Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout101711 CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF OCTOBER 17, 2011 CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Port Townsend City Council met in regular session on the seventeenth day of October, 2011, in Council Chambers at 540 Water Street. The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. with Mayor Michelle Sandoval presiding. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present at roll call were Kris Nelson, George Randels, Catharine Robinson, Michelle Sandoval, and Mark Welch with David King, and Laurie Medlicott excused. Staff members present were City Manager David Timmons, City Attorney John Watts, Development Services Director Rick Sepler, Planning Manager Judy Surber, Public Works Director Ken Clow, and City Clerk Pam Kolacy. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA City Attorney Watts stated that the Council may be asked to go into a short executive session regarding pending litigation, with no action anticipated. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Public comment Todd Wexman provided a written copy of his comments relating to the Howard Street extension project and other City matters. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Bills, Claims and Warrants: Vouchers 115882 through 115890 in the amount of $253,401.11; Vouchers 115891 through 115905 in the amount of $2,630.66 Approval of Minutes: October 3, 2011 Approve Resolution 11-028, repealing Resolution 06-024 and terminating Kitsap County Consolidated Housing Authority operations within the boundaries of the City of Port Townsend Authorization for the City Manager to sign an agreement with the Washington State Department of Ecology for matching grant funds for the independent remedial actions completed at the Cotton Building site located at 607 Water City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 1 of 11 Street, Port Townsend, Washington Approve Resolution 11-029, authorizing the City Manager to submit a Washington State Transportation Improvement Board grant for the Howard Street Extension Project Motion: George Randels moved to approve the consent agenda. Catharine Robinson seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 5-0 by voice vote. PUBLIC HEARING Public Hearing: Interim Ordinance 3064 - LIS Pilot Sign Project Mayor Sandoval reviewed the rules of procedure for legislative public hearings. No Council members had any financial or property interest to disclose in regard to the matter. DSD Director Sepler reviewed the packet materials. He noted the public hearing is being held consistent with state law requiring a public hearing on an interim ordinance within 60 days of adoption. If the ordinance is extended, Council needs to approve findings in support of the ordinance. Mr. Sepler stated that Council recently adopted changes to the sign code which includes a local information sign program, with signs to be installed specifically between Kearney and Haines Streets. The program is meant to assist businesses off the beaten track, which serve the traveling public and where awareness of these businesses would be of benefit to both the community and the businesses. Interim signs have been installed and will be reinstalled when the Wayfinding program is completed. The signs are designed to be legible to vehicles traveling at 30 mph. He noted that regulation Department of Transportation signs would have been significantly larger and that many existing information signs between Kearney and Haines will be removed and consolidated. Businesses currently participating are supportive and initial conversations suggest the signs are effective in directing customers to the businesses. The ordinance presented tonight expands the program to include two signs on Upper Sims Way which are characterized by pre-existing commercial development with limited access, without a parallel commercial road. In such circumstances, staff felt that it would be in the community's best interest to help provide signage on an interim basis and then modify it as we complete the Wayfinding process and develop permanent standards through the City's legislative process. He noted that in response to the number of businesses who wish to be included but do not qualify under existing standards, further regulations or alternatives may need to be instituted to accommodate those requests. City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 2 of 11 Mayor Sandoval asked if any written comments had been submitted or if anyone wished to submit them now. There were none. Public Comment: Randy Huston spoke for a friend who has a business on Washington Street near Hollywood Video. He wants to address expanding the program to include other businesses. He stated that other services besides restaurants and lodging should be included in the program. Kathy's Nails is one of those businesses people enjoy going to but have a hard time finding. The business has a lot of walk-in customers from out of town. He suggested including services like massage parlors, spas, nail and beauty salons that would benefit from better signage. He said he really likes the signs and thinks they look nice, and that they progressively add aesthetic value going down the highway. John Paul Davies is here representing his business, Castle Key Restaurant, which is located inside the Manresa Castle Hotel. He stated he likes the signs and would like one too. He is benefitting from the new plan with his business Key City Fish located in the Port and he thinks the Castle Hill area may not have been considered, partly because there were not a lot of illegal sandwich board signs to remove. He believes his business would greatly benefit from similar signage and signs in the Castle Hill area would fit nicely with the whole look as it is being created for the town. Gretchen Brewer stated that whatever solution is settled upon, it would be nice to see something that could accommodate locally-made signs with more of a local flavor so that they do not have to be supplied from an out-of-town source for either the sign posts themselves or the signage. Mr. Davies noted that a local signmaker made his sign and it was possible because the City authorized him to create a sign within certain parameters but he was free to have the sign made by a local person. Mr. Sepler stated that the City is required by law to solicit bids for the lowest price on projects and cannot give preference to local companies. The fact that the sign inserts are provided by the business owners means that they can make the choice to use a local company. He stated that neither the interim nor the permanent signs will be required to have standard colors or fonts. Businesses receive a list of suggestions but have latitude on designing their signs. Questions from the Council were taken. These included why different areas have different rules for signage even though they appear to be similar, for example the Business Park and the Port. The issue of how to deal with signage for seasonal businesses was also raised. The two year assessment period was questioned as being lengthy as it would be hard to pull a sign that has been up for that length of time. Mr. Sepler explained the differing applications of the Code to the Port and Business Park and reviewed the proposed process which will include a Council workshop at the City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 3 of 11 beginning of 2012. Council may be asked to approve a program, although if a recommendation comes forward for Code modification it would go through the Planning Commission for recommendation to the Council. He noted that the current signs are modular and will be replaced with a design that will tie the historic districts together. The interim signage was advanced quickly because of the interest of the business owners. Individual sign inserts will remain the same. There were no additional comments regarding questions raised by Council or staff. Mayor Sandoval declared the public testimony portion of the hearing closed. Brief discussion ensued. It is desired that perceived inconsistencies should be addressed soon, such as different regulations for different sections of town, whether businesses other than food and lodging should be included, and how to manage equal opportunities for signage for individual businesses in a multiple business location (Port or Business Park). Council expressed interest in seeing the specifics of the permanent signage as soon as possible. Motion: Mark Welch moved to leave in place interim Ordinance 3064 for a period not to exceed six months from its adoption (Sept. 12, 2011), by adopting as findings the reasons set forth in the Ordinance. George Randels seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 5-0 by voice vote. Motion: Mark Welch moved to direct staff to review the requests for inclusion in the various signage programs with the Wayfinding consulting team. If not addressed by other Wayfinding programs, present potential modifications to the Planning Commission concurrent with their review of the interim standards established by Ordinance 3064. George Randels seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 5-0 by voice vote. Mayor Sandoval declared the public hearing concluded. Public Hearing: Climate Action Plan Mayor Sandoval did an abbreviated review of the public hearing guidelines (read for the previous hearing). No Council members declared any financial or property interest in the matter. Planning Director Judy Surber made the staff presentation and introduced Kees Kolff, Chair of the Climate Action Committee. Ms. Surber noted that because the resolution is a joint resolution with Jefferson County, public comment directed to both the Council and Board of Commissioners must be considered. No deliberations are expected tonight, but are scheduled for November 7. If a resolution agreeable to both entities is not completed by November 7, the decision will be postponed to November 14. Mr. Kolff reviewed the "errata" sheet listing specific changes to the July draft. He then City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 4 of 11 presented a brief review of the Plan. Public Comment: Stan Willard is a physics and chemistry instructor at high school and community colleges and a dedicated scientist in that sense. He would like to say simply that you have already made a commitment, don't waiver. If you knew what was happening 56 million years ago with the Paleolithic Eocene thermal maximum (that means a big heat wave), the rate that the carbon dioxide was accumulating in the atmosphere was 1.7 petatons per year. Now I don't think anybody knows what a petaton looks like but it's big. We are currently emitting 9 petatons, almost a tenfold increase in that rate. It can only be attributable to human activity. That's my comment. Elaine Bailey has put together a rather large informational packet that has scientific information, mainly on the carbon neutral question. I am really thrilled that the people who have put this plan together have really worked so hard to address an issue that is vital. I want to read the first part of my statement. We are all concerned with energy reduction, climate change mitigation, and reducing GHGs. I am proud that many in my community have worked so hard to put a plan in action. However the accounting must include all sources of CO2. What we do now and in the next decade is vital. If we had hundreds or even thousands of years to grow more forests before biomass was burned, excluding biomass CO2 from your PTPC accounting figures might not be as drastic a mistake as it is now. From the report I quote "the wood fuel that makes up 75% of their stationary energy use is considered climate neutral within the CACP software and thus was not included as a direct source of CO2 emissions." Before using a conclusion that PTPC CO2 from biomass is climate neutral, a concept that was misinterpreted from the older IPCC reports, one should read other authors [such as M.C. Jacobsen] who have soundly, effectively challenged and shown that these faulty assumptions will only lead to massive releases of climate changing CO2 from biomass. Also the newer CACP upgrades do not include this statement. The software used for this project must have been an earlier version. I inquired about the CACP system from the ICLEI and there are free upgrades that include what they now call an information item that recognizes that actual emissions are coming out meaning that emissions associated with biomass should be reported. They do not have to be included in the final accounting but this is a choice, not because the program excludes biomass CO2. Therefore the exclusion of accounting for biomass CO2 from PTPC was not a condition of the CACP software but a choice. And you have a choice - you have a choice to stand forth and actually claim CO2 to be CO2. There is no difference, biogenic or anthropogenic. Our mother earth does not recognize semantic differences and this is very important. Kevin Clark stated: I am here to give qualified support for the final Climate Action plan formulated by the Climate Action Committee. Though there may be some who genuinely believe there is no climate change or no climate change that is not somehow naturally cyclical. I am convinced that climate change is now a permanent reality mostly or totally caused by the human introduction into the atmosphere of numerous greenhouse gases. In dealing directly with this issue, the City, the Port and the County are courageously accepting responsibility to face our duty as citizens and local government to take actions to begin to remediate and respond to this global City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 5 of 11 crisis. As a current Christian and on behalf of my Christian ancestors, I take primary responsibility for the ideology that has led to this permanent change in the hydrologic cycle. I repent of our reading of Genesis so that domination "over creation" means that all creatures and all elements of air, land and water are only here as resources or commodities for the satisfaction of human wants. This latter description has, however, become part of the basis of our economic theory. As such the non-human entities will always be only commodities for the satisfaction of human wants. Accepting this economic theory means that we will consume resources that will continue to more dramatically alter the hydrologic cycle. The satisfaction of human wants is the only value that the economic system considers. I applaud your decisive and bold actions in the report to address best the issues of climate change and bring about an 80% reduction in the 1990 levels of CO2 emissions by 2050 with two caveats. Except in the mayor's letter there is no mention of carbon neutral. In a recent edition of this document - I believe it was a recent edition - you referred to the CACP software which "ignores CO2 emissions from the burning of wood because by international convention CO2 from wood is considered biogenic" (page 10). Wikipedia defines a biogenic substance as "a biogenic substance is a substance produced by life processes." As far as I can tell with my limited time any reference to biogenic has been removed from the final document. My issue here is that although the burning of wood is considered carbon neutral by international agreement or by US laws, my claim is that it is not. You deal bravely with climate change but not with carbon neutral. The earlier version says that the PTPC accounts for 29% of the total emissions and for 99% of the industrial subsection of emissions of Jefferson County. As far as I can tell now, the contents of the former Table 4 - Community and Port Townsend Corporation Emissions- has been incorporated into Appendix C and all other significant data references to PT Paper have been removed from the final draft. On page 81, no reference is made to PT Paper as leading to any percent of the industrial total in 2020, 2030 or 2050. 1 understand that if you don't have to deal with the issue of woodburning and carbon neutrality, but if you did the report would be very different. But if it is indeed true that PT Paper is responsible for over 99% of the industrial emissions for the County why have they been erased from any significant data reporting and from any direct responsibility to reach targets. Finally an economic question: is the satisfaction of human wants the only value included in the final document? I say that because CO2 affects all life. Diane Haas is in support of reduction of carbon emissions and all efforts in that direction. She read from the National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine and National Research Council news release from May 2011. The new report reaffirms that the preponderance of scientific evidence points to human activities, especially the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere has likely caused most of the global warming that has occurred over the last decades. Substantial reductions of greenhouse gas emissions should be among the most important priorities in the national response. Scott Walker states - I am a member of the Climate Action Committee and certainly endorse what we put together but as you have been told it deals with just 1% of our greenhouse gas emissions and that's what the government puts out. The 9% comes from the mill, you have heard comments from Kevin and Elaine about that. 40% of the greenhouse gas emissions come from transportation, which as you know has been my City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 6 of 11 subject for 25 - 30 years here. And there's a crossover - investment by government in significantly enhanced transit, and more pedestrian and bicycle facilities is the way to reduce that 40% that the public puts out in all their driving. So we still have to turn to you to help us get out of this mess. Barney Burke states - I am a PUD Commissioner and a member of the Climate Action Committee. I want to commend the City and the County for trying to address this issue. As you've found out it is not exactly a collection of cheap and easy solutions. There are surprises there, none have easy solutions overall. Sometimes I get discouraged but then I think it's like retirement planning - you can't do it all at once, you have to take the actions that you can take and realize that some of the solutions are going to come along over time and I think one of the things that is encouraging to me is seeing that we're less than 18 months from completing the transaction with PSE and when you look at our figures here we'll no longer be producing electricity with coal or natural gas. So there is something in the near term future that is an improvement in terms of our own carbon footprint - there are many other things we've done. I would certainly echo Scott's comments about the transportation aspects of this. So thanks for giving this the attention it deserves. Michael Tweiten states - I recently moved here in July with my wife and three children. I'm a botanist and climate change researcher. I've been working for the University of Wisconsin Center for climatic research as a research associate for several years but I came here in my capacity as a citizen to speak about how this research gets turned into action. I really appreciate the effort you are making in this small town to really be a leader in climate change action and governance and how desperately that's really needed and I appreciate the courage you have to address these issues. I know that this is an ongoing process and you're just beginning this journey together and I appreciate that especially since the effort at the federal and the international level is so dysfunctional and has basically fallen apart. This is where it comes down to and this action to help our planet and our species will move forward. In the media it is said that the science is not settled often, it is almost a plank of the presidential nominating process right now, and I agree with that in some ways because there are two major camps assigned to this in the climate change research - those that believe that climate change is proceeding incrementally and those that are increasingly concerned that we are heading toward very dramatic tipping points in the climate system where it will get out of our hands and these may be much closer than anyone has believed before. I'm not going to endorse either one of those positions but wanted to say that that is really the debate. The debate is about how close we are to something that is beyond our control and it is imperative for you to act on this and also feel a sense of urgency because you are leading that way. Doing larger things first might be a really good idea. I also wanted to say that by reducing our impact and our footprint - it is good for that to be done at the government level because we can't all do it as individuals. I personally have a long ways to go and many people have gone online and calculated their footprint on various online calculators. I did mine and found that if everyone lived like I did in my family it would take 3.2 earths to accommodate that resource use. I felt really bad about that being an ecologist and someone who turns off the lights all the time and switches out the bulbs and everything else but this site lets you do it in different countries. I tried my same activities in the country of Ecuador which has.a fairly high human development index for Latin America and it City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 7 of 11 would only take .7 earths with the same activity and that is all about public infrastructure and government action and military defense and other actions we take collectively not just as individuals. So reading through this plan I really like the focus on growing the local economy. Respecting population growth and how that comes about will make a big difference in how our community actually reduces its impact as it develops. I appreciate the focus on land use, especially designated urban growth areas so that people don't find themselves out in the middle of the woods having to use their car without being able to connect into a transportation system and I also, as a botanist, appreciate the emphasis on sustainable forestry and getting our trees and our people to be working together to help their common future. Mainly I just appreciate moving to a town where a lot of this is going on and I appreciate your leadership in this issue. Gretchen Brewer - stated first I would like to congratulate you for taking on this challenge as it is essential as all the previous speakers have said. I think there are incredibly good people on the project and I am really surprised in a way that they were led to use outdated software and I guess my question would be to them what version of the software they were using. And encourage them to encourage you to press for the committee to redo the exercise including the emissions from Port Townsend Paper because I think if you do that you will see that by ignoring the emissions from Port Townsend Paper we can do all we want but it pretty much becomes a feel good exercise and doesn't get us closer to where we want. I would like to give you the present 2009 emissions from PT paper and I will point out that they are not required by Ecology because they have a special status so are not required to report CO2 emissions but Nippon in Port Angeles is comparable and if you do a comparison currently PT Paper would release approximately 281 million pounds of CO2 in a year. It doesn't matter how you account for it, it has to get reabsorbed somehow. And with the biomass project proposed that will double. Furthermore, the greenhouse gas emissions they are reporting they will reduce- actually when you look at it, they are not that significant in the amount they would reduce so they are actually doubling most of their greenhouse gas emissions and I can give you more data on that later. For now I will give you their emissions inventory so you can compare these numbers and again double them for what it would be with the biomass project. That will be a useful tool to compare to the numbers in the report. The other thing as far as transportation that will happen is this biomass project with diesel trucks - they say going off a certain mass of fossil fuel. That will reduce one half truckload a day but the increase in biomass increases by 15 - 18 trucks per day so you get a net increase of 5500 - 6500 diesel trucks a year and that will add significantly to our transportation greenhouse gases and that's really hard to counter with our individual transportation choices. In closing, the groundwork has been done and is incredible. I would like to see the numbers redone and I really don't think we need to choose between jobs and good health and good air. We are creative enough we can come up with a solution that doesn't compromise our health and the environment. Staff and Committee Response: Mr. Kolff noted that when the inventory was done it did include the emissions from the mill. He stated our projection for the future held the emissions for the mill as level and did not increase the projections from the mill the way we projected that with business as usual, transportation sector and residential sectors, because of increasing City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 8 of 11 population, would go up. He said the chart that shows the emissions with business as usual going up between now and 2050 - is really based mostly on population increase and again that is run through the computer software but it is primarily because of population increase and not knowing what would happen with industry in this community and not assuming it would increase or decrease with population we kept the emissions level overtime. He also confirmed that the biomass project was not factored in. Ms. Sandoval asked if the speakers who spoke about biomass had made their comments to the County Commissioners at their hearing today. She noted that this would be appropriate since the mill is in the county, not the city. She added that all comments at tonight's meeting would be on the record. Mr. Kolff asked Committee member Deborah Stinson to comment on the use of the ICLEI software. Ms. Stinson noted that the software was acquired in 2006 when the initial inventory was done and that the inventory was not revisited when completed but that the Committee then started moving forward on the plan. None of the data was re-run so there was no opportunity to upgrade the software. She confirmed that the most up-to-date software available at the time of the research was used. Mr. Kolff noted that in the Committee's work plan there is an interest in revisiting the inventory in order to monitor and see what kind of progress is being made. He added that one of the reasons that we didn't redo the inventory with new information or software available is that we did not believe it was relevant to what we are presenting today, which is really the city and the county leading by example to reduce your carbon emissions, so it really doesn't alter our recommendations as to what you can do to reduce your emissions. Clearly when it goes out to the community and there is dialogue at the community level I suspect that that issue will come up. Ms. Surber added that the CAC having spent three years working on the plan really felt the importance of getting going on the implementation of the plan and not going back and redoing data over and over again. Bruce Tipton stated that there will not be any changes on anything until we start right at the beginning, until we stop blowing our leaves around in the parks, wasting energy tearing out a park to make a new park, lop off some corporate heads, sell some City cars and stop mumbling about the science and get on with it. Who cares about the science, there are so many obvious things we could do to change the situation. The Council should step up. I appreciate the committee's work. Mayor Sandoval noted that the public comment period will remain open for written comments until Wednesday, October 19. The issue will be addressed again on November 7. Councilors complimented the Committee and staff on the work product. It was noted that the language suggested by staff in response to Commissioner Sullivan's proposed language is preferred by Council. Mr. Kolff said that due to a series of circumstances, Commissioner Sullivan was not informed his language would not be included and he was caught by surprise at the hearing this morning - that is what prompted him to sit down with staff and come up with alternate wording. The issue should be ironed out City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 9 of 11 before the adoption of the joint resolution. OLD BUSINESS Ordinance 3065, Repealing Chapter 2.64 of the Port Townsend Municipal Code Relating to Vacation, Sick, and Other Leave Policies for City Employees Mr. Watts reviewed the packet materials. He noted this is a process step in connection with adoption of the new Personnel Policies Manual. The policies currently in the Municipal Code will be superseded by the manual so that all references will be in one location. A resolution adopting the new manual will be presented at the next meeting when second reading and adoption of the Ordinance repealing Chapter 2.64 is scheduled. There was no public comment. Motion: George Randels moved to approve first reading of Ordinance 3065, Repealing Chapter 2.64 of the Port Townsend Municipal Code Relating to Vacation, Sick, and Other Leave Policies for City Employees. Mark Welch seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 5-0 by voice vote. NEW BUSINESS Exploratory Parks and Recreation Committee Timeline Mr. Timmons introduced the issue. He explained the Exploratory Parks and Recreation Committee has recommended combining benchmark dates for the Needs Assessment and the Funding and Administrative options to coincide on January 31, 2012, while retaining the existing dates for all subsequent benchmarks. The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to support the recommendation provided the City agrees to support it as well. There was no public comment. Motion: George Randels moved to support the recommendation of the ERPRC as outlined in memorandum from Matt Tyler dated September 23, 2011 and approved by the Board of County Commissioners on October 3, 2011. Kris Nelson seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 5-0 by voice vote. PRESIDING OFFICER REPORT Mayor Sandoval reported that she and Councilor Nelson attended the Association of Washington Cities regional meeting in Bremerton. CITY MANAGER REPORT City Manager's 2012 Budget Distribution and Presentation City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 10 of 11 Mr. Timmons said that the 2012 City Manager's Preliminary Budget has been provided to the Council today. He added that the budget contains a maximum level of detail as well as a fund summary format. Initial discussion on the budget is set for the next meeting. There was no public comment. SUGGESTIONS FOR NEXT OR FUTURE AGENDA, REGULAR MEETING AND/OR STUDY SESSION COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL Committee Reports Because of the lateness of the hour, committee reports were deferred to a future meeting. EXECUTIVE SESSION City Attorney Watts stated the Council will not need to go into Executive session, however he reported that the Port of Port Townsend has filed suit in Federal Court against the City, and several other government entities seeking to lift any restrictions on the Kah Tai property arising out of the Park Service letter regarding the subject of the 6 (f) designation. The basis for the Port's argument is that they did not sign a deed or conveyance document and therefore should be relieved of obligation. Mr. Watts stated that the Port did, however, sign a project contract along with the City. He said that as specific strategies are ready to discuss, there will be executive sessions scheduled. Mr. Watts added that the Port is making a claim that the lease entered into between the City and Port says the City will hold the Port harmless from claims arising from use of the property as a park. They are now saying the City must indemnify against against the National Park Service decision. City Manager Timmons noted that the City will assist a City employee in seeking a restraining order against harassment from a member of the public. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:59 p.m. Attest: Pamela Kolacy, MMC City Clerk City Council Business Meeting October 17, 2011 Page 11 of 11