HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft CC Minutes.041910DRAFT CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MINUTES OF THE BUSINESS MEETNG OF APRIL 19, 2010 CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The City Council of the City of Port Townsend met in regular session the nineteenth day of April 2010 at 6:30 p.m. in the Port Townsend City Council Chambers of City Hall, Mayor Michelle Sandoval presiding. 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 Attorney John Watts, DSD Director Rick Sepler, Senior Planner John McDonagh, Public Works Director Ken Clow, and City Clerk Pam Kolacy . CHANGES TO THE AGENDA SPECIAL PRESENTATION(S): Main Street Quarterly Report Susan Windle, President of the Main Street Board of Directors, presented the Main Street quarterly report. Arbor Day Proclamation Mayor Sandoval read a proclamation designating April 2010 as Port Townsend's Arbor Day, Every Day. Daniel Collins, chair of the Parks, Recreation and Tree Advisory Board was present to accept the proclamation. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC There was no public comment. CONSENT AGENDA Ms. Nelson stated she was concerned about the source of matching funds for several of the grants. Mr. King clarified that the Finance and Budget Committee had approved only the action to apply for the grants and that any that were successful would have to be discussed and accepted by the Council. City Council Meeting, April 19, 2010 Page 1 of 8 DRAFT Motion: Catharine Robinson moved to approve the following items on the consent agenda: Bills, Claims and Warrants, Vouchers 110842 through 110848 in the amount of $10, 791.10 and Vouchers 110860 through 110999 in the amount of $574, 734.80; Minutes for April 5, 2010 Business Meeting and April 12, 2010 Workshop; Authorization to apply for "Safe Routes to School Grant" Authorization to apply for a Public Works Board loan for the mandated Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Facility project; Authorization to apply for a Public Works Board loan for the 5 Million Gallon Reservoir Tank Replacement Project,' Authorization to apply for a Public Works Board loan for City Lake Outlet Pipeline Replacement Project; Authorization to apply for a state Building Communities Fund grant for Libary Expansion. George Randels seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 7-0 by voice vote. PUBLIC HEARING(S): Ordinance 3036, adopting a map designating residences as historic; Ordinance 3037, adding provisions to the City's historic preservation code on design review and demolition of historic residences; Ordinance 3038, relating to zoning code changes adding bulk and scale limitations to residences. Mayor Sandoval reviewed the rules for public hearings and asked if any Council members had financial or property interests to disclose in connection with the matter. Ms. Robinson stated she is the owner of an elderly home which may fall into the historic secondary category. There were no requests that she recuse from the issue and no other Councilors had any disclosures. City Attorney John Watts presented an overview of the packet materials. DSD Director Rick Sepler reviewed the policy background for the issues, including the applicable Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. Senior Planner John McDonagh reviewed the historic home survey process. Mr. Watts reviewed the three ordinances in more detail. Mr. Watts distributed two photos illustrating adaptive re-use. He asked that the Council receive all the Exhibits in the packet as well as the photos into the record. Mr. Watts stated that Council may either move for first reading, or defer action City Council Meeting, April 19, 2010 Page 2 of 8 DRAFT until after a followup workshop or meeting; staff would like direction as to next steps regarding research or modifications to the ordinance. Mr. Sepler stated that because the regulations may create issues for some financially challenged homeowners, staff has researched two incentive-based ways of addressing some financial aspects of historic home ownership and these are available whether the ordinance passes or not. Mr. Sepler then reviewed the provisions of the bulk and scale ordinance relating to all residences. Mayor Sandoval asked whether any other written materials had been submitted. Ms. Kolacy stated that two letters had been submitted, one from Kathleen Knobloc, which all Council members received via a-mail on April 18, and one from Eileen Flynn Gatto, received via a-mail by all Councilors and provided in written form tonight. Mayor Sandoval noted that she had talked with Ms. Gatto just before the meeting and that Ms. Gatto stated her concern was that all Council members had received her letter and had time to read it, not that it be read aloud at the meeting. Public comment Charles Capreva [sp?] asked whether current deliberations will require any private improvements in the right of way to be demolished. Marcy Jaffe stated that the ordinance will affect all those who own an older home. She said it makes sense downtown but the uptown historic district is not a place where people drive around looking for old cottages. She submitted written comments for the record and summarized those comments in her testimony. Pat Durbin stated she owns a pivitol historic home and that many homeowners are supportive of the ordinance. She has seen the character of other communities deteriorate without such rules, to the point they are no longer attractive. She stated there is a walking map of Port Townsend and hundreds of people walk the route looking at historic homes. She understands the concerns raised but is aware of many people in town who support the ordinance but who are not present. Mr. Watts spoke in response to Ms. Jaffe's comments about the Penn Central case, stating that it simply set forth principles which allow governments to have design review in place to protect historic assets. He stated that courts have applied these principles in both commercial and residential contexts. The "takings" issue was answered in Penn Central as well as the issue of whether design review using the Secretary of the Interior's Standards is vague and capricious or arbitrary, with the courts stating that is not the case. City Council Meeting, April 19, 2010 Page 3 of 8 DRAFT Mr. Watts stated the City's open house on the issue was well attended by about 60 people who all had opportunity to comment. Comments received were overwhelmingly favorable. Mr. Sepler added the ordinance has been carefully crafted and guided by the Comprehensive Plan which was created by hundreds of residents who believed that historic preservation was one of the community's highest priorities. In regard to the question concerning buildings encroaching the right of way, Mr. Watts noted that there are many buildings encroaching into the right of way, some dating back over 50 years. He stated that the ordinance does not deal directly with those situations and in fact is supportive of preservation of historic buildings. He noted that it is possible that with substantial redevelopment involving the facade that was encroaching, it is possible the new development would be subject to moving out of the right of way, but would be a case by case decision. Mayor Sandoval opened the meeting to questions from Council members. Ms. Nelson asked whether there is a cutoff date for defining historic structures and asked if that was deliberately not tangible. Mr. McDonagh stated that 50 years is the closest we have to a bright line. In general, in Port Townsend the period of significance for the historic district is 1870 to 1920 and that period was used to award more points in the scoring system. He explained some other considerations and added that there is no definitive bright line. Mr. McDonagh added that in terms of classifications for pivotal, primary and secondary buildings, there is clear methodology available for review. Mr. Welch asked about the process for changing a home's rating. Mr. McDonagh said that if there is a difference of opinion about classification either way, owners may formally request redesignation. He added that he believes a majority of those questions could be resolved informally. Mr. Sepler stated that if a homeowner outside the district comes in for a permit for demolition or significant addition, the same methodology would be provided and the same remedies would be available to the homeowner. Mr. Randels stated that the bulk and scale regulations came to our attention in the context of the building of "McMansions." He stated that it is important to preserve present and future neighborhoods so the City's current ambiance has potential for being achieved elsewhere. He pointed out a conflict between the Agenda Bill which says the ad hoc committee made no recommendation regarding size limits and Attachment A ,page 3, which says the ad hoc committee did recommend size limits. Mr. Sepler and Ms. Sandoval City Council Meeting, April 19, 2010 Page 4 of 8 DRAFT recalled that the committee referred the concept of establishing size limits to the Planning Commission. Ms. Robinson asked for examples of non-residential buildings outside the landmark historic district. Mr. Watts listed buildings at the fairgrounds, school buildings and other public buildings. He noted that "Revision 5" is a placeholder far the Council's policy direction as to whether the code should apply to non- residential historic buildings outside the historic district. Ms. Robinson asked why churches would be exempt; Mr. Watts replied religious buildings have some federal legal protection from zoning regulations and historic regulations are a form of zoning. In response to Mr. King, Mr. Sepler stated that if adopted, bed and breakfasts would be subject to design review subject to the ranking of the building. Ms. Robinson asked why language regarding public health and safety was removed from the historic preservation ordinance. Mr. Watts replied that there are existing code requirements under the nuisance regulations and the building code that allow the City to address health and safety issues. In addition, the changes were meant to respond to comments that the international code was too vague and gave too much authority to staff so language that appeared to be too broad was removed. Mr. Welch asked about application of the remedies for demolition by neglect. Mr. Sepler stated that the point is to be proactive about preventing demolition by intent. Mr. Watts agreed the primary thrust of the regulations is to avoid the situation it the first place by making sure the building is weather tight. For example, a blue tarp over a roof would not suffice and at this time now we are limited in our ability to deal with those situations unless they become a public health and safety issue. These code provisions would allow the city staff a greater ability to make sure that the intervention or the correction actually addresses the situation by making sure the building is weather tight. The process would initially be to seek voluntary compliance which is effective in most cases. If not effective, then we have the ability to initiate a formal code enforcement process which would provide a time frame for correction. Mayor Sandoval declared a recess at 8:42 for the purpose of a break. The meeting was reconvened at 8:53 p.m. Ms. Robinson asked what options are currently in place addressing the maintenance of property. Mr. Watts noted there are some broad nuisance codes that are basically related to conditions affecting public health, safety and welfare. There is some general language in the building codes about buildings City Council Meeting, April 19, 2010 Page 5 of 8 DRAFT which are unsafe and uninhabitable and also some language in the state code for historic buildings that says historic buildings "shall be maintained" but there is no standard or guidance specified. This would give staff more specific language than they have by relying on the state historic building code. Ms. Sandoval asked about the review process for secondary homes. Mr. Sepler said it would be part of building permit review process. Mr. McDonagh stated minor alterations to pivitol and primary buildings would not need HPC reveiw. Ms. Sandoval asked if commercial buildings have specifics about demoliton by neglect on the books already. Mr. Sepler stated the demolition by neglect regulations would apply to all historic structures. In reply to Ms. Sandoval, Mr. Sepler stated that non-contribuing homes are not considered to be historic and would not be subject to the ordinance. Some have been so altered that they would not be considered protected. They could be old but not classified as historic. Mayor Sandoval asked if there were any comments from the audience solely in regard to clarifying Council questions. There were none. The public testimony portion of the hearing was closed at 9:15 p.m. Mayor Sandoval asked the Council to outline their primary issues so staff can get direction on what issues need further attention. Ms. Robinson stated areas she would like to discuss further include exempting historical buildings outside the historic district, the approach to demolition by neglect, and whether to limit residence size through either bulk and scale standards or by size limits. Ms. Sandoval added that she would like to have further discussion about the designation and rules regarding secondary homes. Mr. King agreed on the outstanding issues which need further discussion. Mr. Welch stated he believes more extended discussion is needed and that his particular interest is in the area of demolition by neglect and also the issue of secondary homes. Ms. Sandoval also requested further discussion of funding sources for historic home maintenance and the incentives that were discussed. There was consensus by the Council to re-open and continue the public comment portion of the hearing to a date specific which will be scheduled and noticed to the public. City Council Meeting, April 19, 2010 Page 6 of 8 DRAFT UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS "CDBG Planning-Only" Grant Application In response to Mr. King, Mr. Sepler confirmed that action to accept the grant would come back before the Council. There was no public comment. Mr. Randels expressed concern about instituting a process that could result in a grant we would receive as a co-recipient studying land that is not committed to the process. He would like to insist upon that commitment prior to the study. Mayor Sandoval noted that we will have to have a discussion with the county before the grant is accepted and she has thought a lot about asking the county to commit. She would like to see it happen but the city has its own process in regard to our commitment to affordable housing and we have to lead in this situation. Mr. Randels stated he does not believe we should be spending city, state or federal money to study land to be used for this purpose unless the study says it should be used for that purpose. Motion: David King moved to authorize the City Manager to apply for the Community Development Block Grant either in conjunction with the County or solely as the City of Port Townsend depending on the Manager's assessment of what will obtain the best results for the city with respect to affordable housing. Mark Welch seconded. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 7-0 by voice vote. PRESIDING OFFICER'S REPORT Mayor Sandoval noted that Governor Gregoire will be visiting Port Townsend on Thursday, April 22. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS SUGGESTIONS FOR NEXT OR FUTURE AGENDA, REGULAR MEETING ANDIOR STUDY SESSION COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL City Council Meeting, April 19, 2010 Page 7 of 8 DRAFT EXECUTIVE SESSION ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 pm. Attest: Pamela Kolacy, MMC City Clerk City Council Meeting, April 19, 2010 Page 8 of 8