Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout021411CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MINUTES OF THE WORKSHOP MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2011 CALL TO ORDER The Port Townsend City Council met in regular workshop session the fourteenth day of February, 2011, in the City Council Chambers, Mayor Michelle Sandoval presiding. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present at roll call were Kris Nelson, Michelle Sandoval, David King, George Randels, Catharine Robinson, and Mark Welch with Laurie Medlicott excused. Staff members present were City Manager David Timmons, City Attorney John Watts, DSD Director Rick Sepler, Public Works Director Ken Clow, and City Clerk Pam Kolacy. PROJECT OVERVIEW BRIEFING WITH WAYFINDING CONSULTING TEAM Development Services Director Rick Sepler introduced the wayfinding project concept. He noted that members of the consulting team were present and included Kelly Brandon of Kelly Brandon Design, David Edquist of Edquist Davis Exhibits, and co-project manager Christina Pivarnik. Mr. Brandon presented an overall view of the wayfinding project. Mr. Edquist added information about the interpretation design. Member of the public present were allowed to comment. The Council heard from Peggy Hanson, Jefferson Transit Director, and Jim Todd. Some questions and discussion ensued, mostly regarding upcoming process. Mr. Sepler noted an ad hoc focus group has been formed by the administrative team to garner some basic overall input. Members of that group will develop a rough concept based on the elements presented by the consulting team so a plan can be devised from the initial elements for a phased approach. Council members provided some suggestions regarding the make up of the ad hoc group. Mr. Brandon added that there will be extensive public process and the purpose of the initial group is to get content and perspective from community leaders and identify any gaps in the plan. Mr. Timmons added that a key goal is to build for the community first and tourism facilitation will follow in an organic process. Mayor Sandoval declared a recess at 7:12 p.m. for the purpose of a break. The meeting was reconvened at 7:21 p.m. City Council Workshop Meeting February 14, 2011 Page 1 of 4 RESIDENTIAL STREET USES City Attorney John Watts reviewed the packet materials and noted that the issue was discussed extensively at the Community Development /Land Use Committee with a recommendation from the committee that the full Council review further in a workshop session. Mr. Watts suggested that the Council try to come to consensus on some of the less complicated issues first. In response to discussion of allowing private gardens and fences in the right of way, Mr. Sepler summarized the discussion by stating that the Development Services Department could devise a permitting system with criteria for evaluation for such uses. If it is Council's intent to allow private gardens, then DSD could develop a permitting system for gardens and fences. If allowed, the uses would not preclude long term public use nor would they be allowed to displace parking. Councilor comments acknowledged that it is difficult to be equitable due to the many different types of situations in the city. Every street is different and prioritization of public uses must be established. Council comments indicated support to direct staff to pursue the general concept of requiring all uses to be located in a manner eight feet back from the developed portion of the street with some sort of departure process if special conditions exist. The eight foot setback would allow for parking use as well as drainage. Council comments indicated that there will be many current uses which will become illegal with the passage of regulations and that it would be best for the regulations to be applied first to current proposed development and re-development. Mr. Clow noted that a reasonable explanation of the reason for rules is generally accepted by most people. There was further discussion about the eight foot rule with a departure for unique circumstances such as topography. More discussion about pre-existing nonconforming uses took place. Councilor comments indicated that no permanent fences or walls (unless a necessary retaining wall) should be allowed in the right of way. There is some practical distinction between aesthetic and structural elements. Generally this regulation would allow for departures and would not be retroactive. The difference between privatizing and providing a public benefit was discussed as a criteria. Generally arbors and hedges are not appropriate uses of the rights of way. Some discussion took place regarding the pros and cons of issuing paid permits for City Council Workshop Meeting February 14, 2011 Page 2 of 4 commercial (or other) use of the right of way but an apparent consensus was that this concept should not be pursued, and that commercial uses of the rights of way in residential districts should not be allowed. Street ends and view corridors were discussed; Mr. Watts noted that adjacent property owners may be allowed the use of the property until the city exercises their right to use for public purposes. Here, the City has exercised control over all rights of way. Comments supported the idea that citizens need to be educated regarding unopened public rights of way and on the importance of knowing where their property line is. The City newsletter can be used for educating the public on this issue. It was noted that education and information make it easier to enforce regulations. Mr. Sepler mentioned that many rights of way are designated in the current amendments to the Non-Motorized Transportation Plan. He stated it is important not to allow use of public rights of way that are on the map for non-motorized use. The concept of a community garden in the right of way would be considered under whatever landscaping rules are adopted. It was noted that community gardens on City owned or controlled land are currently on a separate track for review. Mr. Watts pointed out the "grandfathering" issue was addressed by Resolution 10-002 (2- 01-10). Mr. Watts clarified that the "8 foot rule" (if adopted) applies where there is no sidewalk or curb. Then the area from the edge of the pavement 8 feet in toward the property line is reserved for parking so grass or ground cover would be acceptable, however it must be parkable. Outside the 8 foot area, there was discussion that performance standards seemed to be a good idea and could include low level, landscaping which is not too dense. Mr. Sepler stated prohibiting fences and hedges will be very helpful. Staff can work with this direction and will provide some scenarios as well as a safety valve process according to conditions. In addition there are cases where the adjacent owner may want to seek vacation of the street. Council comments favored a policy that trees would not be allowed to be planted in the right of way without Public Works approval and that approval of plantings would be subject to certain rules, including a permit to dig. Regarding enforcement of RVs in rights of way, Mr. Sepler noted that currently enforcement was based on complaints. Council discussed the complaint process. City Council Workshop Meeting February 14, 2011 Page 3 of 4 Staff will take direction from this meeting and schedule another workshop so Council can review a new draft of the resolution. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS No further verbal reports were presented. Ms. Nelson suggested that Council members report on all of the outside committees they sit on once per quarter. Staff could poll Councilors prior to the scheduled workshop to see if anyone wishes to make a report. Mr. Timmons reported on the progress of interlocal agreements. He noted a special meeting of the Finance and Budget Committee will be scheduled to discuss the agreements. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjounred at 9:22 p.m. Attest: ~` f --%,.c c Pamela Kolacy, MMC City Clerk City Council Workshop Meeting February 14, 2011 Page 4 of 4