PO
Box 173
Manchester,
WA 98353-0173
“it’s
a great place to live…”
Action
Items:
1)
John Winslow to amend 6/28/05 minutes on the subject of firearms
possession at meetings.
2)
Anyone interested in an appointment to the Executive Board should contact
a current Board member.
Minutes:
The meeting was called to order by President, Bob Ballard at 6:30PM outside the Manchester Library. Bob welcomed the 150+ people in attendance and noted that we now have 52 members, representing a 35% increase since March. Our eight newest members were briefly introduced. Bob then introduced our special speakers for the evening, William Palmer (whose arrival was delayed) and David Hopkins. For reference, Mr. Palmer can be reached at PO Box 6 in Port Orchard 98366, (360)769-2434, wpconslts@telebyte.net and Mr. Hopkins is at 5821 Reid Dr NW, Gig Harbor 98335, (253)853-4764, HopkinsD12@aol.com.
Guest Speakers comments:
Mr. Hopkins introduced himself as a developer with his own design and construction firm, Hoppet Design & Construction, Inc. He also is using William Palmer Consultants as he works through the process with the County. Several renderings of his proposal were shown to the audience. His proposed project is a mixed use style with retail space on the main floor and two floors of residential space above. This specific project will include the areas currently occupied by Mama Java’s, Food Center, Go Figure, and Past & Presents. A residence abutting E. Daniels Loop will also be included for egress. Mr. Hopkins went on to describe his plan to give his building a Nantucket style to fit in with the marine environment in Manchester. Overhead wires were proposed to be undergrounded. The building face abutting Main St. would rise as much as 29’ above grade. Hopkins suggested that these would be upscale condominiums, and as a result, he was planning on minimal signage for the retail spaces. Total retail space on the main floor would amount to approximately 7000 ft² which would include about 2500 ft2 for a grocery, plus other small shops. He was planning to include gables, trellises, and arbors to carry through his Nantucket design theme. Mr. Hopkins said he wants the building to blend in well with the surrounding community and to be high quality construction that should last a long time. The residents’ covered parking area behind the building would be gated and access would be via the Port parking lot and the exit would connect to E. Daniels Loop. Parking for the retail spaces would remain as-is. The time frame for the project would be to submit the plans in the fall and begin construction in the spring. The conceptual drawings presented at tonight’s meeting (we’ll try to get them on our web-site as soon as possible) were completed today. The construction will be from the ground up, using the same footprint as the current buildings. The eight condos will range in size from 1200-2600ft², with six on the second floor and two on the third floor. The impact on current lessees is unclear; this will need to be worked out with the current businesses once Hopkins in ready to approach them with a clear plan. Hopkins is currently in the process of purchasing the properties.
Questions from the audience and responses by Mr. Hopkins were as follows:
?1: What about the traffic exiting on Main St.?
A1: The County will make a traffic analysis (out in the future), but this project shouldn’t significantly affect traffic.
?2: We want to encourage pedestrians to visit the 2700’ of retail space in downtown Manchester. How many spaces will be provided for parking?
A2: There will be 14 spaces. We have not conducted our traffic study yet, but we are required to do this in the future for the project.
?3: Will the traffic study be completed in the winter at a low use point?
A3: The study will assess all seasons’ traffic issues.
?4: Has the Port agreed to provide access for resident vehicle traffic?
A4: An easement through the Port parking lot currently exists.
?5: There is a significant development on Puget Drive; will this project get the same public hearing as that project?
A5: We will have our hearing with the County in the near future. [This will not be a public hearing however, since no variances will be required]
?6: Does the Daniels Loop easement currently exist?
A6: No, this will be like a private driveway.
?7: Is Palmer working to make both projects similar in architectural style?
A7: We expect the other project to follow our lead.
?8: What is the likely selling price for your condos?
A8: The average price will be about $475,000.
?9: Could you bring plans on the Puget Drive Highland E. project to the Library for display?
A9: Yes.
?10): I wanted to eliminate the power poles on and Puget Power says the cost would be about $2200 per pole to remove them. Is that what you are going to pay?
A10: The off-site proposal will be to underground the power poles down to the water (Port boat launch) to improve the view.
?11: What is your position on paying the contractor’s employees a living wage?
A2: We will try to hire the best people out there.
?12: Who are your architects working on the project?
A12: Hopkins- Drago Gould in Tacoma Palmer: Wallace Palmer (my brother) in Boulder CO.
?13: What is the schedule for project review with the County?
A13: August 16 is the pre-approval meeting with the County.
?14: I would like to see this project add sidewalks and address parking issues.
A14: We have to hire independent traffic studies as part of the project approval process.
?15: I wasn’t aware that the Sub Area Plan allows mixed use in a commercial zone?
A15: The plan does include mixed use.
?16: Are there any common property elements?
A16: We are trying to include some grass and trees on Daniels Loop to get more permeable surface area.
?17: Thanks for trying to improve downtown Manchester [widespread applause].
Bill Palmer was then introduced and displayed several drawings of his preliminary proposal. Mr. Palmer described himself as a private land planner who has lived in Manchester in the recent past, with 25+ years in South Kitsap. He described his passion to see some development in the commercial area of Manchester. Palmer claims to be well acquainted with the Sub Area Plan. Some four years ago, he began planning work for a development of the old gas station site. Palmer’s current plan for the site along Colchester from Main St. to the Post Office includes 10,225 ft² of office/retail space on the 20,000ft² site. There will also be two additional floors of six condos each. Development will include 34 underground parking spaces plus two additional spaces near the ramp. There will be 19 other parking spaces along Colchester and Main with the parking on Main arranged perpendicular to the street, similar to the parking currently across the street. The building will include a central elevator with stairs on each end. The parking excavation is expected to correct a lot of any potential soil issues resulting from past use of the site. The plan is to also add as much green space as possible and attempt to underground the overhead wires. Mr. Palmer expressed his desire that the design will be well received by the community. The project is currently in the design development phase.
Questions and answers from Mr. Palmer were as follows:
?1: Is there a haz-mat plan since there are likely issues with the old gas station site?
A1: I am planning on studying the soil conditions for possible contamination.
?2: Will the projects complement each other in architectural style?
A2: There will be some similarities.
?3: The designs look too dissimilar, can you make it more like the other design?
A3: [No response].
?4: This is a high-density design. This looks like it should be in the Silverdale Mall.
A4: [No response].
?5: Is the fire protection water supply going to be adequate or will a larger main be required that the County has to pay for?
A5: A storm water project is currently underway that the County is paying for. Manchester Water would be responsible for the water delivery issues.
?6: What is your tentative timetable?
A5: Building permits this fall and construction next spring.
?7: What will the price range be for your condos?
A7: All twelve units will be about $350,000+.
?8: Both projects look great, but purchasers need to understand potential noise issues with the commercial traffic (fuel tankers).
A8: [No response].
?9: What direction will the storefronts face?
A9: Storefronts will face both Colchester with some facing Main.
?10: Will there be a restaurant?
A10: That hasn’t been ruled out.
?11: What is your best-case project completion date?
A11: Fall 2006, six months construction after all approvals.
?12: Is the sewer system adequate?
A12: Should be. [Ron Rada interjected that the current Waste Treatment facility was operating at 45% of capacity.]
?13: What exterior materials do you plan to use?
A13: A lot of wood, but the project has not yet been fully designed.
?14: Does the sewage treatment plant actually have capacity for projected 20 year growth?
A14: I suggest you contact Public Works for an answer to that question.
?15: If sewage lift pumps are required, who would cover that cost?
A15: The cost would be shared by the affected projects.
?16: Do you expect to use the full 35’ height allowed in the Sub Area Plan?
A16: The mid-point of the roof peaks will be at 35’. We are discussing this issue with the County.
?17: What would be required to cut this project in half? It’s too dense!
A17: Twelve units are required to make this project work.
?18: Is the ramp from underground parking right on the property line?
A18: The wall is 6” inside the property line.
?19: Will you need to access neighbors’ yards to build this project?
A19: We will replace any fences damaged during construction.
?20: We don’t have a say on what you do with this project. Could this become a strip mall?
A20: Do you have a business you’d like to start? There are limits, no taverns, no convenience stores with gasoline pumps.
?21: Is there a timeline on public input:
A21: You’re here tonight and we’re listening. Both projects will have site plan reviews with the County (no public hearing). A hearing may not be required and there will be administrative site plans (preliminary & final) with no public input. We’re solicitous of your input and will try to accommodate.
?22: Is a commercial site plan review required?
A22: Yes.
?23: Are there other similar [Palmer] projects to these that you’re aware of?
A23: Yes, on Bainbridge at the west end of Winslow Way on Madison there is a three story building similar to these.
?24: We want a less industrial look.
A24: [No response].
?25: Why use back-out parking?
A25: This is a trade-off to meet County parking requirements. The County does not want to see many new surface parking lots. The most logical parking arrangement would be to pursue parking on the perimeter. The existing lost has traditionally had the same parking arrangement. If the arrangement were to change, it would necessitate a lot of additional paving (impermeable surfaces).
?26: What will the properties be priced at?
A26: The owner has requested that I not disclose that.
?27: These will be sold as view condos. What if properties build up in front of these condos?
A27: There is no guarantee.
?28: What will this do to other views?
A28: There will be some impact on the Manchester Inn and up on Spring St.
?29: What are you doing about taking the view of those up on Spring?
A29: It’s a likely possibility.
?30: Is ventilation required in the parking area?
A30: Yes.
?31: During construction will there be an impact on routing of the fuel trucks?
A31: We will need to accommodate them.
?32: Are you both willing to come back in November to address our issues again in the future?
A32: Yes, we can do that when plans are more complete, perhaps in 1-1½ months.
?33: I would ask you all if what has been presented is not less attractive that what already exists…I like it.
Chairman Ballard then thanked both speakers for their presentations and began the business meeting.
Business meeting:
Review and approval of past meeting’s minutes:
Executive Board member Mark Rebelowski then asked if the minutes of the past meeting could be approved. Bob Edwards pointed out that the minutes stated that a motion had been approved on firearm possession at our meetings. In fact a formal motion was not made, nor was a motion formally approved. It was agreed that the minutes would be amended to state that it was requested that the subject be added to a future agenda, but in fact, further review suggested that such an action was not per the RCW’s. Only formal motions will only be considered in the future.
Correspondence:
One favorable sewer survey card forwarded to Bob Ballard.
Reports:
Treasurer:
Treasurer Kowalski reported our balance at $641. Carol also thanked John Quartermass for hosting cold water for the crowd on a warm evening!
Sewers, Crime Prevention, and Public Facilities Sub-Committee reports were postponed due to lack of time.
Old Business:
John Winslow reported on the status of the proposed “Manchester Clean-up Day”. The proposed date for the event is Saturday October 8 from 9AM-3PM. This event is intended to give the MCC members an opportunity to make a near-term meaningful difference in the community. Activities will include “Adopt-a-road” along main roads into Manchester, some moderate waste pick-up including paint, NiCad batteries, fluorescent bulbs, and care batteries, used clothing donations, used book donations, Manchester-wide garage sales, information booths on “Clean Kitsap”/”2Good2Toss”/Composting, and a celebration of our successes! Volunteers will be needed for all activities, contact John Winslow.
New Business:
Mark Rebelowski, current Executive Board Member-at-Large, tendered his resignation effective immediately. In Mark’s letter of resignation he sited his plan to run for Port Commissioner and it’s potential for being seen as a conflict of interest as his reason for resignation. A new Member-at-Large will be elected at our next regular meeting. Those interested in this position should make their interest known to one of the current Board members.
The planned meetings of our five Action Groups were postponed due to lack of time.
There being no other discussion from the floor, Chairman Ballard adjourned the meeting at 7:55 PM.
Our next meeting will be Tuesday August 23rd at
6:30-8:30PM in the Manchester Library.
Bob Ballard and
John Winslow will jointly develop an agenda for our next meeting
for distribution with the reminder, several days before the meeting.
At this point the tentative agenda includes meetings and feedback from
our Action Groups. If you have any
additional items for the agenda, contact John Winslow prior to August 15.
Respectfully
submitted,
John
Winslow, Secretary-Manchester Community Council