The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About071309 CC Draft MinutesDRAFT CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MINUTES OF THE WORKSHOP SESSION OF JULY 13, 2009 CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Councilmembers present at roll call were David King, Laurie Medlicott, Kris Nelson, George Randels, Catharine Robinson, Michelle Sandoval, and Mark Welch. Staff members present were City Manager David Timmons, City Attorney John Watts, Public Works Director Ken Clow, DSD Director Rick Sepler, and City Clerk Pam Kolacy . PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON ALLOWING "DEPARTURES" FROM SIGN CODE REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WITH DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL Mr. Sepler reviewed the packet material. He noted that the issue of sign departures has come up in several instances lately with entities such as the Northwest Maritime Center, Point Hudson and the Port seeking signage which would not be allowed under the current code. He stated that the Council could proceed with proscriptive standards or with performance standards which would assure that certain standards were met but also provide flexibility. Mr. Sepler stated that the Planning Commission thought the departure idea should be available for private individuals as well as governments. Although departures were proposed only for the Historic District, some commissioners thought it might be appropriate to expand it to citywide use. In terms of staff perspective, a context for departures is needed. He added that the master sign plan was designed for public and quasi-public entities; departures would be applicable for all uses, inclusive of quasi-public. Staff has an easier time with quasi-public than private and commercial; there must be a mechanism to determine whether a master sign plan or departure serves the public interest and is a better solution than following the code provisions. The proposed methods differ from a variance, which is based on a hardship. These are the issues addressed in the revised ordinance. Mr. Welch asked what the "appropriate advisory committee" would be for the departure approval process. Mr. Sepler noted that the Design Review Advisory Committee would do commercial review and the Historic Preservation Committee would do review for the Historic District. He added that for purposes of the sign ordinance, agreement by the majority of the committee is required, not City Council Workshop Meeting July 13, 2009 Page 1 of 4 DRAFT consensus as in other sections of the code. Ms. Robinson asked whether the DSD director has veto power over a committee decision in favor of departure. Mr. Sepler stated that neither advisory body has final decision authority but that the Director rarely has had occasion to go against a committee decision. Ms. Robinson suggested that the specific criteria be broken out so they are easy to find. Mr. Sepler reviewed the conditional uses allowed in residential areas. Ms. Robinson suggested that the fact that departures are discretionary and therefore not guaranteed be clearly stated. Mr. Randels suggested that the language in A be changed to reflect exceeding a particular standard "or group of standards" and to make both "technique" and "approach" plural. In section 2, he suggested making "building" plural. Mr. Randels sugested that the last sentence (C)(1) spell out clearly that the Director may deny the request in spite of a positive commiee recommendation. Mr. King asked if the "master sign permit" still exists. Mr. Sepler stated that this approach can accommodate the need identified for that process; however staff has concerns about the lack of specific guidance in the governing documents for areas outside the Historic District. Mr. Randels stated that it must be clear that the signage must be "better" by interpretation of staff, not the applicant. Ms. Sandoval asked how to interpret "better serve the public interest" as it seems subjective. She suggested referencing the Comprehensive Plan in the ordinance. Ms. Sandoval said that the ordinance should contain language stating that the process will never apply to ahome-based business and other Council members agreed. Mr. King stated that in areas like Sims Way, there should be more specific language about why a departure would be approved as "serving the public interest" is vague and open to interpretation. Mr. Randels stated that referencing the Comp Plan might be of help. There were questions about outright prohibition, for example, of pole signs. Discussion ensued about off premise signs; Mr. Sepler noted that we are one of the few jurisdictions prohibiting off premise signs although district signage will be allowed under the ordinance. Mr. Sepler stated he will try to add some more specifics. He also said the existing sign code is a reference point so applicants can refer to the existing code as the basic framework for the community's desires. Mr. Randels asked if there should be specificity for residential signage that wouldn't be covered by either committee or parts of the zoning code that aren't City Council Workshop Meeting July 13, 2009 Page 2 of 4 DRAFT covered, P-1 for example, and whether these areas should be referenced. Ms. Nelson stated that we should be cautious about spelling out a specific type of sign that is not allowed as that implies approval of all others. Discussion ensued regarding how new regulations might apply to aquaculture or fisheries or sales of fish from docks. Ms. Robinson stated she thought the regulations would apply to permanent rather than temporary signage and she does see a difference between a seasonal nursery and selling fish off the dock. Mr. Watts stated that sign codes are difficult as they may be interpreted under free speech laws; the worst approach is carving out many exceptions that undermine the basic rationale, which is generally based on such things as aesthetics and traffic; you can open the door for directional, wayfinding and traffic signs but going to the next level and saying some businesses may have signage and some may not, the legal standing becomes more questionable. Mr. Watts stated it is safer not getting into off premise signage, and particularly if you create a large number of exceptions. signage rules need to be tied to wayfinding or directional needs rather than type of business. Mayor Sandoval declared a recess at 7:33 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 7:44 p.m. STREET USE PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS Mr. Sepler reviewed the packet material and passed out a revised draft ordinance. Mr. Sepler and Mr. Clow answered several clarifying questions about the proposed ordinance. Mr. King suggested that a reference be included to note that the regulations apply in the Historic District. Ms. Nelson asked about making language more clear that all applications must be approved by the appropriate staff person (even if they meet all criteria it is not automatic). Mr. Randels stated that all references to "criterions" should be changed to "criteria." Mr. Randels requested that a fee schedule be brought fonn+ard in conjunction with the ordinance. Mr. Randels stated that the concept of rent should be incorporated so that the City does not allow the use of its property for free. City Council Workshop Meeting July 13, 2009 Page 3 of 4 DRAFT There was brief dicsussion about how decks over a public right of way would fit in; Mr. Sepler stated this is already in the code although some cities have negotiated air rights and allowed "bridge" expansions. Mr. Watts stated the permits would be issued for one year with renewals and any other arrangement would come back to the Council for approval. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:17 p.m. Attest: Pamela Kolacy, MMC City Clerk City Council Workshop Meeting July 13, 2009 Page 4 of 4