Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout091709CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING City Hall, Third Floor Conference Room Thursday, September 17, 2009 6:60 PM Materials: EXH 1 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda, September 17, 2009 EXH 2 Bulk, Scale and Teardown Revision, Draft Schedule (as of 09/15/09) CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Monica Mick-Hager called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. IL ROLL CALL A quorum of Planning Commission members was present: Steve Emery, Jerry Fry, Bill LeMaster, Monica Mick-Hager, and Julian Ray. Excused: Gee Heckscher III. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA Mr. Ray moved for acceptance of the agenda; Mr. Emery seconded. The agenda was approved, as presented, all in favor. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of August 27, 2009: There were two clarifications from Mr. Heckscher in advance of the meeting. On page 4, regarding "page 19 -Transparency D; highlight comment was removed. Also on page 4, regarding "page 18, E3", highlight and question marks removed. A misspelling of "Heckscher" was corrected. Mr. Emery moved to approve the minutes of August 27, 2009, as amended, and Mr. LeMaster seconded. The minutes of August 27, 2009 were approved, as amended, all in favor. V. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT (None) VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Bulk, Scale and Teardown Code Revisions Rick Sepler reported on his meeting with Bruce Freeland to follow up on his comments at a previous meeting regarding whether things of historic note or unique types of architecture should be preserved. Mr. Sepler praised Mr. Freeland's research work on homes in the district, and noted that he had been the Planning Director for Bellevue, Page 1 of 9 Planning Director for Kitsap County and, for a short time, for Port Townsend, as well. Mr. Freeland had determined that about 840 homes that he inventoried were historically significant, which is about the same number that are in the National Historic Landmark District. Mr. Freeland placed properties in three "bins": house types that number twenty or more; types that number ten to twenty (Craftsman, Mission, etc.); and those where there are ten or less. If a house is a significant type, it maybe well to add a point to that inventory rating. One concern was that for those houses already "caught in the net", if the criterion of significant personages was added, those may already be classified as primary or secondary, and therefore protected. Mr. Sepler said that City staff felt it appropriate to take Mr. Freeland's inventory (provided on disk) and examine where they each house falls on the rating chart. If a point were to be added, would it change anything? Mr. Freeland agreed that would be a worthwhile exercise. If only one or two houses fall away, Mr. Freeland agreed it may not be appropriate to create a whole new scheme. Therefore, a supplemental scope of work has been drafted for Jeff Arango, who will attempt to complete as much work as possible before resuming his coursework in one week. Mr. Sepler distributed the schedule which attempts to do as much work in parallel as possible. Once Mr. Arango has completed his analysis, the Planning Commission can consider any changes to the scoring system. Mr. Sepler said he was more concerned about inclusion of historic personages than design, since this has been an aesthetically based approach. In addition, work is in progress on a workable ordinance, based on the Planning Commission directions; John Watts is leading the drafting efforts. John McDonagh is working on the SEPA checklist; a copy will be sent to the Department of Commerce which has 60 days to review it. Once the inventory criteria and process is settled, it is likely that additional properties will be added to the Map and be subject to restrictions on modifying their houses. Therefore, as has been advised by the insurance carrier and other professionals, a panel of experts will be established to review/verify the checklist and methodology. Among those invited are: Michael Houser, State Architectural Historian; Jennifer Meisner -Executive Director of the Washington Trust; Charlie Paul -HPC; and Gee Heckscher -Historic Preservation expert, member of the Washington Trust Board and HPC member. The outcome will be documented and shared with the HPC and Planning Commission. Informational notification materials and newspaper announcements will be prepared including an invitation to an Open House/Presentation on November 4. The meeting will describe the purpose and provisions of the draft proposed ordinance. The feedback from property owners of those who are "on the map" will be heard and considered. Mr. Sepler then reviewed the remainder of the schedule including the joint meeting with the County Planning Commission; the Public Hearing on Allowable Height near Point Hudson (October 22, 2009); and Public Hearing on Bulk, Scale and Teardown Ordinance (Special Date -November 19, 2009). Mr. Ray announced he will be out of town for approximately three weeks in November. Mr. Sepler will check with Mr. Heckscher to ensure his availability for the November 19 meeting. Mr. Sepler said that he would notify Commissioners about Mr. Arango's findings and whether they address Mr. Freeland's concerns. A portion of the October 8 meeting may be used to discuss this. Page 2 of 4 Mr. Ray asked if full materials would be sent to the 800+ property owners. Mr. Sepler said he expected to have materials available on the web, and the notification post card will carry the web address. Mr. Ray suggested that more intensive outreach would reduce any fear or negative reaction. Commissioners made several suggestions such as the inclusion of FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions); clear, simple language; enlisting the help of Public Relations experts; sending a packet rather than a postcard, and including some information in the utility bill newsletter (which would reach virtually all property owners). Chair Mick-Hager requested that Commissioners notify her of any expected absences as soon as possible to ensure a quorum for upcoming meetings. Joint Planning Commission Meeting -Discussion Mr. Emery suggested that Glen Cove would be an obvious topic for the next joint meeting. Mr. LeMaster said that he would be interested in discussing the timeline for working on the 2011 Comp Plan Update, before addressing the specifics of a meeting with the County. He said that issues such as Glen Cove maybe natural fall outs of that larger context. He also suggested that 2010 census information should be examined as soon as it is available. Mr. Ray suggested that hearing the County's input on priorities and concerns is important. Mr. Emery asked if Judy Surber would be available for a briefing on surplus properties, which had been discussed earlier by the HAPN task force. Mr. Sepler said that there would be a City Council resolution the following week to establish those properties as a land bank. Mr. Ray suggested that the City and County Shoreline Master Programs were among the topics of common interest. Mr. LeMaster questioned why the City and County have different building codes and completely independent property record systems and service/staff structures. He suggested that merging the two structures might be a good topic for discussion. He noted the opportunity for reducing overhead and/or making better use of permitting fees. Mr. Sepler recalled that there had been an attempt at having the County do all inspections for the City. There were problems due to the County's lack of infrastructure, i.e. water, sewer and street requirements and associated expertise. Mr. LeMaster suggested that there should be discussions to brainstorm and consider ways of economizing and making more efficient use of shrinking revenues. Mr. Sepler pointed out that Public Health and the court system are areas already handled by the County, and that there have been attempts at merging the GIS functions. He said that with regard to SMP, Judy Surber had presented to the County Planning Commission on several occasions, gratis, and that expertise from both sides is often shared. He said that the topic could certainly be explored further, if the Commissioners wish. Mr. Ray spoke in favor of developing a relationship with the County and working to dissipate any misperceptions based on past events, rather than immediately pushing for Page 3 of 4 specific agendas and changes. Mr. LeMaster said he was in complete agreement with that approach. Mr. Ray also suggested alternating meeting places between the City and County. Chair Mick-Hager expressed her support for both building lists and for building relationships. She reminded that there will be only about one and a half hours if some meeting time is reserved for Bulk, Scale and Teardowns. Mr. Sepler suggested that the two Chairs could meet in advance to set the agenda, and that staff could address the logistics of meeting place, etc. Mr. Sepler reported on a meeting the previous week about the lift station location, capacity, etc., i.e. to allow for extension of service to Glen Cove. Work is continuing on development of costs so that per parcel implications are known. There was additional discussion about possible schedule conflicts. Vice Chair Fry confirmed he would be available if Ms. Mick-Hager could not make a preparatory meeting. He also suggested that there would not be time to do more than set some joint tasks/priorities for next year. Mr. Ray said that agreeing on a joint list would be a great accomplishment. Mr. Sepler suggested that it is important to identify the challenges, particularly with regard to land use. He said that if both Planning Commissions consider housing as an important issue, the two Planning Commissions would need to find ways of working on this together. He also mentioned transportation, climate change and economic development as possibilities. In any case, he suggested giving a few minutes to each Commissioner to give their input as to the biggest challenges for the City and County. Mr. LeMaster asked for clarification on whether or not Mr. Sepler would facilitate all or part of the joint meeting. Several commissioners suggested that the two Chairs should discuss the process and facilitation for the meeting, as well as the agenda. Chair Mick- Hager was in favor of outside facilitation or having both staffs involved in facilitation. Bill Weiss, Katherine Baril and Karla Main were also mentioned as possible facilitators. Chair Mick-Hager said she would discuss all of these ideas with Chair Peter Downey, and e-mail results to Commissioners and staff. VII. COMMUNICATIONS (None) VIII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Ray moved and Mr. Fry seconded for adjournment. Chair Mick-Hager adjourned the meeting at 7:25 PM. Monica Mick-Hager, Chair ~~ti. ~~ `mac ~z..:y.--~-- Gail A. Bernhard, Recorder Page 4 of 4