearing.
Mr. Evans was the primary spokesperson for his
application. His attorney, Tom O'Hare, also spoke on his
behalf. Six other persons spoke in favor of the application.
The file also contains several letters from persons in favor
of the project.
-1-
Attorney John McCullough was the primary spokesperson
for the West Winslow Neighborhood Association, a group of
neighbors opposed to the application. Richard Bowen also
spoke on behalf of the west Winslow Neighborhood Association.
Twelve other persons spoke in opposition.
The file contains n,umerous letters from persons in
opposition to the proposal, including some one-hundred and
fifty three pre-stamped, pro-addressed post cards distributed
by one of the members of the.West Winslow Neighborhood
Association.
Persons in favor of the project generally welcome a
quiet, smoke-free gathering place for adults to socialize in
a scenic waterfront environment; they also favor the rare
public access to the Eagle Harbor shoreline. Those in
opposition are concerned with potential traffic, noise,
rcwdiness, drunken driving, and the impact of an alcoholic
beverage establishment on a primarily residential
neighborhood.
Based upon the testimony at the public hearing, the
exhibits in the file, and an inspection of the property, the
Hearing Examiner now makes and enters the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
The property is owned by Bar Harbor Management
Corporation, of which Roger James Evans and Judith Evans, are
both part owners. It is located at 321 Parfitt Way S.W. in
Winslow on Bainbridge Island, and affects tax lots
272502-4-127-2004, 272502-4-081-2008, and 8057. See Exhibit
J-4. The property is long and narrow: 62 feet wide along
Parfitt Way, 340 feet deep on the east side, 416 feet deep on
the west side, with a diagonal 96 feet of waterfront along
Eagle Harbor. See enlarged site plan, Exhibit A-4b.
II
Applicant seeks to remodel a small house currently used
as an office/library for the adjacent Bar Harbor Marina to
the west. He wishes to convert the 100 year old house to a
English style pub, which would serve Pacific Northwest micro-
beers, ales, wines and light food. The rest of the property
is covered by tall grasses, a garden, and some deciduous
trees. A foot path is worn across the property from Parfitt
Way to the buildings.
-2-
Applicant does not plan to add significant landscaping.
Mike Regis testified that the Planning Agency felt that the
site already has enough vegetation and that with little or no
asphalt planned, additional landscaping would not be
required.
IV
The project is estimated to cost $25,000. Exhibit A-1.
V
The property is in a Commercial zone with a master
shoreline designation of "urban."
VI
To the west along the waterfront is the Bar Harbor
Marina, also owned by the Applicant, with 45 moorage slips,
and the Williamson Landing six-unit condcminimum complex with
24 moorage slips. Due west is a gravel marina parking lot,
and another parcel of land which is the subject of a rezone
petition to change from Commercial to High Density
Multifamily Residential. Further west across Wood Avenue is
a Single Family Residential zone. Up Wood Avenue to the
northwest is a primarily single family residential area in a
Medium Density Multifamily Residential zone. A 39 unit
senior citizen apartment complex, Winslow Manor, has been
approved but not yet constructed.
Across Parfitt Way to the north is a Medium Density
Multifamily Residential zone, containing single family
residences as well as the Captain House Bed and Breakfast
establishment directly across the street and a 60 unit senior
citizen apartment complex, Winslow Arms. To the northeast is
the parking lot for the Winslow Wharf Marina businesses, a
single family residence, and Finch Place, a new 29 unit
senior citizen apartment complex, further north.
To the east the zone is Commercial, with the two
adjacent lots used for single family residences. Further to
the east is the Winslow Wharf complex, which includes a large
marina, the Saltwater Cafe, serving food and alcoholic
beverages, the Pegasus Coffee Shop, a marine supply store,
with an architect's office above, and a small boat repair and
construction shop. Offshore to the south are marina docks
and buoys for pleasure boats and live-aboards. See Exhibit
Q-7, the February 9, 1987, letter from the Neighborhood
Committee to the Planning Agency.
-3-
The Saltwater Cafe was previously a liquor and food
establishment known as Mac's Tavern. The multifamily
residential complexes in the area were built after the area
was zoned commercial.
VII
Applicant would neither enlarge the footprint of the
building nor change the roof line. He would remodel the
interior and add viewing windows on the harbor side. There
would be seating inside for forty-nine persons. Applicant
plans to add a deck to the existing building. The deck would
be 28 feet wide and 29 1/2 feet deep on the west side,
"stepping" diagonally to the 10 feet deep east side. See the
October 30, 1986, site plan, Exhibit A-4. The deck would
accomodate 25 to 30 customers. The actual number of
customers allowed at any one time will be determined by the
Liquor Control Board.
No smoking, loud music, or pool tables would be allowed.
Rather there would be music of a character and volume to
encourage conversation, as well as reading, chess games and
other quiet activities. Applicant, intends to continue
living next door, to run the pub and to insure as best he can
a mature, peaceful, rather than a rowdy, environment. He said
that he would control persons from becoming intoxicated the
same way he would control dinner guests in his home.
VIII
The pub would be linked by a foot path to the parking
lot. It would not be readily visable from Parfitt Way due to
the distance and downward slope of the site.
IX
Applicant proposes to link his pub with the Winslow
waterfront trail system and would encourage public access on
his property. The existing foot trail across his property is
currently open to public.
X
Applicant anticipates that many patrons will walk to the
pub from their boats, nearby homes, and even from the ferry,
once the City's waterfront trail system is completed. He
anticipates generating 25 vehicles trips daily.
Applicant plans parking stalls for 13 vehicles in the
gravel parking lot. He plans for garbage pick-up and
delivery to be made through the Parfitt Way driveway and
-4-
parking lot rather than through the adjacent Wood Avenue
marina parking lot; deliveries would be made by a footpath
from the parking lot rather than by vehicles driving up to
the building.
Concern was raised at the public hearing about the lack
of turn around space in the parking lot for large delivery
vehicles and garbage trucks. See enlarged site plan, Exhibit
A-4b. Mr. Evans promised to revise the plan to provide ample
turn around space.
XI
The driveway from Parfitt Way through the parking lot
would be angled and screened so as to minimize glare from
headlights into neighbors' yards across Parfitt Way. Concern
was raised at the hearing about the safety of pedestrians if
the driveway entrance were so well screened that pedestrians
might not see vehicles emerging from the pub parking lot onto
Parfitt Way.
XII
There are no sidewalks on Wood Avenue or Parfitt Way,
though the City has plans for sidewalks along at least one
side of Wood Avenue. Currently, pedestrians walk in the
roads.
XIII
Applicant intends that fire truck access be through the
marina parking lot to the west where existing fire hydrants
are available. This parking lot is neither paved nor lined;
sometimes vehicles are parked closely in an haphazard way.
In order for emergency equipment to be assured a clear
passage way through the parking lot, a fire lane would need
to be kept clear.
XIV
The pub building is much lower than the adjacent multi-
story ccndominimums to the west. The building is a miminal
intrusion on the shoreline when viewed from the water or the
land. The remodel would not further obscure anyone's view of
Eagle Harbor.
-5-
XV
The small house character of the building is compatible
with the other existing small older single family houses in
the area. It is not in character with the modern high rise
condominim~m complex to the west or the senior citizen
complex to the northeast.
XVI
The proposed pub use for the building is consistent in
character with the property's commercial urban designation
and with such nearby uses as the Saltwater Cafe, which serves
alcohol, and the Pegasus coffee house to the east. It is
compatible with the two nearby marinas.
The proposed pub use is not consistent with the
surrounding residential use of the area, much of which is on
land zoned commercial. This inconsistency does not arise
from the "pub" nature of the use but rather from the non-
residential, commercial nature of this use in a commercial
zone just as any other commercial venture would be
inconsistent. Future commercial development is likely in the
commercially zoned area, with which Applicant's proposed use
would be consistent.
XVII
On February 22, 1979, attorneys for Williamson
Properties, Inc., the City of Winslow, and Applicant Evans
signed a Stipulation and Order of Dismissal of a lawsuit,
whereby Williamson and Evans agreed that neither would oppose
the other's development of his property so long as it was in
compliance with applicable building regulations. Notice of
this stipulation was mailed to Dick Bowen, then prospective
purchaser of Williamson Properties and later developer of
Williamson Landing Condominmums to the west. See Exhibit
P-2.
XVIII
On November 26, 1987, City Land Use Administrator Mike
Regis issued a Determination of Non-significance to the
environment. On June 8, 1987, Mr. Regis issued an updated
Determination of Non-significance. See Exhibits D-1 and L-l,
respectively. The West Winslow Neighborhood Association has
appealed this determination, which appeal is currently
pending before the winslow City Council. There has been no
evidence presented thus far that the pub would have an
adverse impact on the shoreline environment.
~6-
XIX
On April 9, 1987, the Winslow Planning Agency recommended
approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and
Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Agency noted that
though the proposal is not particularly water dependent, it
would provide a public facility allowing waterfront viewing
and access to the shoreline. The Planning Agency suggested
no conditions for granting the permits. See Exhibit J-4.
XX
Notice of the public hearing was visibly posted on the
property and published in the Bainbridge Review on June 10,
1987, and June 17, 1987.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Legal notice of the public hearing was given.
II
WMC 16.12.860 requires the Hearing Examiner to transmit
to the City Council her recommendation on the shoreline
permit application within thirty days after completion of the
public hearing. Although the City's Determination of Non-
significance is still on appeal and therefore subject to
change, the June 29, 1987, hearing was completed that
evening. Thus the Hearing Examiner renders these conclusions
based on information available at this time, subject to
amendment following resolution of the appeal.
Until and unless the City Council rules to the contrary,
the Hearing Examiner will honor the presumption established
by WMC 16.04.260 E, that the Land Use Administrator's
Determination of Non-significance was made according to legal
requirements and is not clearly erroneous.
-7-
III
A substantial development permit is required by the
Shoreline Management Master Program because the cost of the
project will exceed $1000 in cost. WMC 16.12.400.
IV
The property is in a Commercial Zone and designated as an
"urban" enviroraent by the City Shoreline Management Master
Program. A pub is a permitted use in a commercial zone.
WMC 18.44.020 A. and C. It also serves the general purpose
of a commercial zone as set forth by WMC 18.44.010:
The purpose of the commercial zone is to provide retail
and personal services to the residents of the City and
visiting public.
It also fulfills the policies and regulations for
recreation in the shoreline area as set forth in WMC
16.12.730, part B of which provides:
Priority shall be given to developments ... which provide
recreational uses and other improvements facilitating
public access to shorelines.
WMC 16.12.570 sets forth the purposes and uses of a
shoreline "urban environment" as follows:
A. "Urban environment" is an area of intense
modification of the natural systems caused by human
activity with residential, commercial, and
industrial uses. The purpose of placing an area in
an urban environment is to ensure the utilization
of the area to be a multiplicity of
intense human uses.
The use policies are as follows:
1. Any shoreline use, subject to specific use
regulations concerning them should be
permitted.
2. Public access should be encouraged. Where
practical, various access points ought to be
linked to nonmotorized transportation routes,
such as bicycle and hiking paths.
3. PUDs should be encouraged within the
shoreline area.
4. Floating homes shall be permitted in this
environment.
VI
WMC 16.12.670 C. provides "General Regulations" for
commercial developments ,in part, as follows:
2. Ccmmerciai facilities should provide public access
to shoreline areas when feasible, taking into
consideration public safety, public health and
security.
3. Uses which are not shoreline dependent or related
but which provide an opportunity for the community
to have access to the shoreline shall be encouraged.
These uses require a conditional use permit.
5. Uses other than water dependent and water related to
be located less than fifty feet from the ordinary
high water mark shall require a conditional use
permit.
VII
The proposed English style pub is not a "shoreline use"
in that it is neither water dependent nor water related.
However, public access to the shoreline is invited. The pub
would ultimately be linked to a non-motorized transportation
route, the Winslow trail system. There is no evidence
concerning whether or not people would arrive by boat;
however moorage is available at nearby marinas. Also, the
pub would be linked to the parking lot by a long walkway.
From the pub and surrounding grounds the public could enjoy a
view of Eagle Harbor and access to the shoreline.
The pub would be located less than fifty feet from the
ordinary high water mark. However, Applicant is not
proposing to build a new building but rather to remodel the
existing building, which is already located less than fifty
feet from the water's edge. A deck to be added on the water
side of the building would be even closer to the shoreline
but would have nc significant impact on the shoreline
environment. It would provide the public a closer, outdoor
space to enjoy the waterfront in nice weather.
VIII
WMC 16.12.670 B. provides policies for commercial
development along the shoreline as follows:
1. Commercial development should be compatible in
design and scale to the area in which it is located.
2. Parking facilities should be placed inland away from
the immediate water's edge and recreational beaches.
-9-
Commercial development should bedesigned and
maintained in such a way as to minimize disruption
of scenic views.
IX
The development proposed is basically compatible in
design and scale to the area in which it is located. It is
smaller in scale than the condominimums to the west and the
senior citizen apartment complexes north of Parfitt Way.
However, such large side developments do not epitomize the
City's housing character goal, which is "to retain the
present character of a primarily single family residential
community .... " WMC 16.08.120. The character of the pub
building would be consistent with this goal.
Parking facilities would be placed inland, away from the
immediate water's edge. The development would be designed
and maintained so as to cause no additional disruption of
scenic views.
X
WMC 16.12.930 B. outlines what applicants must
demonstrate in an application for conditional use permits:
!. That the proposed use will be consistent with the
policies of the Master Program;
2. That the proposed use will not interfere with the
normal public use of public shorelines;
That the proposed use of the site and design of the
project will be compatible with other permitted uses
within the area;
4. That the proposed use will cause no unreasonably
adverse effects to the shoreline environment
designation in which it is to be located;
5. That the public interest suffers no substantial
detrimental effect.
The above criteria are also required by the State in WAC
173-14-140 (1), which stresses that all five must be met in
order for conditional use permits to be granted.
xI
The proposed use would be consistent with WMC 16.12.670
B. and WMC 16.12.570 B. policies of the master program,
especially in the encouragement of public access to the
shoreline. There are very few places along the Winslow
shoreline for the public to view or enjoy the harbor
environment. One of the other few remaining undeveloped
commercial shoreline properties has been proposed as the site
-10-
of a non-public commercial office space complex. The pub, in
contrast, would provide a scenic, quiet place for the public
to enjoy Eagle Harbor.
The proposed use would not interfere with the normal
public use of public shorelines.
The proposed use and design would be compatible with
other permitted commercial uses in the area, primarily to the
east. Although many of the residential neighbors feel
strongly that a pub is not compatible with a residential
area, the design and proposed use do not appear to be anymore
incompatible with neighboring residential use than any other
commercial establishments would be incompatible. Rather, its
small scale and low visibility may prove to be more
compatible with the residential area than other types of
permitted commercial activity. See Finding of Fact XVI.
The proposed use would have no unreasonably adverse
effect or the general public interest would suffer no
substantial detrimental effect, but rather would benefit from
the additional public access to the shoreline.
XII
WMC 16.20.930 D. requires:
In the granting of all conditional use permits,
consideration will be given to the cumulative impact of
additional requests for like actions in the area ....
WAC 173-14-140 (4) also provides that consideration be
given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for
like actions in the area.
XIII
The cumulative impact of additional like actions in the
area would have both positive and negative effects.
Additional like requests would provide a benefit to the
public by increasing commercial waterfront activity which
invites the public to enjoy the waterfront. There would be a
detrimental effect in further reduction in available
commercial waterfront for water dependent or water related
activities. However, remodeling a small house into a pub now
does not foreclose yielding to future water related or
dependent commercial development when and if the demand
materializes; such future transformation would not seem so
likely if Applicant were proposing a large new complex. In
other words, the small scale of the proposed development
preserves the option of a water dependent or water related
activity in the future.
-lt-
XIV
WMC 16.12.750 B. 2. requires minimum alteration of
natural conditions in parking areas accessory to shoreline
uses. Applicant's minimal landscaping plan fits this policy.
WMC 18.56.110 requires the parking area and driveway to
be paved or surfaced in such a way as to elimiate dust and
mud.
WMC 16.12.750 D. 2. requires that parking facilities
provide "safe and convenient pedestrian circulation, within
the parking area, and to the shoreline." Pedestrian safety
requires pedestrian access to the pub from Parfitt Way along
a path separate from the driveway and parking area.
XV
The recent United States Supreme Court case of Nollan v
California Coastal Commission, 55 LW 5145 (June 26, 1987),
need not be considered in conjunction with this shoreline
application. When raised by the Hearing Examiner at the
public hearing, Applicant stated that he would not protest
the City's requiring public access as a condition of the
shoreline management permit. Rather he welcomes the public.
-12-
RECOMMENDATIONS AND
DECISIONS
For the foregoing reasons, the Hearing Examiner
recommends approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit and grants Conditional Use Permits for a non-water
related use which promotes public access, in a building
located less than fifty feet from the ordinary high water
mark, cn the following conditions:
1. Public access to the waterfront and eventual tie in
with the City's waterfront trail system, including grant of a
public easement along the waterfront;
2. Clear delineation of fire access through the adjacent
Harbor Marina parking lot and enforcement of a fire access
zone so that emergency vehicles shall not be impeded in
reaching the pub location;
3. Compliance with all fire safety requirements as
specified by the Fire Inspector, including, but not limited
to, addition of fire hydrants and relocation of fire access
lanes if deemed necessary;
4. Parking area and driveway surfacing or paving so as
to eliminate dus~ and mud, in compliance with WMC 18.56.110;
5. Provision of an adequate turn around for delivery and
garbage trucks in the parking area off Parfitt Way;
6. All supply deliveries and garbage pick ups to be made
through the Parfitt Way entrance;
7. Screening along Parfitt Way designed a) to minimize
headlight glare onto Parfitt Way and into neighbors' yards
across the street, and b) to maximize visibilty of Parfitt
Way from the driveway entrance and visibility of the driveway
entrance from Parfitt Way, so that vehicles entering and
leaving the pub parking lot will be able to see pedestrians
and vehicles along Parfitt Way and visa-versa;
8. Provision of a pedestrian walkway from Parfitt Way to
the pub walkway, separate from the driveway and parking lot;
9. Installation of a sidewalk along the Parfitt Way edge
of the property when the City completes plans for improvement
of Parfitt Way;
!0. Provision of additional parking spaces in the pub
parking lot off Parfitt way if the 13 spaces planned prove to
be inadequate. The parking spaces allotted shall be deemed
inadequate if the Liquor Control Board allows more than 49
customers at a time or if on three occasions or more the pub
parking lot is full and additional vehicles are parked nearby
along Parfitt Way or Wood Avenue with customers cutting
through the marina. in addition to reporting to City police,
neighbors may bring such overflow parking problem to the
attention of the City by filing a written statement with the
City Land Use Department, specifying the dates, times, and
locations of the additional vehicles. The City Land Use
Department will then investigate and require Applicant to add
the appropriate number of additional parking spaces on site;
-13-
11. Screening of the parking lot on the east side
in accordance with WMC 18.56.130. At the discretion of the
Winslow Planning Agency, screening shrubbery shall be allowed
in lieu of a fence if it is of equivalent height and glare-
blocking density;
12. Preparation of detailed site and landscaping plans
to be presented at the site plan review stage; and
13. Notice of the site plan review to be given to the
West Winslow Neighborhood Association through Richard Bowen
or their attorney, John McCullough, at least four calendar
days in advance.
At the discretion of the Hearing Examiner or the City
Council, the Hearing Examiner may amend these Findings of
Fact, Conclusions of Law, Recommendations, Decisions and
Conditions after the City Council's review of the West
Winslow Neighborhood Association's appeal of the
Determination of Non-significance.
Dated this 28th day of July, 1987
J. Robin Hunt
Hearing Examiner
-14-
To:
From:
The City of Winslow Planning Agency
R. J. & J. A. Evans
425 Wood Ave. S.W.
Bainbridge Island, WA 98!!0
SubJect:
'AU¢ 'Z'4. 98'r
Proposed Rezone of Wood Ave./Parfitt Way Waterfront
We are part owners of property in this area and strongly object
to any fezone. We urge the Planning Agency to promptly recommend
against rezone. Rights of property owners have legal basis and property
cannot be rezoned without strong Justification; no such Justification
exists in this case. Please consider the following facts.
1.) The existing shoreline designation (urban) as well as the existing
shoreline use (commercial moorage) is entirely consistent with
existing zoning.
2.) We are currently applying for a shoreline permit for the development
of an English-style pub on our property. The fezone petition was
filed after our permit application and appears to be a reaction
against that application.
3-) Williamson Landing Condominiums which are also in the area of
proposed rezone were built after the present zoning was established
using permits from prior zoning.
4.) Most of the property addressed by this petition is defined as
shoreline property and, as such, requires a shoreline permit for
development. This process contains stringent procedures to protect
the public interest in any subsequent development.