Pearl Street Zoning

I'll get a full report out soon on the planning commission's public hearing last night regarding the zoning designation on Pearl Street from 52nd to the entrance of the park. But the following letter was presented to the town planner with 62 signatures representing almost 100% of the properties on Highland (the street directly east of Pearl):
Rob White, Town Planner
North Creek Consulting

Dear Mr. White,

This letter is regarding the upcoming public hearing of the rezone for the east side of Pearl Street between 52nd and 54th Streets from RES to COM-P.

This issue came up once before about 2 ½ years ago. The Council rejected this part of the rezone with good reason. At that time, the residents of this area made it quite clear that they were not in favor of this change for the following reasons:

1. Increased alley traffic and noise. The proposed area is not isolated in any way—it shares an alley with mostly older single-family homes. Since the proposed change protects the view of the front side (Pearl Street) of the buildings, parking, garbage, deliveries, noisy heating and cooling units--to name a few, would all be open to the alley and therefore the residents’ homes.
2. Decreased privacy. The intended change appears to be focused on a mixed commercial/residential use for this area. If there are residential units above the commercial units, the view would be directly down or into the backyards and windows of the existing residential units on Highland Street . Design considerations for any new building areas appear to concentrate on the Pearl Street frontage. Can the privacy of the established residences be protected?
3. Increased traffic on Highland Street . Not only would there be more general traffic on this street, but most assuredly there would be a dramatic increase in parking on Highland Street . Though there would be on-site parking for customers and perhaps most residents of any proposed complex, workers would park on Highland Street—the easiest access.
4. There has already been a recent change to zoning on Pearl Street from N. 51st to N. 52nd. At the present time, there appears to be sufficient COM-P properties available in Ruston as well as the west side of Pearl Street in Tacoma . Many of those properties are unused, underused or underdeveloped. There seems to be little need to extend the COM-P zone all the way to Pt. Defiance Park . Rather than enhance the entry into the park, this change would make a family trip to the zoo or Owen Beach on a sunny summer day even more cumbersome. Once a zone has been changed, it is difficult to change it back.

Although the need for increased residential density (mixed with commercial) in our small town is debatable considering the 17.5 acres of mixed use property in the MPD, the proposed rezone on Pearl Street does not address that supposed need in a sensitive manner consistent with section 3.4 of the Comprehensive Plan (“Protect and enhance the character and vitality of established residential neighborhoods.”). Many concerns are not addressed in the COM-P zoning in the current Comprehensive Plan. It was surprising that a rezone notice was not sent to all residents of Ruston , but merely the ones within a certain area. Is that normal? Since a rezone of this type reflects a major aspect of tiny Ruston , the whole town needs to be given a chance to speak on this.

We, as a neighborhood, were quite surprised with the arrival of the public hearing notice. We felt that we had spoken loudly enough previously and that our public officials had listened. We feel it is time to change the Comprehensive Plan--not the zoning--to better reflect the realities of development of this small part of Ruston .

Thank you for taking the time to hear and assess our concerns.

Respectfully submitted,

Name Address Comments