Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11021998 PORT TOWNSEND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF NOVEMBER 2, 1998 The City Council of the City of Port Townsend met in regular session this second day of November, 1998, at 6:35 p.m. in the Port Townsend Council Chambers of City Hall, Mayor Julie McCulloch presiding. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present at Roll Call were Ian Keith, Kathryn Jenks, Mark Welch, Forrest Rambo, Peter Badame, and Joe Finnie. Councilmember Ted Shoulberg arrived at 6:40 p.m. INTRODUCTIONS and/or RECOGNITIONS PRIORITY PRESENTATION There were none. AGENDA CHANGES OR ADDITIONS (Excluding Consent Agenda) Councilmember Jenks requested tonight's public testimony have full minutes. Approval was granted. CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Welch made a motion to approve the following items on the Consent Agenda which was seconded by Councilmember Keith and passed unanimously by voice vote. Approval of the following Bills and Claims: The following vouchers/warrants are approved for payment: Voucher/Warrant numbers 65433- 65308 in the total amount of $348,432.94. Approval Without Reading of Minutes from: Regular Session of October 19, 1998 Workshop Sessions of October 21, October 22 and October 27, 1998 Approval of Resolutions: RESOLUTION NO. 98-110 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK AND THE PEG ACCESS COORDINATING COMMITTEE TO AWARD CONTRACT(S) FOR IDENTIFIED CAPITAL EQUIPMENT PURCHASES FOR THE PEG ACCESS City Council Minutes Page 1 November 2, 1998 STUDIO Date Author Topic Disposition 10-13-98 Sara A. Schroeder Offering property for sale to City Copied to Finance Committee; 10-15-98 Mari F. Mullen, Executive Director, Main Quarterly report for the Port Townsend Civic Trust. Copied to Council for Street Program information. 10-19-98 Mari F. Mullen, Administrator Enclosing letter of request from Carol Shiffman, Copied to Finance Committee; Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) Executive Director, Centrum, requesting $15,000 City Council. from LTAC to assist Centrum in reaching its National Endowment for the Arts Matching Campaign goal. 10-22-98 Don White, Chair, Port Townsend Arts List of budget priorities Copied to Council. Commission 10-23-98 Kate Jenks, Councilmember Resolution #98-029, Approving Conditional Use Copied to Land Use Permit Application No. LUP97-00002 (Puget's permit Committee, Judy Surber, Tim to preclude herbicide use); Resolution No. 96-98 McMahan, Bob Wheeler, Jeff Adopting a Herbicides/Pesticides Policy for City Randall Pubic Lands and Rights-of-Way. Request policy development. 10-23-98 Joe Finnie, Councilmember Minutes, October meeting, Public Safety Committee Copied to Council. 10-26-98 BCD Pending Land Use Cases, 10-26-98 Copied to Council. 10-26-98 Yvonne Cvitkovich Urging reconsideration of policy regarding the zoning Copied to Council. of the bowling center property. 10-26-98 Dennis Early Letter in support of zoning changes requested by Copied to Council. Denny LaVigne. 10-28~98 Randall Brackett, President Letter expressing support for the proposed ordinances Habitat for Humanity to defer system development charges for low-income of East Jefferson County potential home builders. Public Works Staff City Clerk Reports City Administrator PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Veto Garrison: Announced and invited all candidates and city employees to a Government Operations Committee meeting, Thursday, November 5, 1998, 4:00 p.m. Ms. Lyn Hersey: MOCCA information regarding City Managers is in the public information file. Mr. Allen Frank: 1999 Budget -- requested demographic information; a clear summary of Public Works costs charged to each utility fund; more information on rates; an itemized list of City Council Minutes Page 2 November 2, 1998 other funds; subsidized programs and who qualifies: utilities, recreation, etc. STANDING/AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORTS Transportation. Councilmember Badame No action items. Set meeting -- Wednesday, November 4, 1998, 3:10 p.m. Council Chambers Agenda: Pierce Street neighborhood issues; Sheridan Street sidewalk; discussion of proposed Capital Improvement Plan, "F" Street portion Parks, Recreation and Property_. Councilmember Welch October 31, 1998 meeting -- No action items. (Minutes should reflect that Councilmember Keith was present.) Set meeting -- Joint workshop with Council and the Planning Commission, mid November Agenda: Parks & Recreation Functional Plan Set public hearing -- January 4, 1999 Council Meeting (Council Consensus) Agenda: Parks & Recreation Functional Plan Moved to Public Hearings at 7:00 p.m. No report. MAYOR'S REPORT STAFF REPORTS Written reports are included in council communications PUBLIC COMMENTS/QUESTIONS There were no public comments/questions at this time due to Public Hearings. VOTE ON MOTIONS MADE DURING COMMITTEE/STAFF REPORTS There were none PUBLIC HEARINGS (Open Record) A. AMENDMENT TO 1998 BUDGET TO ESTABLISH A SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE LOW INCOME DEFERRAL ACCOUNT IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000. Councilmember Keith made the introduction. City Council Minutes Page 3 November 2, 1998 Amendment proposed -- Mr. Keith Page 5, Ordinance 2667 "F" -- Add sentence to the end of the paragraph: "provided further that in no circumstances shall the reimbursement be less than the amount of the original deferral" Mayor McCulloch opened the hearing for public testimony at 7:10 p.m. Speaking in favor: Ms. Patrieia Finnegan, associated with the mutual self-help housing building group Ms. Christy Apker, First recipient of a house in Port Townsend from Habitat for Humanity. Mr. Randy Brackett, Outgoing president, Habitat for Humanity He encouraged support for: · Sweat equity element defined as labor contributed by the prospective home owner and/or labor contributed through community donations as a means of ensuring the personal investment that recipients realize by putting in that labor and by volunteers within the community donating labor as well. He feels that is one of the successes of Habitat. · Seeing this is funded annually. It is a great investment in the community, and as Mr. Keith pointed out it is only deferred, not that the city is necessarily losing funds. Mr. Martin Rowe, Clallam/Jefferson Community Action Council; Jefferson County Housing Authority; board member for Habitat Ms. Jean Camfield, Member of Habitat This is a revolving fund and she knows it is going to impact the city's budget, probably for the next 5 years; maybe by then it will start paying back. She reminded of the loan fund that started the revitalization of downtown buildings and how that has paid off. She said this is a win-win situation and encouraged Council to support it. No one spoke in opposition. The public hearing closed at 7:20 p.m. 0 ORDINANCE NO. 2666 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND CREATING A SPECIAL "SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE" (SDC) FUND; ESTABLISHING A "SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE LOW INCOME DEFERRAL ACCOUNT" IN THE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE City Council Minutes Page 4 November 2, 1998 FUND; APPROPRIATING THE SUM OF $15,000 TO THE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT LOW INCOME DEFERRAL AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Councilmember Keith made a motion that the second reading be considered the third and the third be by title only which was seconded by Councilmember Shoulberg and passed unanimously 7-0 by voice vote. Ms. Kolacy again read the ordinance by title. MOTION SECOND VOTE Mr. Keith Council adopt Ordinance No. 2666 Mr. Shoulberg Carried unanimously, 7-0 by roll call vote ORDINANCE NO. 2667 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND AMENDING CHAPTER 13.03, SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES FOR WATER AND SEWER CONNECTIONS, OF THE PORT TOWNSEND MUNICIPAL CODE, ADDING A NEW SECTION 13.03.10, SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE DEFERRALS FOR LOW INCOME HOUSING, TO ENABLE THE CITY TO DEFER PAYMENT OF SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES FOR QUALIFIED LOW INCOME SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING PROJECTS Councilmember Keith made a motion that the second reading be considered the third and the third be by title only which was seconded by Councilmember Shoulberg and passed unanimously 7-0 by voice vote. Ms. Kolacy again read the ordinance by title. MOTION Mr. Keith Adopt Ordinance No. 2667 with: Amendment #1 -- Addition on Page 5, Section 1, "F" -- add to end of the section: "provided further that in no circumstances shall the reimbursement be less than the amount of the original deferred amount." Amendment #2 -- a "sweat equity" provision be added to Section 2B. Discussion Mr. Keith suggested amendment #2 be passed with language to be drafted by the City Attorney or remand the ordinance to the Finance Committee to finalize the language. Discussion followed. AMENDMENT #2 WITHDRAWN by Mr. Keith SECOND MOTION SECOND Discussion: Mr. Shoulberg (with one amendment to Section 1 "F") Mr. Badame Amend the ordinance to include a definition of and a requirement for sweat equity under Section 2 B 2 Mr. Welch Mr. McMahan provided suggested language: "a qualified applicant shall assure City Council Minutes Page 5 November 2, 1998 that as a component of the project, they will provide or include in the project sweat equity, defined as labor contributed by the prospective home owner or volunteer labor contributed by community donation." MOTION TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE: Carried by voice vote 6-1, Mr. Rainbo opposed VOTE ON MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED: Carried unanimously, 7-0 by roll call vote B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS (Public testimony only -- no Council deliberation) Mr. Bruce Freeland introduced all of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments: MINOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS Planning Commission recommended all minor amendments with a 5-0 vote. (Specific texts included as appendix to October 19th Staff Report.) Received only supportive comments. (Land Use Element) · Change of building heights in M-II(A) zones (Port of Port Townsend Boat Haven) ,. Shorelines Clarification for Port Property (Only land subject to the Shoreline jurisdiction is within 200 feet of the high water line) (Transportation Element) · State and Private Ferry Needs -- Seattle to Port Townsend Passenger Ferry (To support tourism and economic development) Transit Connection to Passenger Ferry (Improved connections to Kingston ferry service) Seattle Ferry (Work with State DOT to study viability of full vehicle ferry) · Role of Port of Port Townsend Correct omission of Port of Port Townsend and Jefferson Transit as important interjurisdictions. ,. Street Utility State courts have issued a ruling that calls into question the viability. Until changed, should be considered a funding source to explore rather than ready to be implemented. (Capital Facilities and Utilities) · Endangered Species Addresses potential listing of salmon runs in area, not currently mentioned in the plan. (Economic Development) City Council Minutes Page 6 November 2, 1998 · Northwest Maritime Center Add language to support development Public Testimony in favor of the minor amendments: Lloyd Cahoon representing Port of Port Townsend. Asked Council to vote in favor of the 6 amendments requested by the Port that made the docket -- two specific to the Port and four general in terms of community impact. Asked to consider opening the 1999 Comp Plan update process as soon as possible to revisit the question of the City's support of the Port's study of potential feasibility of a marine expansion. No one spoke in opposition. MAJOR POLICY AMENDMENTS (Text amendments and Zoning Code amendments) (Changes to the Text of the CII/MU Zone) Planning Commission voted 3-2 to recommend Option B, and provide a minority report in favor of Option A. Mr. Freeland pointed out an error on Page 22 of his October 19, 1998 staff report that should be changed to read: "By a vote of 3 to 2, the Commission recommends approval of Option B, with the following findings and conclusions:" 1. Legislative a. LaVigne Request -- CII/MU request Testifying In favor: Mr. Denny LaVigne, 4320 San Juan Avenue Had a written testimony with exhibits. He made the following recommendations: · The district be returned to CII commercial; or · City Council abandon the Planning Commission recommendations for floor area ratio (FAR) incentives in this district and adopt an amendment that enables mixed use but does not require residential. His Exhibit G showed that Staff supported both Options A and B throughout Planning Commission deliberations. · Removal of all requirements for two story buildings in this zoning district. He showed a map from the crossroads intersection of the Gateway Plan in the flats district, the Gateway corridor and alt the zoning in that area, the Gateway boundaries to the north and south (all CII including residential and the Jefferson Title mixed use), the bank, his property within the Gateway boundaries, and the Port Townsend Inn. He said in every area except the subject property, Gateway boundaries are exceeded by CII property. Mr. LaVigne entered the map into the record as Exhibit D, other exhibits are included City Council Minutes Page 7 November 2, 1998 with his written testimony. He visually showed in scale his existing bowling center as it stands in relation to the area of his property; the bowling center approximately 10,700 square feet plus or minus 50 feet, compared to the area .2 square feet, 1,000 square feet plus or minus 30 square feet, smaller than his existing bowling center. He said he is non-conforming. He asked for clarification -- if a permitted use in the CII/MU zone were wanting to occupy this building that is non-conforming, could they move in? Mr. Freeland replied that they could. Mr. LaVigne then asked if they would have to remove 1,000 feet; Mr. Freeland replied that they would not. Mr. LaVigne stated that at the joint workshop last week he sensed confusion regarding FARs, and asked if Council passes FARs, whether .2, .3, or whatever, because the two-story requirement remains, they are leaving the entire situation up to Staff. He said by that he means this is a 9,680 square foot single story building and could be reduced in size by Staff requiring 2 stories that are 200 - 300 - 400 square foot conference rooms on the roof or on the second story, or by requiring simply a 4,840 square feet per floor, thus making the property 10% developed. If they require a 4,840 square foot footprint and a 4,840 second story, the footprint then becomes 4,840 square feet. Mayor McCulloch suggested that Mr. LaVigne complete his testimony for now and they would come back to him. She suggested that Mr. Freeland respond to Mr. LaVigne. Mr. Freeland stated there is nothing in the current draft or in the current ordinance that defines what it means to be a two-story building. He suggested that is the point Mr. LaVigne is making, that there is an area of interpretation as to what requirement there is for a two-story building. He said in his mind, anything that puts usable space on the second floor is a two-story building, but at some point you may have something so small it would not be considered a two- story building, i.e. a 10 foot square storage area above the ground floor, would that be a two-story building. There is an ambiguity, and at some point staff would have to make a determination. Mr. Finnie asked Mr. LaVigne for clarification of his recommendations. Mr. LaVigne reiterated: 1) Return the district to CII, commercial, or 2) Abandon the Planning Commission requirement of an FAR incentive in the district; 3) Adopt an amendment that enables mixed use but does not require residential. Mr. Jim Ramey, 2010 Rosewood He and his son own the Penny Saver market. He has been at that location for 20 years, that it was an old brick building about to fall down, gas pumps, and there were holes in parking lot. He said the spent several hundred thousand dollars improving the comer. Now they are at a dead end. His property where it borders Kearney Street is 54 feet deep; now they have 54 feet of CII, 70 feet of road; and as it stands 80 feet of the bowling alley property that all falls within the Gateway Corridor, if you consider 200 feet from the right-of-way. He listed surrounding buildings within the Gateway Corridor. City Council Minutes Page 8 November 2, 1998 He asked: · What are we going to build on 54 feet? You can't build anything -- the set backs overlap. · Can we use the road -- will it be vacated? · Will there be different zoning for the other 80 feet? He suggested that sometime the city will have to put it all together, or it will stay a mess as it is now. He spoke of the economic feasibility. We have Option B, which is not really an option -- no one will build mixed use there. He referred to Bay Vista Apartments that he says has been nearly empty for 5 years; no one wants to live there. The last two Edgewater Condominiums sold very slowly at $85,000 and $105,000. He said the only thing he can say for apartments over a building next door to the Penny Saver as opposed to the Edgewater, when you look out your window you will look at the Penny Saver parking lot instead of boats and water, or for a few pennies more, you can see a power substation. He has been working for 15 years in Tacoma with venture capitalists, and they are financing a lot of these things. Pierce County is tough, but he has never seen .02 FAR. He has seen .03, .035, but never .02. Regarding underground parking, he commented that during the water, they have a 30" water table. He would like to see: · The zoning changed to CII; · The road vacated; · All the property through the Penny Saver parking lot, the road, and the bowling alley property combined as CII and have something worthwhile there. Ms. Jenks asked for clarification: Did you mean .2, not .02. Mr. Ramey replied it would be .02 per 1 foot. Ms. Penny D'Amico, Representing their own property adjoining the LaVigne property She said she would have been on agenda this evening if they had received proper notification. She spoke of her family upheaval in 1996, and said she had some questions and a couple of statements. Mayor McCulloch asked that Ms. D'Amico limit her comments to the particular proposal. Ms. D'Amico noted when the zoning changed on their particular property in 1996, they were not notified, as they do in other areas that are being changed; there was no posting and no notification. She said she is in favor of taking it back to the zoning it was originally, C-II commercial, and to consider that a lot of owners of those properties have all owned property for a long time. She was not just talking about not only affecting owners along Kearney Street and Penny Saver, that she was here representing her family, saying they are opposed to what was done and would like to return the zoning to the CII commercial designation -- not mixed use. City Council Minutes Page 9 November 2, 1998 Mr. Gerald Adams, 1515 McPherson Is not familiar with the zoning codes, but he is familiar with people who are out of work, and said if Rite-aid goes in, it will bring in many jobs. People living in low income housing will be thankful when they get their prescriptions filled. Mr. Bernie Arthur, 1320 Jefferson Street Reviewed what he thinks is happening, that the Comp Plan deliberations he attended and zoning code that erupted out of that didn't really agree. He suggested what happened to that zone, which has existing businesses in it, is that when they changed the CII to CII/MU it was downzoned and took away from the people who had been using it for many years as CII. He asked that they seriously consider the damage this has done to people and said they should return it to what it was before the last zoning code change, or compensate people for the losses they have incurred. Mr. Byron Ruby, 1130 Hastings He said back in the 60's the CII was brought into effect, and he is opposed to having residential on Kearney Street, because Kearney is a very busy thoroughfare at all times -- the rest home on one end, apartments at the other end. To have residential above buildings would be detrimental to children, and older people who might live there. He is opposed to residential on Keamey; it should be left CII. Mr. Scott Walker, 712 H Street Said he is semi in favor of this amendment. Originally he was excited about CII/MU zoning, but thinks if it were to be changed back to the requested CII there are two elements that are important to hang on to. He said to see what makes a vital commercial area, look at the downtown old historic district and how that's so vital and economically vibrant versus other commercial places like upper Sims Way which has its own level of vitality but is not as intense as downtown. · Building frontage requirement is one element to hang on to -- it affects how pedestrian- friendly the environment is -- buildings right there where pedestrians access off the sidewalk. If you maintain that, it will be maintaining an inviting environment for pedestrians and folks who want to live in that area. · He will discuss the other element later. Ms. Shirley Rudolph, 2137 Washington Street #16 -- speaking for herself personally, and for lighthouse Associates, the partnership that owns the 17,000 foot shopping center housing Mailboxes, Etc. She recommend and endorsed changing back to CII zoning because there is so little commercial zoning in Port Townsend. She urged City Council to stand behind logical and reasonable economic development. In order to have affordable commodities, goods and services you have to have locations that can be appropriate for shopping like Swains, or Henerys Hardware. She said at this time there is no commercial property available that could house a medium size business such as these two. The area between Penney Saver and Lawrence Street is City Council Minutes Page 10 November 2, 1998 not necessarily conducive to residential. The Penny Saver, bowling alley, and Puget Sound Energy transition down to residential at the apartment house a little further on Lawrence Street. She urged Council to go by the minority report from the Planning Commission which also replicates the endorsement of Staff on the Harper property for the rezone to commercial. She said we have so little commercial; traditionally the area had been used commercially, and when the Comp Plan was put together, there apparently was an issue as to whether or not CII/MU zoning would be appropriate, or economically feasible, and if not, there would be opportunity to change back to CII. She said she believes the present zoning would make any development there unviable. Mr. Erik Andersson, 4807 Willamette, Executive Director of Economic Development Council In support of Mr. LaVigne's property which is currently mixed use and is also subject to the regulations of the Gateway Plan. With the recommendation that Harpers goes back to CII, this would be one of the few properties in Gateway Plan that would not be zoned CII, and he asked for rezone back to CII for better consistency. He stated concerns: · Perceived lack of commercial property in CII in Port Townsend; · Rezone provides more commercial property and locations convenient to local residents, pedestrians and transit riders; · Economic feasibility of mixed use properties being developed under Option B as recommended by the Planning Commission; · What was developed as an incentive to housing would be a disincentive to commercial. Mr. Jeff Hamm, Manager, Jefferson Transit, Member Comp Plan Transportation Committee Spoke in favor of the Planning Commission recommendation of Option B which preserves a portion of the zoning code that pushes the land uses into mixed use. The mixed use concept was also a central element of the long term transportation element of the Comp Plan -- to make a more walkable community to bring housing and jobs closer together and to promote alternative modes of transportation. He urged not to abandon or dismantle the concept based on the problems that one particular project may be presenting you; this was a major theme for the Comp Plan and he urged them to consider dismantling carefully. He felt Option B preserves the inherent nature of trying to push development to combine housing and commercial areas, but provides incentives for them that are not as rigid as the former. Those making continuing comments: Mr. J. J. Kircher, 2010 Jefferson Street Has lived in Port Townsend since 1937; the house he lives in is 108 years old and built by people who built the courthouse when things were slack. He owns the property above the bowling alley and Penny Saver. He lives in a house that has no abstract, has never been rented or sold, and he doesn't want it diminished in any way for himself or for Port Townsend. Mr. Kircher referred to the New York Times of Oct. 18, 1998 and said if you had read it you would have seen the write up about Port Townsend, and picture showing his home in front of the courthouse taken from the bluff on the far side over by the mill. That edition went all around City Council Minutes Page 11 November 2, 1998 the world -- that property that belongs to Port Townsend should not be diminished. In 1945 he bought two blocks for $600, and it is now assessed at over $500,000; it has been for sale for 10 years, and no one can afford it. It is virgin land. He asked why not go all the way back to RIII as it used to be?. There are many things associated with commercial property that infringe on the rights of residential people who live adjacent to it. He planted the holly field in 1945, and it seems strange to him and doesn't seem right to destroy what's good for the town. He doesn't want anything done to the land that isn't good for Port Townsend and that doesn't go with the picturesque sign as you enter town -- it doesn't come to town and take anything out of the town. Ms. Ruth Short Came to town in 1927. She parked outside of a commercial building, later bought it and kept it 47 years. She does not want a lot of children running up and down that street; it would never work. Ms. Barbara Marseille, 1031 Cherry Street, Representing the Historic Preservation Committee Reminded Council that the Historic Preservation Committee (HPC) is charged in the municipal code to review and comment on land use as related to historic resources within the historic district, and that HPC took a position on proposal and wrote letter concerning this. She asked Council to please review that letter during their deliberations. The HPC official position is to retain the CII/MU in this area (at the time of the letter there was no Option A or Option B); they are very interested in keeping mixed use zoning. She pointed out that the area is quite near the landmark downtown historic district and may be more fragile and significant than we understand. She pointed out that a district does not just stop, that adjacent zoning impacts that historic district profoundly, and that a buffer zone is extremely important. Ms. Sandra Stowell, Lincoln Street above Kearney Street It is a difficult area, and she understands the problems with trying to make a mixed use area out of it; the power station certainly doesn't contribute to that kind of use. She is against zoning it back to commercial or too much modification of the mixed use, particularly modification of street frontage, partly because of the closeness to the residential area up the hill. She said she would not want additional commercial noise added to the neighborhood any more than necessary. She also spoke of the impact to the nature park, that mixed residential on a modest scale of use can be wonderful combination with the nature park and she would hate to see full scale commercial development of that area. Mr. Dana Roberts, 438 22nd Street Wants his comments considered in relation to the LaVigne and Baldridge proposals. He said to be mindful of the Plan; it is how to convert a vision to reality. Port Townsend won't be different if we do what other cities do. Keep the long view of Port Townsend's present and future by keeping the bold and rewarding requirement of CII/MU. Revising as Rite Aid demands will give us a Sequim type box in a parking lot, and will City Council Minutes Page 12 November 2, 1998 not advance the common based goals of the Comp Plan or the UGA principles. If you can drive all around a building, it is neither pedestrian nor neighborhood friendly. He urged Council if they decide to alter the Plan or zoning requirements: · make zoning pedestrian friendly by requiring all CII/MU development to have a O-foot setback from the street side and a sidewalk; · keep the housing requirement of multi-story construction, but consider allowing the retail development up to 5 years to complete the housing component. He submitted extended remarks in what amounts a sizeable chunk of the Kah Tai nature presence; also comments in opposition to the PUD proposal for office building -- he is against the PUD proposal. He is in favor of the Greenway agriculture proposal; we need all the locally grown produce we can get. Ms. Niki Clark, Representing Jefferson County Historical Society Referenced her letter of comments addressed to the Planning Commission and said the basic position is general, not addressing a particular project, but recommending that the City continue with mixed use and residential use that has been defined. She noted this is a critical transition area; to change significantly from downtown would jeopardize the character of our historic districts. Those addressing the Speser, Arthur, Fisher/Dorn and Greenway proposals Mr. Bernie Arthur, Arthur proposal Letter and written testimony. Review of current uses allowed shows the uptown area from the Post Office to Lawrence Street has been mixed use historically. Commercial services available there include churches, government buildings, apartments, home businesses, retail, Bed & Breakfasts -- located and permitted in RI residential area. He said they live in that area, so deal with changing environment every day. He said the proposal is too complex and in some ways duplicates Port Townsend Municipal Code 17.56. He suggested approving the following: · Additional and expanded businesses considered on conditional basis in Uptown RIII · Number of employees, depends (see letter) He said this is an idea whose time has come. Mr. Robert Greenway, Greenway proposal Is in favor of agricultural zoning. His pictures showed the agricultural enterprise, to give some realism. He also urged for earlier 1999 Comp Plan revisions. He said the logical zoning would be RI and believes an aberration slipped up out of agricultural zoning when the Comp Plan was passed. He said the zoning change would cost $1300, that he did not make application when he realized changes in RII would allow them to do exactly what they have been doing. He thanked Mr. Freeland for his support, that they had a long discourse on the philosophy of agriculture in an urban/small town area. He said this will dribble out in bits and pieces. Ms. Barbara Marseille, Proposals for Speser, Arthur, Fischer/Dom City Council Minutes Page 13 November 2, 1998 Referred to the letter from HPC concerning the three proposals and recommended those three small businesses be denied. She suggested that in residential historic district, a house is not just a house listed on the historic register here and there; it is greater than its parts and must be considered in its entirety. She said they do have activity other than residential, but on a level that seems to work well, and she asked to support the district and its character. She said she personally does not believe we need to change that. Ms. Lyn Hersey, Greenway Proposal Farming in our community is a great idea. She said she is confused that Mr. Greenway has been an opponent of the 35th Street Park, and at the time of the hearing, she understood he did not want traffic impacting his neighborhood. She said people coming to buy vegetables will add traffic to the neighborhood. She referred to vending cart requirements she had to meet, and spoke of "street vendor" licenses. She said she does not want one set of people who need to have street vendor permits and others who don't. She noted there are many people selling in front of the Adams Street Park, and that Council should look at that before approving this request. Ms. Penny D'Amieo, Arthur proposal Spoke in support of the Arthur proposal. She pointed out she is redoing the old Episcopal parish hall and would hate to have someone say to her she couldn't put a business in there to make this project work. She said they should look at each proposal persons come in with stating they want to have businesses in a home or historic building, not have it all black and white, but go on a case-by-case basis. She said after all she has sunk into the parish building, she would need some support and would hate to think it black and white. Mr. Allen Frank, Greenway proposal Pointed out he is not anti-agriculture, but he feels when candidates for office make requests, they should be held to a higher level of scrutiny; the bar needs to be set high. He said he is asking for more disclosure. Mr. Frank raised the question with Mr. Freeland regarding agriculture in RI-A, that there are only three to four farms in the city, and he felt a new designation did not seem necessary. He felt the Planning Commission worked through these and other issues. Mr. Frank requested they table this vote until a full disclosure is made on assessed values and property values. He asked regarding possible impacts: · May potentially reduce property values; · Impacts on utility rates; · Possible impacts on the 35th Street Park which would border on agricultural property; · Impact of future housing in this area He asked for a further study of traffic and parking impacts on adjoining neighborhoods. He said he thinks the Comp Plan process has put farms in the county and not in the city. He wants a full disclosure of all impacts on all affected, so this doesn't become a divisive issue. He said he likes fresh produce, but there are several outlets. He is concerned that the proposed City Council Minutes Page 14 November 2, 1998 designation is another subsidy being requested of the hardworking citizens of Port Townsend, and asked if these farms are providing the sole income, or are they hobby farms? Do we want Port Townsend to be a subsidy? Many are paying more than their fair share. Mr. Denny LaVigne Questioned how this whole thing transpired outside of what went on in public hearings and the draft Comp Plan process, etc. He pointed out contents of exhibits he submitted: · Exhibit A -- Unconstitutional Taking for the Good of the Public Without Compensation · Exhibit B -- The 48 categories listed in CI, CII, and CII/MU (there are only 3 uses permitted in CI and CII that are not in CII/MU) ~ Exhibit C -- Permitted uses and potential uses in CII/MU which illustrate the obvious downzone in the zoning. Asked Council in their preparation and during deliberations to compare. ~ Exhibit D -- Already covered · Exhibit E -- A letter from the Mayor, and his sales proposal showing this zoning code district was aggressively targeted by the City as a potential area for the police station. His sales proposal was prior to the Comp Plan public hearing -- he was not sure of the other two, but is sure Council could find out. He asked if these properties were targeted by the Planning staff, and department heads because they knew the properties might be sold in the next 2 years. His observations are that there is no clear consensus nor a true understanding of mixed use, only what Staff may not want at these locations. In his research, he finds our zoning codes are far more restrictive than in other cities. In previous written testimony in the Planning Commission, Mr. LaVigne said he has heard it is similar to other CII properties in the city. He gave a reminder that there was to be a revisiting to address property owners' objections, whether or not this is workable. He said there are no similarities between the two CII/MU centers currently mapped in the city of Port Townsend. Kearney Street is substantially developed and qualifies in all ways to be commercial CII, and should not have been changed. Discovery Road is undeveloped and may fit the vision of the city. He again asked that they return his property to CII, commercial, or abandon the FAR, adopt mixed use that does not include residential (which he said was favored by staff) and remove all requirements for two-story buildings in this zone. He questioned pedestrian friendly possibilities in that part of town. He said he would like to know when Public Works plans to put sidewalk access to Kearney Street from above the hill behind his property. He said there is not one sidewalk on Washington, Jefferson, Clay or Lawrence Streets; they need to get with it, if it will be pedestrian friendly. Ms. Jenks asked for clarification on the reference to Mr. LaVigne's comments in his previous testimony regarding the footprint of his building. Mayor McCulloch announced: Deadline for written comments -- Tuesday, November 10, 5:00 p.m. City Council Minutes Page 15 November 2, 1998 2. SITE-SPECIFIC REZONE APPLICATIONS Mr. Freeland introduced the site specific rezone applications. Public testimony was opened to the public. a. Harper Proposal (LUP98-07). Those testif.ving In favor: Mr. Keith Harper, 609 Franklin Street, Representing Bob Harper. Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Planning Staff, and the Planning Commission voted to approve. He noted his letter dated June 30, 1998 to Mr. Freeland and it was incorporated by reference as part of record. He said it set forth all the grounds by which to approve the proposal. He said Mr. Cahoon also spoke in favor of the rezone; the Port land adjoins on the south and west. He said for all those reasons, and based upon findings and reasons in the letter, he asked that the proposal be approved. Mr. Jim Ramey Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Stated many things that apply to Mr. Harper's apply to theirs. He said he does not know why it was changed in first place, and supports changing it back. There was no one testifying in opposition. b. Evans Proposal (LUP98-16) Those testifying in favor: Mr. Roger Evans, 4920 E. Quilcene Road, One of the owners Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Mr. Evans affirmed what the Planning Commission has already affirmed 5-0. He said they are happy with the results and the good cooperation. He said they had originally donated part of the property to the City under the forest corridor. There was no one testifying in opposition. c. PUD Itl Proposal (LUP98-30) Those testifying in favor: City Council Minutes Page 16 November 2, 1998 Ms. Barbara Blowers, 930 Beckett Point Road, Representing PUD #1 Swore and affirmed the testimony she was about to give was true, to the best of her knowledge. The PUD #1 has owned the property since 1952 when it was purchased. They were planning to build a building, but now it is excess property of a public utility, as the PUD wants to be in the county where their work is and wants to divest themselves of it. She said she knows that the City put this particular property in as part of its park. She understands how they did that, but is not quite sure she understands how they presume to do that with someone's property. Apparently that's possible. She said the PUD wrote a letter to the City during the Comp Plan considerations asking this property to be put into CII. She does not have a problem with it going into CII/MU -- either way you do it. It is a very restricted property, and not much can be done; is has a very small building envelope. Ms. Blowers said they would like to see the City buy the property for the fair market value, and she is working toward that end. They have an appraisal. She expressed her wishes that the 1963 Port Commissioners would have to take out every grain of sand they put into Kah Tai Lagoon. She indicated the Park & Ride area and so-called Kah Tai park was still water in the late 1980's, and that the filling began after 1971 when it was not allowed. Those testifying in opposition: Ms. Char Flum, 2360 Haines Street Swore and affirmed the testimony she was about to give was true, to the best of her knowledge. Rezoning this property would allow commercial development in an area which has been a part of Kah Tai Park (because of grants and an understanding with the State that these properties would be part of the park). She indicated this is a top priority in the current Parks & Recreation Functional Plan. She commented the wetlands change is interesting, considering standing water has been on that property. She said if a change happens, our children and grandchildren could have a strip mall as a reminder that their elected officials were not stewards of the Kah Tai Park. She called for a dedication to a dream -- lend to the quality of life. She said imagine an 1,800 footprint with 5,000 square foot of asphalt -- the PUD has envisioned this development with Bionomics who says the property is not a wetland, only a small development with a 50 foot buffer. Opportunity will be lost forever to the City to do the right things and purchase an extension of the Kah Tai nature park. Mr. Steve I-Iayden Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Displayed the Kah Tai park master plan produced for the dedication of the park in 1985, shortly after they leased property from the PUD; it has been a master plan for 18 years. He claimed there is a technical and thin legal slice that you could say the parcels owned by PUD may not be part of the park, but they have been functioning as part of the park. The PUD was enthusiastic when they leased the property out to the park. City Council Minutes Page 17 November 2, 1998 Mr. Hayden reminded Council of the criteria they must consider: is the rezone consistent with community values? He said it is astounding that anyone could think that rezoning would add to community values or would not assume it would spread up the street. He spoke of restrictions the PUD offered at the Planning Commission meeting and asked how big a building could be built under PI? According to code, it could be 11,000 square feet, 1 to 3 ratio, but given the constraints of the site, it couldn't be much larger than what they are offering; only recognize the constraints of the site -- it is not a gift. He claimed the PUD is interested in selling to get money to do something else; it does not oblige the city to change the use; the PUD can sell under the PI zone; it doesn't have to be owned by a public entity, it can be private. Many things are allowed in PI that a private person could do. The value will not be taken away if they are not granted rezone. There is a perception that the City is using its powers to keep the price down through zoning. It would be embarrassing to argue that in court, criteria are spelled out in ordinances; he urged, you have the ability to evaluate criteria; don't rezone. Ms. Carol Ann Modina Swore and affirmed the testimony she was about to give was true, to the best of her knowledge. Urged not to allow the zoning change that would allow what functions as Kah Tai Park to open to commercial development. The zoning changes should contribute to the public good; this wouldn't. She jogs through the park; Kah Tai is wonderful resource, a little piece of wildness. The more the edges are developed, the less a refuge for people and animals. She pled to save a bit of the nature preserve to nourish our soles. Ms. Sandra Stowell Swore and affirmed the testimony she was about to give was true, to the best of her knowledge. Thinks the zoning under which it functions as a park is appropriate, and pUshed to maintain that as a part of the most accessible green space, the most natural park in this part of town where it is sorely needed. Any kind of building on that site will significantly change that end of the park; it will eliminate the buffer from the street and really cut into the park character and function. She said the lagoon park is a category I wetland; recent studies would indicate the property is out of the wetland I buffer zone, but it is hard to do accurate testing given the disturbance to the area, so they should go to a wider buffer zone. She also pled to keep the area zoned as is and let it function as part of Kah Tai. Ms. Helen Kolff, 510 35th Street Swore and affirmed the testimony she was about to give was true, to the best of her knowledge. So obviously seems like part of the park, even though it isn't. She urged to take the long view, not the short view. If we need, citizens should get together and buy it if the city can't. Mr. Norman Dyck, 2360 Haines Street Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Is opposed to rezoning. He referenced a letter dated October 1, 1998 from Chair Jim Farmer of the Port Townsend Parks and Recreation Commission to the Planning Commission, and read the final sentence: "In light of the PUD's desire to divest itself of its property at this City Councit Minutes Page 18 November 2, 1998 time, a unique opportunity exists to further the City's goals and benefit the citizens of our community." Mr. Bob DeWeese, 1919 Lawrence Street Affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. The City's failure to renew the lease should not condemn our neighborhood to the consequences of a rezone. It is incredible to include a strip of development along Keamey Street making increased congestion at Lawrence and Keamey and further degradation of the lagoon. This rezone is the very thing the Comp Plan had in mind -- prohibited in areas where it would "diminish livability or viability" of the adjoining neighborhood. He said it would degrade his neighborhood, the lagoon park, which has been his neighborhood park for 15 years; it will never be the same. He claimed voluntary restrictions is a transparent effort to divert objections. Any building on that site would lead to the neighborhood degradation and he believes they know that. He finds it very cynical they would propose those restrictions. Ms. Jenks spoke of Mr. DeWeese's statement regarding the City's failure to renew the lease and asked for clarification on the lease. Mr. McMahan replied that the City currently leases property where the path goes through, and at one time, they also leased the other two properties for 3 years; the lease expired and was not renewed. He said it appears someone dropped the ball in the early or mid-1980's, and suggested what might have happened is that there was discussion but no implementation. He clarified the City has no legal interest in these parcels, not in at least 10 years. Mr. Ron Sykes, 1709 Gise Street Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Kah Tai Lagoon area including PUD land adds a great deal to the quality of his life; he visits it almost daily. He said the area has potential as plant succession continues, which it is doing, and as volunteers plant it, to increase the buffer for the park to benefit people and wildlife, reduce sound and clean the air. The City should make the extra effort to see it remains open space. It will not come again, and it would be a great lost opportunity. Every block in that area should remain in open space. Mr. Gerry Gilbert, 935 18th Street Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Has been a resident for 25 years; those of us on the other side of the lagoon have no park spaces except Kah Tai. He walks through the park in order to get to the city. He said he doesn't see that rezoning to commercial zone will make it more attractive for us to go through the park on foot or bicycle; it would be less likely to be used in a way that would benefit natural landscape, etc. He said he is against rezoning to any kind of commercial zone whatever. Mr. Charles I-Ianiford, 907 Pierce Street Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Kah Tai Lagoon and the area are special parts of town. Some parts of town are unique, City Council Minutes Page 19 November 2, 1998 give a sense of peace and tranquility; Kah Tai is among the top. He said it is ironic that the public utility district would request public land to be changed to commercial use, and he wants Council to deny the application to change the zoning. He said whenever we have rain, there is a tremendous amount of water, and it would surely be a problem if you add more asphalt and building to the site. Mr. Dana Roberts Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Said he understands from the State of the City that 1 percent of property tax money collected in Port Townsend goes to the PUD. He said he doesn't see much of a presence in the city, and it makes one wonder what is becoming of that money; maybe they could provide the City with some asset. He suggested that some of these properties in Kah Tai would be a good place to look first. Mr. Michael Pruett, Haines Street Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Urged to deny the zoning change: · Class III wetland on the property itself-- Development toward the north end of property, closest to park, even though it is small, would have a large impact against the park, crowded against the north border. · Couldn't get away from subjective reasons. Must be subjective, as quality of life is a subjective criterion. Any building would certainly impact enjoyment of nature. · Financial impact. All these people showed up -- to get this many people to come out and deal with this, you can figure many more are represented who couldn't be here. d. Baldridge Group Proposal (LUP98-31) Those testifying in favor: Mr. Denny La¥igne Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. All reasons for the Harper property, apply to Key City, i.e., highway orientation and current use, helps offset deficit of commercially zoned land. Key City is also highway oriented with a history of CII -- not an organizing principle, could be changed if shown to be economically impractical. Safeway is in a building permit process to add 14,000 square feet -- could monopolize pharmaceutical business in Port Townsend. Rite Aid will mitigate all issues including building design standards, Keamey/Sims intersection. Pedestrian friendly -- not really, need sidewalks. Photo of Rite Aid store in eastern USA entered as Exhibit A. Mr. Craig Berman (23409 NE 19th, Redmond WA), Representing the Rite-Aid Corp. (not the Baldridge Group) Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was true, to the best of his knowledge. Sometimes developers come in and ask for a rezone, or a conditional use permit, and City Council Minutes Page 20 November 2, 1998 they also pack up and leave when things are done. Who will be your neighbor? and your partner? He noted that is why he is present. It is important to realize this is a property rezone, not anything'that will be on the property. He said he would love to talk about all the great things they do, but it was noted they need to just talk about this property and this site. The most important component, was that this will open up further development along Kearney Street. He stated he got clarification before the Planning Commission, and the City Attorney indicated this request is not president setting, in the sense that it does not bind the City Council in any way for further requests for rezones up Kearney Street. Given that the arguments are used, it would possibly open or diminish Council's authority as a governing body to use vision about what the town will look like. Mr. Berman said this property should be looked at differently, strictly from a real estate and zoning prospect; it is different; it is closest to the busy intersection. Rite Aid's criteria and most retailers, is for a comer location, very close to a high traffic intersection -- only this piece of property meets this criteria. Take that, combine with criteria, it fits into the vision of the Gateway Plan and Land Use Element 8; it is appropriate for Council to rezone back to CII and eliminate the mixed use component. He said this will help stop the concern about retail leakage. It is already zoned commercial (with mixed use component); would the reaction be same? Mr. McMahan clarified for the record that he did not remember a conversation where he made an opinion about setting precedence; Eric Toews was also at that meeting. Mr. McMahan said that is a policy issue on whether a precedent is set on a particular rezone and he does not remember reassuring any applicant regarding that issue. Mr. Jim Ramey Swore and affirmed the testimony he was about to give was tree, to the best of his knowledge. Competition is healthy. He asked why it changed in the first place, some things are facts: this is a high traffic, high visibility comer; he thinks Keamey Street is the most traveled side street in Port Townsend. He asked if you have seen the Kearney Street playground? Where are the kids going to go -- the Penny Saver parking lot? Also consider the tax base -- bring some bucks to town, 16-18 jobs to town. If we had adopted this attitude 20 years ago, Safeway would still be where it used to be. There was no one testifying in opposition. Mayor McCulloch again reminded regarding the deadline for written testimony -- Tuesday, November 10, 5:00 p.m. at City Hall. Mayor McCulloch recessed the meeting at 10:35 p.m. and reconvened it at 10:50 p.m to consider New Business. City Council Minutes Page 21 November 2, 1998 Ms. Jenks asked regarding the schedule for the Wireless Facility Siting Committee. Mr. McMahan indicated the Planning Commission did not want a workshop but instead wanted to proceed with the ordinance. It was suggested they invite the HPC and the City Council to the meeting, but with a short time frame a workshop wouldn't be efficient. Mary Winter will provide whatever working document she has by November 12th. They are intending to have two meetings in December to work on the ordinance and City Council will work on it in January. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was none. NEW BUSINESS Memorandum from Mary Winters, Assistant City Attorney, regarding Resolutions scheduled for November 2, 1998 Council Agenda concerning capital equipment purchase for the PEG Access Studio. Mr. Welch had hoped to use equipment as collateral on this, but essentially they are bound by general fund obligation if the system should default. They are also looking at lease options. RESOLUTION NO. 98-111 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF CAPITAL EQUIPMENT FOR VIDEO PRODUCTION AND BROADCAST, AND A FINANCING CONTRACT AND RELATED DOCUMENTATION FOR SAID EQUIPMENT MOTION SECOND VOTE Mr. Welch Council adopt Resolution No. 98-111 Mr. Shoulberg Carried unanimously, 7-0 by voice vote RESOLUTION NO. 98-112 FORM OF RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND FOR THE STATE LOCAL OPTION ASSET LENDING PROGRAM ("LOCAL") MOTION SECOND VOTE Mr. Welch Council adopt Resolution 98-112 Mr. Rambo Carried unanimously, 7-0 by voice vote PUBLIC COMMENT Page 22 City Council Minutes November 2, 1998 There was none. There was none. COUNCILMEMBERS GENERAL DISCUSSION EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor McCulloch recessed the meeting into Executive Session at 11:04 p.m. for approximately ½ to 1 hour to discuss labor negotiations and potential litigation, including Michael Hildt, Pam Kolacy, and Tim McMahan. No action was anticipated. The meeting was reconvened at 12:15 p.m. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, at 12:20 p.m., Mayor McCulloch adjourned the meeting. Attest: Pamela Kolacy City Clerk City Council Minutes Page 23 November 2, 1998