Proposed development angers neighbors, splits council

Two buildings at top of Pioneer would alter ‘Gateway to Gig Harbor’

Paige Richmond

of the Gateway

A project that would include two of the largest buildings ever constructed in Gig Harbor could soon be given the go-ahead, depending on a vote by the city council on Monday night.

The proposed buildings have been hotly debated at planning commission and council meetings since April, when the city began the annual process to amend the comprehensive land use plan.

One of those amendments was initiated by MP8 LLC and Pioneer & Stinson LLC, the property owners who are looking to rezone a tree-filled 4.27-acre parcel at the corner of Grandview Street and Pioneer Way. That parcel is known commonly as the “Ancich Property,” since it was owned by the Ancich families before it was sold to developers a few years ago.

If the amendment is approved, the developers — Mike and Marty Paul, two Horsehead Bay residents — plan to build two three-story structures totalling more than 30,000 square feet each.

Even though the amendment is no guarantee that the project will occur — in essence, it’s the first step in the developers’ process — it’s been treated by some council members and residents as a precedent-setting vote that could alter the face of Gig Harbor.

The reason? That piece of land has been called “the Gateway to Gig Harbor” by Mayor Chuck Hunter. The mayor, along with half the city council and neighbors of the property, fear that approving the two buildings would change the residential character of the area.

“To me, this seems a huge, huge change to the complexion of Gig Harbor,” Hunter said at an October council meeting. “The mass of these is bigger than anything we have in that area.”

Other members of the council think approving the development is the only way to control what happens on that plot of land. Otherwise, developers could potentially create a less attractive shopping center where most of the property’s iconic trees would be destroyed.

“The reason you hear me up there saying we ought to listen to this is because it comes with a development agreement,” said council member Tim Payne, who is also a neighbor of the Ancich property. “We can put stipulations on what they do on the property. We have a say so.”

Even reaching that development agreement — a contract that would put permanent restrictions on what could be built on the property — has been years in the making. MP8 and Pioneer & Stinson first proposed re-zoning the plot at 3700 Grandview Street in 2007, but they were turned down due to the city’s sewer moratorium.

The property owners declined to comment for this story, saying it would “be premature to discuss this ... until after the city council has made their decision.”

When the company went before the city council again in April, the initial plans for the property were extensive, including a seven duplexes on the northern side and one large mixed-use building on the southern side, which borders Grandview Street.

It was immediately protested by the Ancich property’s neighbors.

Bill Fogarty, one of those neighbors, has been at every meeting since April. He was happy to hear the planning commission — which reviews comp plan amendments before sending them to council — shot down the idea in September.

Now Fogarty is frustrated that the council is considering approving the amendment anyway.

“I think that (the council members) have made some mistakes,” Fogarty said. “They’re allowing this guy to proceed, and every time he comes to the meeting, he’s changed the plan.”

But changing the plan is something the council has continually asked of MP8 and Pioneer & Stinson — one more issue that makes this amendment so unusual.

After the planning commission denied the proposal, the developers presented a revamped idea: Do away with the duplexes on the northern side of property, and on the southern side only, build two three-story, mixed-use buildings, with housing on the third floor, office space on the second and underground parking on the first.

While the council warmed to the idea — it meant little asphalt on the site, since all parking would be hidden — it wanted specifics. The council asked the property owners to draft a new site plan that would illustrate exactly what the two buildings would look like.

That’s a step far outside the realm of a comp plan amendment. Usually, a site plan wouldn’t be required for months, after the city council, hearing examiner and design review board all took a look at the project.

Payne, who favors approving the amendment, admits the process has been “somewhat abnormal,” but both he and City Planning Director Tom Dolan recognize this particular piece of property requires special attention.

“Whenever you ... change the permitted use of a piece of land, neighbors and residents of the city are concerned,” said Dolan. “They want to get it right.”

Getting it right includes an offer on the part of the developers to create a 40-foot-wide setback of dense vegetation reaching 25 feet tall around the development — substantially more than what is required by code — in order to make the buildings less visible.

MP8 and Pioneer & Stinson even spent their own money to inventory all the trees on the property, and they promised to retain 30 to 40 percent of the 390 trees currently there, which is twice the amount legally required.

But both of those offers are contingent on a development agreement that accompanies the amendment’s approval. If the council shoots down the amendment, the Pauls have stated their intent to build to the maximum density currently allowed at that site. If that were the case, the development would include four buildings at 5,000 square feet each, with above-ground parking and no vegetative buffer.

At last week’s meeting, Mike Paul said he believes the larger development would be better for the city.

“We want this to be a great development,” he said. “We feel like surface parking doesn’t help Gig Harbor. We feel like leaving only 78 trees doesn’t help Gig Harbor. We’re not trying to push anyone.”

The development agreement is why council members Payne, Paul Kadzik and Paul Conan openly favor the amendment. Council member Derek Young also has tentatively showed support.

“We have the opportunity to guide this development and make it much better,” said Kadzik, who pointed out that a development agreement would hold true for any company that attempted to develop that property at any point in the future.

That’s not enough for council members Jim Franich, Ken Malich or Steve Ekberg, who oppose the amendment. Franich, who has maintained his position since April, appreciates the many measures the company has taken to adjust its proposal but is still wary of moving forward.

“For me, personally, I’m really having a hard time debating whether we should up-zone based on those goodwill measures you’re providing,” he said at last week’s council meeting. “I really haven’t seen a compelling case.”

No matter what, Fogarty is firmly against seeing 30,000-square-foot buildings anywhere in Gig Harbor’s view basin. He presented the council a letter on Nov. 10 with 25 neighbors’ signatures, stating their opposition.

If the council does approve the amendment, it will only be the beginning of the process for MP8 and Pioneer & Stinson. The company also hopes to have the 25-foot height restriction on the property lifted, which would require an exemption process.

The city’s Design Review Board would still need make sure the plan complies with all city codes.

It would be 2010 before the developers could break ground.