LAVON/GATEWAY CUP05-06-88-1 BEFORE THE
CITY OF WINSLOW
HEARING EXAMINER
RECEIVED
.ll l 2 9 1988
CITY OF WtNSLOW'~
In re the Application for )
a Conditional Use Permit )
for a Commercial Parking Lot, )
Lavon Enterprises, )
Applicant )
File No. 05-06-88-1
Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law,
and Order
On July 18, 1988, at 9:30 a.m., the City of Winslow Hearing
Examiner, J. Robin Hunt, conducted a public hearing at Winslow City
Hall, Bainbridge Island, Washington, to consider the application
of Lavon Enterprises for an 82-stall commercial parking lot to be
located north and west of the northwest corner of Highway 305 and
Winslow Way, Winslow, Washington. John Rudolph~ project architect,
was the primary spokesman for Applicant, Lavon Enterprises.
Project owner, Larry Stutsman, also spoke on behalf of Applicant.
Mike Regis, City Land Use Administrator, spoke on behalf of the
City of Winslow. Renee Hauge, Administrative Clerk, monitored
~e~ording of the hearing. Eleven other persons attended the
hearing.
Testimony and questions focused on storm water control, drainage
effect on the Hall Brothers ravine to the west, landscaping, and
right-turn only ingress and egress. Eight persons spoke in favor
of the project: Karen Driscoll, Don Beach, Sheila Crofut, Jessie
Hey, John Rudolph (in his capacity as a city resident and
busnessman), Carol Rothe, Dorothy Nystrom and Wilbur Nystrom. The
speakers commended the "invisible" nature of the parking lot, with
its set back from the road and heavy landscaping screen, and
stressed the need for additional ferry commuter parking and
Winslow's ferry terminus status. John Rudolph also submitted a
letter of support from Chuck MacLearnsberry.
Carol Rothe also voiced opposition to the project's reduction
from 200 to 82 parking stalls. Mike Regis explained that Applicant
(not the City) had withdrawn some of the land included in the
original proposal, consequently reducing the number of stalls. On
behalf of the Friends of the Ravine, Sheila Crofut stated that
their environmental concerns had been satisfied by Applicant's plan
and the matters discussed at the hearing.
From the testimony at the hearing, the exhibits in the file,
an on-site inspection of the property, the Hearing Examiner now
makes and enters the following:
and
FINDINGS OF FACT
The project's flag-shaped 1 1/3 acre site comprises portions of
three different lots, denoted A, C-1 and C-2, on the revised June
20th site plan, Exhibit C-Sa. The project would be located north
of Winslow Way East between the east edge of the Hall Brothers
ravine and the west greenbelt edge of Highway 305, and west and
north of the Beach buildings and the auto repair site, also on lot
C-1. A legal description of the affected parcels can be found in
Exhibits B-4a and 4c, incorporated herein by reference. The
property is also described as: Tax lot #4118-001-004-0104, lots
4,5,6,7,7-1/2, and 8, Block 1, plat of Winslow; and tax lot
#26250-2-3-136-2006. See Exhibit D-5. The property is owned by
Larry and Evon Stutsman, operating as Lavon Enterprises; they also
own the Hall Brothers ravine to the west.
The City of Winslow owns the land at the proposed driveway
entrance to the property, which land p[rovides City access to the
ravine.
II
The project site is in a commercial zone, designated the
"Gateway District" by City of Winslow 1987 Zoning Ordinance,
Section X.I. It slopes downward from northeast to southwest.
Property to the west is also in the Gateway District and is deemed
an area of special significance; it includes an undeveloped
ravine, containing a stream flowing south to Eagle Harbor. The
ravine is separated from the site by an earth ridge. Land to the
north is also in the commercial Gateway District and contains a
wrecking yard, a non-conforming use. To the east is State Highway
305, separated from the site by an earth berm. Property to the
south, owned by Donald Beach, is also in the Gateway District and
contains commercial retail and service buildings. Further south
across Winslow Way is the Union 76 gas station and the southern
part of the Hall Brothers ravine. Further south is the Washington
State Ferry Terminal.
III
Applicant proposes to build 82 parking stalls for monthly
leasing to ferry commuters. The stalls would be located on two
levels, separated by a rock wall: 1) along both sides of the
driveway, a low area between the east side of the ravine and the
west side of the Beach buildings and auto repair site, and 2) on a
higher plateau between the north edge of the auto repair site and
south of Van Wagoner's wrecking yard. The parking stalls along the
entrance dirveway would be set back about sixty feet from Winslow
Way. See Exhibit C-5a. No buildings would be constructed and no
vehicles would be parked on the earth ridge sloping east from the
ravine. Parking would be at least five feet from the top of the
ravine ridge.
IV
Access to the parking lot would be by a two-way 24-feet wide
paved driveway from the north side of Winslow Way East, between the
east edge of the ravine and the west side of Beach building #1(the
Sow's Ear). Landscaping would extend in from Winslow Way 65 feet
along the west side of the driveway entrance and 95 feet on the
east side. A power pole and telephone pedestal would need to be
relocated and new guard rails installed at the entrance. A five-
feet wide sidewalk would also be installed on the east side of this
driveway. See Exhibit C-5a. The current entrance is an unpaved
one-lane driveway at the same location.
Vehicular access would be restricted to westerly travel along
Winslow Way with right turn only. Additional access for emergency
vehicles only would be provided along South View Street, east of
the Beach buildings. A barrier with unfastenable hook, and strict
enforcement by Applicant would prevent commuters from using this
street for vehicular ingress or egress. A landscaped walkway would
provide pedestrians a short-cut from the parking lot onto South
View Street, leading to the Winslow Way crosswalk at the west side
of the Highway 305 intersection. A sidewalk along Olympic Drive
South leads to the Washington State Ferry terminal.
V
Except for grass and brush on the ravine ridge and an apple
tree, there is little vegetation on the site, which is mostly dirt
and gravel. Applicant plans to retain the tree. Currently water
drains from the site into the ravine; John Rudolph testifed that
some current surface water run-off contributes to ravine erosion.
The site is currently used for automobile repair and vehicle
impound storage. It was previously used as Van Wagoner's auto
repair, towing and wrecking yard. Since Applicant began working
with the site, the deteriorated auto repair structure has been
replaced with a new iron-clad structure and the wrecked vehicles
have been moved out of sight to the northern part of the property.
See Exhibit E-2. Mr. Rudolph also testifed that this parking
proposal will not detract from the sense of quiet at the bottom of
the ravine.
Except for the paved driveway entrance, most of the parking lot
would be gravel, to enhance storm water absorption on-site and to
prevent run-off. Applicant plans little grading of the site except
as required to induce water flow to the center of the driveway and
into the oil separator. Storm water would be collected on site,
passed through an oil separator, and discharged into the ravine
throught a pipe opening near the culvert which passes under Winslow
Way. See Exhibit E-1. Applicant would be responsible for
maintenance and clean-out of the oil separator. The project's
storm water drain would coordinate with the City's plan to upgrade
the metal pipe which currently carries ravine stream water under
Winslow Way. The City has been working with the Department of
Fisheries to minimize impact to any fish in the ravine stream. The
City Land Use Department and Applicant are of the opinion that the
project's storm water treatment would not change the volume of
water discharged into the ravine, that storm water from the site
would clear through the ravine before storm water from the uplands
would flow downstream, and that no damage to the ravine, its stream
or fish would result from the project. Project architect John
Rudolph predicts the project's drainage measures would enhance
ravine erosion control.
VII
Applicant plans to add extensive landscaping to screen the
parked cars and nearby buildings and to help prevent erosion of
the adjacent ravine. The total project area would be 59,155 square
feet, 10,220 square feet or 17.27 percent of which would be devoted
to landscaping. See Exhibit C-5a. Project architect John Rudolph
testified that the proposed parking lot landscaping exceeds
ordinance requirements of 10 percent landscaping in areas not less
than five feet wide and 100 square feet, located between parking
stalls and between stalls and property lines, exclusive of the
extra landscaping screening the auto shop site. Specific plant
materials would be selected by landscape architects or other
persons with expertise in choosing plant material for erosion
control, screening, and soil and light conditions. Applicant would
pass along to such expert the plant material suggestions from the
United States Department of Agriculture set forth in the May 31,
1988, letter from J.E. "Skippy" Moore, Exhibit E-4a.
Because a greenbelt and earth berm already screen the site from
Highway 305, the Winslow Planning Agency allowed Applicant to
relocate to other areas on-site the extra fifteen feet of
landscaped strip otherwise required along a public street right-of-
way in the Gateway District.
VIII
Lighting in the parking lot would be
create glare off-site.
IX
low level and would not
Winslow Way is part of the designated circulation loop for the
City. The right-turn only ingress and egress would minimize
traffic impact on Winslow Way and its intersection with Highway
305. It is expected that it will take ten minutes for returning
commuters to walk to the parking lot, thus allowing vehicles parked
closer to the ferry to clear. Any vehicles would thus exit the lot
at the end of the afternoon and evening commuter ferry traffic
surges. Congestion would occur on-site, as cars line up in the
parking lot to exit right (west) onto Winslow Way. Vehicles would
exit primarily during the gap caused by the red light for east-west
traffic at the intersection of Winslow Way and Highway 305.
Because of the 82-stall size of the parking lot, and the
availability of several afternoon commuter ferries, it is expected
that no more than 20 or 25 cars will be added to the stream of cars
traveling west along Winslow Way during any one time frame.
City Land Use Administrator Mike Regis testfied that the City
wants the State to upgrade the traffic light at Highway 305 and
Winslow Way to provide more sophisicated timing, and to create a
left-turn lane on Winslow Way traveling east. Mr. Regis also
feels that no additional traffic analysis is needed at this time.
He testified that a previous traffic analysis had been done in
connection with a full ravine development proposal and was not
applicable to this parking project. He explained that further
traffic analysis may need to be undertaken in connection with any
future development proposals.
Applicant intends this parking project to be an interim use of
the land, to generate funds to pay property taxes while planning to
develop the ravine area. As stated by project architect John
Rudolph in his July 18, 1988, letter:
It is...important to recognize that this property (parcels A
and C) is so valuable and so strategic and so important as a
gateway to the City that a parking lot is not to be
considered as anything but a holding operation. It is
expected that an overall development plan for this area will
materlize which will be much more compatible with the
property situation.
Exhibit E-5.
X
Applicant submitted his application for a conditional use
permit on May 6, 1988. See Exhibit C-1. He revised his
application and environmental checklist on May 19th, 1988.*
On June 13, 1988, the City Land Use Department issued a
Determination of (environmental) Non-significance. On July 7,
1988, the City Planning Agency recommended grant of a conditional
* Applicant had originally submitted an application and
environmental checklist in October 1987, Exhibit A-1 and 2, for a
site plan review. Applicant did not pursue this parking
application because he had not then completed the purchase of the
property from the Van Wagoners. Exhibit E-1. The City Attorney
issued a legal opinion on March 28, 1988, that the application fell
under the newly adopted 87-30 Zoning Ordinance Gateway District
because no final site plan had been adopted and no building permit
had been issued. See Exhibit A-5.
use permit, on the conditions that ingress and egress be limited to
right-turn only and that landscaped areas have curbs of treated
material to prevent infiltration of the parking surface crushed
rock into the landscaped areas. See Exhibit D-7.
XI
Notice of public hearing was published in the Bainbridge Review
on July 6 and 13, 1988. Exhibit F-4. A notice of public hearing
was also posted on the property on July 6, 1988, Exhibit F-5. When
the hearing examiner walked the site on July 14, 1988, she did not
see notice of public hearing posted on the site or at the proposed
entrance. She informed City Land Use Administrator Mike Regis.
A notice of the City SEPA official Determination of
(Environmental) Non-significane had been previously posted
property on May 27, 1988 (Exhibit F-2).
on the
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter is properly before the hearing examiner. Notice of
public hearing was adequate. Even assuming that notice posted on
the property was vandillizted or removed, the published notice
satisfies WMC 16.04.190 C. which requires "one or more" of several
methods of providing public notice. Moreover, a cross-section of
Winslow citizens had sufficient actual notice to enable them to
attend the public hearing.
II
A commercial parking lot is a conditional use in the commercial
Gateway District. 1987 Zoning Ordinance, section X-1.3.F.
III
The Gateway District has additional yard and parking landscaping
requirements. Section X-I.6.C. of the 1987 Zoning Ordinance
requires that all parking areas and pavements be set back five feet
from the top of the slope into the Hall Brothers Creek or Slough.
This requirement is met. See Finding of Fact III and Exhibits C-5a
and b.
IV
Section X-I.7. of the 1987 Zoning Ordinance requires that
parking areas be separated from public street rights-of-way by a
landscaped strip with a minimum width of fifteen feet, except where
unusual property configuration or circumstances causes the City
Planning Agency to allow reallocation of this landscaped area to
another portion of the site. Because the high berm between the
east side of the parking lot and Highway 305 already provides an
effectrive screen, the Planning Agency allowed the required
fifteen-feet landscaped strip to be reallocated to other areas in
the interior of the parking lot, to screen buildings and parked
cars from view along Winslow Way East. Finding of Fact VII.
Parking along the Winslow Way entrance would be setback about
sixty feet from the public right-of-way; this set back would
contain landscaped strips well in excess of the required fifteen
feet width. See Findings of Fact III and IV, and Exhibit C-5a.
V
Winslow's 1987 Zoning Ordinance, section XIII.12 provides that:
No less than 10 percent of a parking lot shall be
in landscaping and no landscaped area shall
contain less than 100 square feet nor be less than
five feet wide. Landscaped areas shall be
distributed throughout the parking lot in such a
manner that no landscaped areas shall be less than
45 feet from the center line of a parking stall.
Only those landscaped areas between two parking
stalls or between a parking stall and a property
line shall be counted as part of the required
landscaped area.
It is difficult to determine from the site plan whether or not
these requirements have been met. As set forth in Finding of Fact
VII, John Rudolph testified that these requirements had been met by
the plan, pointing out landscaping percentages lot by lot and
explaining calculations for each. He further explained that
because the planned landscaping (17%) plus so far exceeds the 10%
minimum required, even eliminating from the calculations the
landscaped screening of the shop buildings on parcel C-i, the
landscaped areas of the parking lot would still meet the above
requirements of the 1987 Zoning Ordinance.
Although specific plant materials have not yet been selected,
the general proposal is depicted in Exhibit C-5a, which calls for
evergreen trees, evergreen ground cover and flowering shrubs as
required by this section of the ordinance.
VI
Because of the existing site-obscuring berms on the east and
west sides of the parking lot, additional site-obscuring fencing is
not required. Fences and landscaping would be installed on the
north and south ends of the main portion of the parking lot, to
screen the shop building, auto repair site and wrecking yard in
accordance with 1987 Zoning Ordinance Section XIII.13. See Exhibit
C-5a, and Findings of Fact II, III, and VII.
VII
The parking lot grading appears to meet the requirements of
section XIII.14 of the 1987 Zoning Ordinance. Most, if not all,
the parking lot would be flat, with vehicles parrked at an angle
the site's slope. See Exhibit C-5b, and Finding of Fact VI.
of
to
VIII
The parking lot lighting would be designed in such a way as to
prevent glare off-site in accordance with section XIII.15. of the
1987 Zoning Ordinance. See Finding of Fact VIII.
IX
The paved entrance and gravel parking surface meet the
requirements of section XIII.11 A. of the 1987 Zoning Ordinance
that surfaces be maintained so to limit dust, while at the same
time maintaining absorption of water on-site. The project also
meets subsection B.~ requiring adequate storm drainage. See
Finding of Fact VI.
X
Section X-I.1. of the 1987 Zoning Ordinance sets forth the
purposes of the commercial zone Gateway District as follows:
Ao Retail and personal services to the residents
of the city and the visiting public.
B. The opportunity for small scale production and
commercial enterprises that benefit from a visible
location, that enhance the economic diversity of
Winslow and that do not adversely impact other
activities in this or adjacent zones.
C. An attractive entry point into Winslow that
emphasizes the City's intimate character and
natural setting.
Although a commercial parking lot does not directly provide
retail services, as Karen Driscol testified, it does enhance
present retail services by encouraging commuters to shop in the
Winslow retail core on the way home. Other persons testifying at
the hearing also felt that Winslow's position as a state ferry
terminus mandated that Winslow provide parking services for
commuters, who arguably meet the purpose A. definition of the
"visiting public".
8
A commercial parking lot does not meet purpose B., as it does
not provide opportunity for small scale production or commercial
enterprise; however it would not adversely affect other such
activities in this or adjacent zones.
The primary purpose that this proposal would serve would be in
providing a more attractive entry point to the City of Winslow,
emphasizing Winslow's natural setting, purpose C., above.
Ironically this purpose is served primarily by the project's
invisibility: its landscaped screening of the parking lot, auto
repair buildings and auto impound yard; and removal of wrecked cars
to the north end of the property. Further, the design of the
entrance driveway and pedestrian walkway would enhance the public's
view of the ravine, a very special component of Winslow's "natural
setting".
As explained by the project architect, a commercial parking lot
is not the best use of the property in this Gateway location. But
it is planned as merely an interim use, it is an aesthetic
improvement upon the past and existing uses, and it is an allowed
conditional use in this zone. See Findings of Fact IX, II, V, and
VII.
XI
Except for the above reservation concerning commercial parking
in the Gateway District, the project meets the criteria which
Applicant must demonstrate in a hearing for a conditional use
permit as set forth in the 1987 Zoning Ordinance, section XVI.4:
A. The proposed conditional use is in harmony with
the spirit and intent of this title.
B. Development of the proposed use would not
adversely affect the health, welfare, safety,
rights of other persons.
and
C. The proposed conditional use meets all the
criteria otherwise applicable to the zone in which
it is to be developed.
XII
The proposed project also meets the goals and ideas of the
City's 1987 Comprehensive Plan, adopted by ordinance 87-29. It
would provide "an improved first impression or gateway to the
City." "Image," page 5. It would provide "convenient non-
obtrusive parking near the ferry terminal." "Movement," page 6.
Parking between the ferry terminal and downtown area would
encourage shopping in the downtown (rather than channelling
shoppers away as encouraged by distant park and ride lots),
9
consistent with the economic goals on page 10 of the Comprehensive
Plan. The proposal is also consistent with the transportation goal
to provide:
More commuter parking that is "consolidated" and
"invisible."
page 15.
As with most proposals to add people, vehicles, or other
development, the project is not totally consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan's traffic and transportation goal to reduce
traffic and congestion in downtown Winslow. However, Applicant and
the City Planning Agency and Land Use Department have successfully
incorporated plans to minimize traffic impact and congestion in
downtown Winslow. See Finding of Fact IX.
ORDER
The application for a conditional use permit to develop the 82-
stall commercial parking lot depicted in the June 20,1988, site
plan, Exhibit C-5a, is granted on the following conditions:
1. Development shall occur in accordance with the revised
June 1988 site plan, Exhibit C-5a. Any changes shall be
approved in advance by the City Land Use Department and/or
City Planning Agency;
2. Landscaping shall meet the requirements of Winslow Zoning
Ordinance 87-30, Sections XIII.13 and X-I.7. and shall screen
the parking lot and auto shop buildings as proposed in
Exhibit C-Sa.;
3. Curbs of treated material shall be installed between
landscaped areas and the parking lot to prevent crushed rock
infiltration into the landscaped areas;
4. Low level lighting shall not produce glare off-site;
5. Storm drainage as proposed, including an oil separator,
shall be installed and maintained by Applicant. Drainage
shall be designed to enhance erosion control and to preserve
the ravine area to the west;
6. Ingress and egress shall be by right-turn only between
the parking lot driveway and Winslow Way East;
10
7. Vehicular access shall be limited to the western driveway
between the Beach buildings and the ravine. Except for
emergency vehicles, vehicular access to the parking lot shall
be prohibited from South View Street.
Dated this 28th day of July 1988
J.Robin Hunt
11