Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01062003CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF JANUARY 6, 2003 The City Council of the City of Port Townsend met in regular session this sixth day of January, 2003, at 6:30 p.m. in the Port Townsend Council Chambers of City Hall, Mayor Kees Kolff presiding. ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers present at roll call were Freida Fenn, Joe Finnie, Kees Kolff, Geoff Masci, Catharine Robinson, Michelle Sandoval, and Alan Youse. Staff members present were City Manager David Timmons, Finance Director Michael Legarsky, City Attorney John Watts, Public Works Director Ken Clow, BCD Director Jeff Randall, Senior Planner Judy Surber, and City Clerk Pam Kolacy. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA Ms. Fenn requested to add the following item under new business: discussion of the historic preservation and demolition and code work which has been in process in the CD/LU Committee and Council for a number of months and relevant to actions the Port has taken recently, and any other issues that bear discussion under this item. The item was designated as 9 ( C ) under New Business. Mr. Masci asked to move 4A (Planning Commission Appointment) from the Presiding Officer's Report to New Business. Mayor Kolff said unless a majority support the move he would like to keep it where it is. Mr. Finnie indicated support for moving the item to New Business. There were no additional comments, and the item remained under Presiding Officer's Report. Mr. Masci moved to add reconsideration of the Kelly rezone decision under Unfinished Business. Mayor Kolff stated that unless a member of the prevailing side requests reconsideration, it is procedurally impossible. Mr. Masci called upon the two councilors who voted on the prevailing side to make that motion as a courtesy to the number of people who have expressed concern about the action. Ms. Fenn noted that the Council could vote to simply put the item on the agenda for discussion, rather than an actual motion for reconsideration. City Council Business Meeting Page 1 January 6, 2003 Mr. Watts confirmed that Mr. Masci could not make a motion to reconsider but that it would be legitimate for the Council to have the item on the agenda as a discussion item with a place for public comment. Motion: Mr. Masci moved to place discussion of the Kelly rezone decision on the agenda as the first item under Unfinished Business. Mr. Youse seconded Mr. Fenn stated that unless there is an indication by one of the two council members on the prevailing side that there will be a motion to reconsider, and since the decision was part of a lengthy Comprehensive Plan amendment process, she thought the issue was completed and without a motion to reconsider, she is not sure it is worth the council's time to discuss it again. Mr. Robinson asked about the effect of her recusal from the matter in light of a new discussion. Mr. Watts stated that the application has been acted upon and so at this point the council members who recused themselves from the proceedings are free to participate in any discussion of the matter whether the council agrees to reconsider or not. If the motion to reconsider were passed and the decision were again before the council, the recused members would not be able to participate. Mr. Finnie stated that he believes it might serve the interests of the community at large for the council to have a discussion of the matter whether reconsideration is made or not. He said that so many citizens have expressed interest, it is a matter of respect to the people even if the discussion simply centers around what the council plans to do at this point regarding locating businesses within the city. Mayor Kolff asked for a one minute comment fi.om each council member. Ms. Sandoval stated agreement with Mr. Finnie, that a full discussion is necessary; however she expressed hesitation about having the discussion without it having been listed on the agenda, as the broadest discussion could not occur. If the discussion expands to include incentives, infrastructure, etc., it should be a noticed topic as opposed to something put on the agenda at the last minute. Mr. Masci stated that his purpose in placing it on the agenda is to discuss and hopefully persuade one of the prevailing Council members to move for reconsideration. Mr. Fenn asked Mr. Watts if she and Ms. Robinson would be free to discuss information received in their roles as members of the Jefferson Transit Advisory Board. Mr. Watts stated that until a motion to reconsider is made, the subject is outside the quasi-judicial process and they would be free to discuss. City Council Business Meeting Page 2 danuary 6, 2003 Mr. Kolff stated he would also like to have the discussion in a public format when proper notice has been given; he stated it is better not to put more on the agenda than the Council can deal with. Vote: The motion carried 5-1, with Mr. Kolff opposed and Ms. Robinson abstaining. Mr. Kolff stated that the discussion of the Kelly rezone will be on the agenda as item 8(A) but would like to expedite item 9(B) regarding the Treehouse Development in deference to those attending for that issue. The item was placed after the Consent Agenda and prior to Unfinished Business. PRESIDING OFFICER'S REPORT Mayor Kolff read a proclamation honoring Copper Canyon Press on their 30th anniversary. The mayor requested nominations for the Jefferson Award for a "local hero" sponsored by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and the American Institute for Public Service. Mayor Kolff then announced that he has requested the City Manager to contact a professional facilitator for the Council Retreat on January 25. He stated he is still waiting for comments regarding the draft agenda. The mayor also noted he will not take unilateral action to make the seating arrangement for Council members more comfortable but has asked the staff to look into options for making the desks and chairs more comfortable. He also stated he has no plans to change the seating arrangement and the issue will be taken up administratively. Mayor Kolff then emphasized the importance of civility and respect during Council meetings in order to encourage people to serve on the Council and in order to make all citizens feel comfortable to testify before the Council and share their thoughts. He referred to the section of the Council Rules pertaining to conduct and added that anyone has the right to call a point of order in regard to whether comments are appropriate. Planning Commission appointment Motion: Ms. Fenn moved that the Mayor's recommendation to appoint Jeff Kelety to the Planning Commission be confirmed by the Council. Ms. Sandoval seconded Mr. Youse stated he will not support the appointment. Mr. Finnie stated as a former member of the Planning Commission, he learned that it is a counselor to the Council on matters dealing with land use decision and he has been impressed with the thoughtful style and interaction of the current members. He stated he City Council Business Meeting Page 3 danuary 6, 2003 believes Mr. Kelety works hard on causes which interest him but he has not demonstrated the temperament suited to the job of Planning Commissioner and he will not support the appointment. Mr. Masci stated he will not support the appointment and stated that another appointment would add more diversity to the commission; particularly a business person. At this point, Mr. Watts, in answer to a question from Ms. Sandoval, stated that Council approval is necessary for appointments to citizen advisory boards. The mayor's recommendation must be confirmed by the Council. Ms. Sandoval pointed out that there are three realtors on the Planning Commission, who would be considered part of the business community. She believes there is already a good mix and that Mr. Kelety would bring his viewpoint of the community which is valid whether or not the Council agrees with it. Mr. Kolff stated he also agrees there is a good mix, and thinks this appointment will contribute to the mix; he added he has spoken specifically with Mr. Kelety who has committed to work in a cooperative and positive way with the other Planning Commissioners. Ms. Robinson stated she would have supported any of the three potential candidates and commends them for being willing to volunteer. Vote: the motion carried, 4-3, by voice vote, with Masci, Youse and Finnie opposed. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT Mr. Timmons stated that the city needs to select items for the Regional Intergovernmental Meeting on January 28. He asked for any issue to be brought forward before the meeting on Jan. 13 so they can be distributed. He added an update on the status of the water system. PUBLIC COMMENT (Non-agenda or Consent agenda items) Bernie Arthur: commented on the number of properties no longer available for use or development because they are in public use and of the tax rolls; noting remaining commercial properties are primarily banks, real estate offices and insurance offices. He stated Port Townsend has become a government and financial service center and opposed continuation of a "no growth" policy demonstrated by the closing of PT Lumber, the Council's preoccupation with Glen Cove, and the opposition to business expansion. RECESS City Council Business Meeting Page 4 danuary 6, 2003 Mayor Kolff called a five minute recess at 7:15 and noted that the Council rules prohibit demonstrations during the meetings. RECONVENE The meeting was reconvened at 7:25 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT Terri McQuillen: commented on the transformation of Port Townsend from a blue collar to white collar town; stated that the leader of the community has a place at the bottom of the Totem Pole and must take care of everyone in the community. Allen Frank: commented on writing notes at meetings; stated that notes taken out of context can be incredibly misleading; stated that Roberts Rules are not intended to supercede First Amendment rights and that dissent frees all citizens. He called upon Mayor Kolff to relinquish the gavel. Janet Welch: commented regarding written notes, stating the Council meeting is a public venue and all written notes should be available to the public; that the rezone hearing was a trial and the notes are admissible evidence. Don Fristoe: stated that while publication of the notes may have been legal, there is still a right to free speech and private observations, whether spoken or written. Stated he believes the Council is losing control of things and can show him respect by dealing with street and employment problems instead of wasting time on other things. Leola Armstong: commented on proper procedure for calling the previous question and laying an item "on the table." She also stated that Roberts Rules were not devised to stifle dissent. Nancy Dorgan: stated councilors did not have the right to "private" conversation during a quasi-judicial hearing. She proposed that Council Rules be amended to prohibit passing of notes. Mayor Kolff stated he has asked the City Attorney for advice on the best practice regarding notes and this will be addressed at the retreat. Bill Metzer: asked that the Councilors remember they are elected by the citizens and must get along regardless of personalities and personal agendas and start doing things that benefit the city. He Stated that the city needs a bigger tax base and not a tree cutting ordinance. Gordon Misselt: stated he has not heard any suppression of free speech during meetings; asked Council members to concentrate on conducting the business at hand. City Council Business Meeting Page 5 January 6, 2003 Herb Herrington: stated the two Council members on the Transit Board should have been notified not to participate in the Kelly sale agreement; believes every Council member is here to vote on every issue. Discouraged changing seating arrangements or altering Council desks. Byron Ruby: stated when he was on the Council they fixed roads and did things for the city; said the city has changed and now there are fewer local businesses and summer jobs for students. Bob Sokol: asked that the Council desks not be altered; supported hiring an outside facilitator for the retreat and volunteered to facilitate himself at no cost to the city. Vern Garrison: stated there is poverty in Port Townsend and the issue is being ignored in favor of discussions of the seating arrangement and altering the Council desks. He stated the Council's list of accomplishments is nothing to be proud of. Asked the Council to get their heads out of the clouds and focus on the real needs of the community. Codi Halliday: cited her work with the needy in the community; said citizens do not have time to come to all the council meetings to make their wishes known; stated the city needs businesses badly and that the Council should help businesses locate in the city. O'Neill Louchard: urged people to shop in Port Townsend; stated that sometimes growth destroys places; urged people to come together and assist organizations which help the need in Port Townsend. Jerry Spieckerman: asked the Council at the upcoming retreat to make a focused effort to put a proactive approach to economic development and jobs on the agenda. He stated the only way to maintain quality of life and promote economic development is to be pro- active. Sandra Youse: stated Mr. Masci is not a sexist or a woman hater; asked why the council is wasting time discussing everything except what this town needs. Jeanie Covall(?) commented that the note passing was a minor issue pointing up that the council is so wrapped up in petty details it can't get down to helping people in the town. She stated that when the opportunity for a quality business providing jobs arises, it must be a priority. She urged the Councilors to have open minds and listen to all the people; citizens would appreciate an end to the polarity. Joey Pipia: stated that the Comprehensive Plan and Growth Management Act have existed only a short time and the city must deal with issues in this context; he stated that change is always difficult. CONSENT AGENDA Ms. Sandoval noted she would recuse herself from voting on the Consent Agenda due to her business relationship with the Coppenruth Street Vacation. City Council Business Meeting Page 6 January 6, 2003 Motion: Mr. Masci moved to approve the following items on the Consent Agenda. Ms. Robinson seconded The motion carried, 6-1, with Ms. Sandoval recused Approval of Bills, Claims and Warrants Vouchers 84341 through 84359, and 84367 through 84447, and 84458 through 84476 in the amount of $318,173.78. Approval of Minutes December 9, 2002, Special Session December 16, 2002, Regular Session Action to Reconsider Ordinance 2825, making changes to the City's Comprehensive Plan Motion to reconsider Amendment 6 and Re-Adopt Ordinance 2825 to add the revisions shown in the Residential Zoning Districts - Bulk, Dimensional, and Density Requirements table, as shown. Resolution Resolution 03-001 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Port Townsend, Washington, Resetting the Time for Hearing on a Petition to Vacate a Portion of"L" Street NEW BUSINESS RESOLUTION 03-003 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND GRANTING FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND BINDING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR PHASE I OF THE TREEHOUSE CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT, APPLICATION LUP02-108 John McDonagh of the Planning staff presented the item, describing the Treehouse 5- phase Planned Unit Development (PUD). He stated that preliminary PUD and Binding Site Plan (BSP) approval from the City Hearing Examiner was granted in mid-April 2002; the applicant is now seeking Council approval of Phase I involving the creation of two new lots along with all required infrastructure. He added that approval of the resolution authorizes City staff to facilitate final PUD and BSP recording after an appropriate financial security has been established for Phase I landscaping. When a final PUD Agreement has been reviewed and approved by the applicant, City Attorney, Public Works Director and BCD Director, the City Manager is authorized by the Resolution to sign the PUDA on behalf of the city. City Council Business Meeting Page 7 January 6, 2003 Public Comment Nancy Dorgan: stated the Council should not grant final approval until all details are wrapped up. Mr. McDonagh stated that the staff has come to the conclusion that the project is sufficiently far along for approval and noted the BSP will not be recorded until every detail has been signed off. Richard Berg: commented as part of the design team, stating that this is an innovative development and furthers some important parts of the Comprehensive Plan such as increased density and housing diversity. He urged the council to support the resolution. City Manager Timmons stated that there are always a few minor administerial items remaining, but it is the norm for the legislative body to approve a final PUD at this point so the applicants can have that commitment to get closure on the project. Motion: Mr. Masci moved for adoption of Resolution 03-003. Ms. Sandoval seconded. Mr. Masci spoke in favor of the resolution and complimented the Planning Commission for initiating the cottage housing ordinance and for the encouragement of this sort of infill housing which includes affordable components. Ms. Fenn also complimented the applicants and designers and added this is diversifying the housing stock in a way useful to the community. Mr. Robinson asked whether there is a tracking mechanism for the details left undone. Mr. McDonagh confirmed that them is. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 7-0, by voice vote. RECESS The meeting was recessed at 8:35 for thc purpose of a break. RECONVENE The meeting was reconvened at 8:$0 p.m. UNFINISHED BUSINESS KELLY REZONE DECISION - DISCUSSION Mayor Kolff stated that there are many people wishing to testify in this matter. He has consulted with Council member Masci and recommends that the meeting be opened at this time to public testimony on the matter. City Council Business Meeting Page 8 January 6, 2003 Jackie Aase: would support the rezone; the business is benign, property is on a major highway which has historically been commercial and the mitigations would have separated it from the neighborhood. She stated this was a workable situation and she thought the many endorsements from the Chamber, EDC, Planning Commission and city staff would be enough to convince the council to approve. She stated that increasing the tax base in that manner would provide the city with more money for infrastructure. Said the vote shows lack of vision and lack of support for the greater good of the community. She asked if the citizens could force a reconsideration. Mr. Watts answered that there is no ability of the citizens to force the City Council to come to a particular conclusion on a land use matter. Ken McBride: stated the vote resulted in failing as elected officials and failing the community. He said the Council should do everything in its power to court Mr. Kelly and get those jobs back in Port Townsend. He stated he would like to see this project in the Transit area. He stated that by this vote, the Council has represented a small part of the constituency that put them in office and not the greater community. Janet Morgan stated she is astounding that the rezone failed; the jobs would be a start in the right direction; if that site is felt to be inappropriate, it is the council's responsibility to find a place for the business and think of the needs of the citizens. In her work, she stated she sees many people hurting in the community and the needs of these citizens must be taken into account. Eileen Rogers: asked for reconsideration of the vote as this is precisely the kind of business needed in Port Townsend; she stated the Councilors have the power to get this back on track. Alice King: stated she is part of minority of Planning Commissioners that voted against the rezone; stated there are Comp Plan policies that talk about filling current commercial areas before doing rezoning; cited the finding of the Planning Commission that there is enough commercial land currently available. She stated that there is a need to be proactive in encouraging businesses to locate in commercially zoned areas. Don Fristoe: stated the Council has sent a message that the city does not want new business in Port Townsend. He said the council listened to the NIMBY arguments of a few while ignoring the need of the city's populace. He asked the Council to take action to turn this around. Ted Rogers: stated that if the Councilors knew this was doomed early in the game, why didn't they work to find a solution. If this doesn't happen, it seems that the economic viability of the community is a matter of indifference to the Council. Nancy Dorgan: supported the rejection of the attempt to rezone and stated the property should be designated as residential if Transit doesn't need it. She stated that jobs should not be considered above other things like Kah Tai, Hudson, and other neighborhood City Council Business Meeting Page 9 danuary 6, 2003 needs. She stated people must participate during the amendment process and not after the fact, that all citizens need to educate themselves so they know jobs are important but so are neighborhoods. She added that you can't scrap neighborhoods under the holy banner of jobs. Shirley Rudolph: stated the town has a very small commercial corridor and the core of the town is having viable commercial property. She stated that many commercial properties had been investigated and none were felt to be appropriate for this business. She stated that some Council members were voting on behalf of the neighborhoods but that the Planning Commission addressed the neighborhood concerns and there are also people in the neighborhood who supported the project. Those who spoke at the Planning Commission thought they had been heard and did not need to come to the Council. She said the city is losing businesses faster than they can be replaced and asked for reconsideration of the vote. Frank Benskin: stated his recommendation along with the majority of the Planning Commissioners, was that Kelly be allowed after hearing much testimony, many facts, engaging in thoughtful discussion and hard decisions. He said he believes that the mitigations the Planning Commission made and mitigations the Council could have added could have met all the concerns of the community. He stated the town needs jobs and families; it is important that the Council represent the bulk of the community they serve. Leola Armstrong: stated the Council members who rejected the rezone are serving a minority of the community that badly needs a better tax base. She stated if the business proposed to locate in her back yard she would put out a welcome mat. Jim Todd: objects to the comments regarding "self serving" and stated that the Comp Plan is not self serving and represents an effort by the entire community. Retrick Stelow: stated he believes the Comp Plan is a living, breathing document, not something locked in concrete. He stated the reality of the economy that exists today is that we need jobs in this town or people will have to start selling their property. He stated he would like to see the vote reconsidered; there are ways to mitigate the buffer between the project and the residential area. He added that the proposal is better than what is there now and not inconsistent with the use of that property. He stated a real leader will look at the balance of the need for jobs, protection of the neighborhood and mitigations. Jeff Kelety: stated the Council's decision did not reject Kelly and his business but was a decision on a rezone to support a neighborhood's concerns. He stated that most of the neighborhood was not satisfied with the mitigations or they would have withdrawn their objections. He also said that the Council hasn't taken credit for other businesses which have come to town and this is not their job. He stated that infrastructure is another word for cost. If the town finds it compelling for Mr. Kelly to locate here, then the town should bear the burden of making the cost satisfactory and not simply a burden on one City Council Business Meeting Page 10 danuary 6, 2003 neighborhood. He suggested putting forward a levy to the community to spread out the cost. A1 Frank: stated the Comp Plan is a living document, not perfect or divine or something to be used as a weapon but that has happened over and over again in the city. He stated the recent demographic study shows the working middle class is going away. Once money comes into a community and takes over you will never get the working class back. He stated the council has a tendency to micromanage what comes in and what goes on in our community; for example, the group which objected to rezoning the bowling alley melted away when the Coop wanted to establish there. He stated that Mr. Kolff referred to this as a spot rezone in spite of differing opinions from the City Attorney, BCD and Planning Commission. He also objected to faulting prior councils for the lack of infrastructure, citing the sale of the Tri-Area water system for cash and increased borrowing power for the city. He stated he hopes things will come together in 2003 because we desparately need businesses in this town. Nancy Stelow: commented that she feels as elected officials you have experts to advise you and all the advice regarding this issue was that the rezone would be appropriate. Speaking as a realtor, she stated that businesses don't move here because the existing buildings downtown are too expensive; personally and professionally she doesn't know anyone who wants to live in a residence right on Sims Way so why would that property be zoned residential. She added that Port Townsend is a UGA and that allows for rezoning for an appropriate use; this would benefit Jefferson Transit and the people of the community. This appears to be an excellent business for Port Townsend and if we say no to this one we are sending a message the town and its citizens do not want to send. Ann Avary: director of Economic Development Council stated everyone agrees that this is a quality company and any community would be proud to have it; Mr. Kelly has been excellent to work with and this was the parcel he felt best fit the needs of his business after a long and exhaustive search. She stated she does not want to get into the merits of a reconsideration but said that EDC cares deeply about the city and the county and is dedicated to helping it grow and develop in the most responsible manner possible. She added the EDC is available as a resource for the city regarding infrastructure and any other matters. She added that every Councilor she has run into has expressed a heartfelt desire to help American Home Supply locate in the area. She said she has relayed all of these comments directly to Mr. Kelly. Paul Mackrow: stated that Mr. Kelly can invest in the cost of an appeal if he wants a different decision. She stated there are many other options for the Kelly project. Lyn Hersey: stated that the staff did an excellent job on this project trying to make it a win-win situation. She added it was not their call to mitigate any further than the SEPA review prior to the public testimony before the Planning Commission. She added that the neighborhood may be facing more buildings, more buses, more hours of use, pollutants and extra employees if Transit does not relocate. These pros and cons were not weighed during the rezoning proceedings. She added that during the Comprehensive City Council Business Meeting Page 11 January 6, 2003 Plan process, commercial projects were embraced into neighborhoods to bring people together. She asked the council to reconsider the vote. Mary Gayle Faul (?): she stated she wishes to speak again for the people in the community who need jobs. She said she works with volunteers, and people who are struggling quietly. When one person gets a job it helps many others; she added the message is pretty loud and clear when we tum down a business like that. Tim Caldwell: speaking as a representative of the Jefferson Transit Citizen Advisory Committee, stated the Transit meetings and advisory board meetings are open to the public and there was never any intention to keep Transit's plan "under wraps" as indicated by prior speakers. Lyle Weyhmiller: stated he filed the appeal against the rezone; said the neighborhood is fighting change and afraid of change. Many people moving here are retirees and this is an issue we have to deal with. Everyone must pay a part in creating the path to the future. Bob Sokol: noted that the GMA has been amended many times by the legislature and the Comprehensive Plan has been regularly amended by the city council. He stated that the quickest, easiest, cheapest way to increase the amount of commercial property with infrastructure would be to rezone the Transit to CII commercial. In regard to the price of the property, he noted that a public entity cannot broker a deal with anybody; it has to be reviewed by an attorney and be consistent with assessed value. He urged the council to look at the future of the P zoned property, knowing that Transit wants to leave. In light of the stories of people in need, perhaps an emergency shelter, homeless shelter of half way house would be an appropriate public use. Mr. Timmons asked to clarify city staff's involvement. He stated that he talked with Ann Avary and Ken Kelly initially and thought this was an exciting opportunity to bring an appropriate commercial entity to town. He listed the many properties assessed and stated that the Transit property became available at the end of the process. He stated any discussions he had with the Transit Director were not extensive and that there was no intent whatsoever to keep anything from the public view. The proposed partnership with Transit for a facility is a way to address the capital needs of the City. He stated that at a staff level, he stepped out of the process and only worked with BCD to make sure there was a fair hearing. He stated that the staff did a commendable job under difficult circumstances and also thanked Ann Avary. He said that the Council does need to extend a hand and try to solve this problem and that the Council will have staff's support regardless of what direction they wish to go. Ms. Sandoval asked to clarify that the property is question is not on Sims Way. She also noted the property was previously zoned residential and that the issue is not whether to let the business move into the current transit building. City Council Business Meeting Page 12 January 6, 2003 Mr. Finnie stated he was concemed that the Council needed to get the venting behind us. He asked the two members voting on the prevailing side whether or not they stand by their prior decision on the vote. Ms. Sandoval stated she will stand behind her vote. She stated she may not have articulated enough her feeling that the project presented many inconsistencies with the Comprehensive Plan. She added she does not think this rezone would fix all our concern in regard to social ills; she stated she is committed to having the Kelly business in town and that her concern was much greater than appeasing the neighborhood. She stated her feeling that the city needs to implement the Comprehensive Plan successfully before piecemealing it. She stated she is very much in favor of incentives. Mr. Kolff stated that he has not heard anything new this evening that would justify the reconsideration of the position he took on the vote. He believes stating that the vote was a vote against Kelly or against jobs is taking it out of context. He stated his vote was a vote for a good process which is an adequate and good Comprehensive Plan process. Mr. Masci compared the situation to the Port's request for a height variance for a commercial building. In spite of pressure from constituents whose views would be affected, the Council voted in favor of increasing the height based on the economic benefits to the community. He stated that the residents later were understanding about the greater good to the community. He believes this situation is similar. He stated the Comp Plan is not a "holy writ" but a guideline which is flexible and changes are allowed when opportunities arise. He asked the Councilors on the prevailing side to reconsider their votes. Ms. Fenn stated she would have liked to share some insight into the Transit issues over the past eight months; however she believes this issue is dead tonight and there are other items on the agenda which need to be dealt with. She suggested talking about these issues at the retreat. Mr. Finnie stated he applauds what Mr. Masci tried to accomplished but assumed there would be no chance of that happening. He suggested that the Council identify some members who can speak face to face with Mr. Kelly and try to figure out what we could do to satisfy his needs for relocation. Mr. Kolff stated that Mr. Timmons and Ms. Avary have assured that we are doing everything to expedite this. He said he would support a letter from the council. He also expressed frustration because the quasi-judicial nature of the rezone greatly limited the ability of any of the Councilors to deal with this whole issue. He stated it is hard to deal with the economic needs of the community within a quasi judicial context. Mr. Youse stated that he does not want to send a message that Port Townsend doesn't want businesses. He stated he voted for the rezone on its merits; he does not look at commercial as being "bad" and stated that change is inevitable. He added the Comprehensive Plan 20 years from now may look like the worst thing we ever did. City Council Business Meeting Page 13 danuary 6, 2003 Motion: Ms. Sandoval moved that Mr. Finnie and Ms. Sandoval be assigned to talk with Mr. Kelly to establish communications and relate the feelings of the Council. Ms. Robinson seconded. Mr. Youse cautioned that he does not want any representation that the City will provide incentives for the project. Mr. Finnie stated they want Mr. Kelly to know that the Council which rejected him wants to do business and find out what his bottom line is. Vote: motion carried unanimously, 7-0, by voice vote. Mr. Finnie suggested putting a "proactive" approach to business on the retreat agenda. NEW BUSINESS RESOLUTION 03-002 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PAY VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS' FICA/FUTA CONTRIBUTION Mr. Timmons noted that the City must treat volunteer firefighters as "employees" rather than "contractors" and withhold social security tax from their compensation. The proposal is to pay the full amount owed since the inception of direct payment to the volunteers to the IRS and withhold the appropriate taxes in the future from the checks. Motion: Mr. Youse moved to approve Resolution 03-002. Ms. Fenn seconded. The motion carried unanimously, 7-0, by voice vote. ORDINANCE 2828 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: DECLARING A MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF APPLICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION PERMITS FOR BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES SUBJECT TO REVIEW UNDER THE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION CODES TO BE EFFECTIVE FOR A PERIOD OF UP TO SIX MONTHS; SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MORATORIUM, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE Ms. Fenn stated that she requested the City Attorney to draft this ordinance when she learned that the Port has applied for demolitions of all but three buildings in Point Hudson. She would like any improvements to the property to be considered under the City Council Business Meeting Page 14 January 6, 2003 potential new rules for preservation and demolition which are in discussion now. She commended the Port for having representatives at the public meetings regarding the new regulations but is now afraid the Port is trying to dip under the wire to vest under the current, less restrictive regulations. She appealed to the Port to work with the City on this. Mr. Masci asked for clarification that Ms. Fenn asked the City Attorney to draft this ordinance. Mr. Watts stated that he and Ms. Fenn had conversations this morning after which he directed her to the City Manager who then asked Mr. Watts to prepare the ordinance which would temporarily suspend applications for demolition of buildings in the Historic District in order to allow the pending work on the Code to be completed. The work has been underway about six months and started with Council's direction to the Community Development/Land Use Committee and the formation of a citizen's task force. The citizen task force prepared a draft ordinance and the CD/LU Committee asked for the Historic Preservation Committee to review it. It will then move back to the Committee and then to Council in the next month or two. He added that the new approach would be to not allow demolition of buildings in Historic Districts without a showing of feasibility or a showing that it is not possible economically to rehabilitate the building; under the current approach there is no requirement to conserve. He stated the proposal needs additional public input and debate. Mr. Watts stated that the Port has applied for a pre-application conference for demolition of the buildings at Point Hudson with the exception of the Cupola House, Commander's House and Sail Loft. That application is not currently vested under the city's existing code so the city is free to modify its regulations. He stated that the GMA allows for interim ordinances and moratoriums as recognized land use tools to preserve the status quo while a city reviews its regulations. Mr. Watts added the Council could move for first reading of the ordinance with the alternative provision in paragraph 6 concerning the effective date (five days after publication). He noted that passage of an emergency ordinance requires five votes. Mr. Masci clarified that the Port has not been notified that the Council planned to discuss this issue tonight. He then stated this is clearly directed at another government agency. He stated he thought during the discussions about the tree ordinance, the council had been told that a moratorium had to be general in nature and not directed at a specific application or entity. Mr. Watts stated the city also has the right to take a proactive preemptive approach to preserve the status quo of its regulations. In regard to Mr. Masci's question about process, Mr. Watts stated a demolition application would be processed through the BCD Department, then the Historic City Council Business Meeting Page 15 danuary 6, 2003 Preservation Committee would make a recommendation and the ultimate recommendation would come from BCD. Continuing in response to questions, Mr. Watts stated that the Port at their meeting indicated that the basis of their submittal was their own ongoing analysis of the economic infeasibility to rehabilitate the buildings. The specific feasibility study has not been provided to the city. Any property owner who needs to make this decision will conduct a structural integrity analysis as well as an economic analysis to determine whether to go forward with rehabilitation or demolition. Mr. Masci asked if there were an exemption proposed for demolition based on a building posing a health hazard. Mr. Watts stated if the building is unsafe, then an exemption to the demolition moratorium could be granted. Mr. Masci asked if a building posing a danger to a class of people with certain health restrictions such as chemical sensitivity syndrome would be eligible for exemption. Mr. Watts stated it would depend on a number of factors and would be based upon the details provided in the application but that health issues would be part of the decision. In answer to Mr. Masci's question regarding whether the Port could obtain an injunction, Mr. Watts stated that GMA specifically authorizes interim land controls and that courts both before and after GMA have explicitly upheld moratoriums as a legitimate land use tool. Public comment: Barbara Marseille: stated the Port Commission and the City are organizations which have different responsibilities who are both looking at the same property. She noted that the only protection historic properties and buildings receive is from local entities. As part of the Landmark Historic District, it is the City's responsibility to protect; it is valuable waterfront property and will be difficult to hold onto as an historic spot if the original buildings are not generating profits. She said the Port has been working on trying to figure out what to do but they have not yet come to other organizations to say we want to work together and have you help us (Main Street, Chamber, Historic Preservation Committee, National Trust). She believes these organizations are eager to help and get this solved. She added that Ports don't deal with quality of life but cities do and the moratorium will give us that chance. O'Neill Louchard: stated she is distressed the Port would make an application at a time the City could not respond under the new regulations. She does not understand why they would be in such a hurry; as that can be a problem down the line both culturally and economically. She stated it is good economics to preserve what we have because it will attract tourists. She urged all to be thoughtful and not rush into anything. Ms. Sandoval read a letter from Carol Hasse into the record which supported passage of the moratorium. City Council Business Meeting Page 16 January 6, 2003 Motion: Ms. Fenn moved to waive Council Rules and adopt Ordinance 2828 as an emergency moratorium effective immediately. Ms. Sandoval seconded Motion: Mr. Masci moved to divide the question. Mr. Youse seconded The motion carried, 4-3, by voice vote, with Kolff, Sandoval and Fenn opposed Mr. Masci stated he sees no compelling need to waive rules, no emergency, and no looming disaster on the horizon.. He stated he believes the application process for the Port could conceivably take as long as it takes to have the final ordinance in place. He stated he would prefer more public input before acting. Ms. Robinson stated she is not in favor of suspending rules; although she understands the concern and desire for urgency she feels it is not appropriate for a decision tonight. She suggested that since the CD/LU Committee is meeting this week, they could take up the issue. Ms. Fenn stated that she is generally not in favor of suspending rules either but the Port Commissioners have already taken a vote to apply for the permits before a City work in progress can be completed. She stated she had thought the Port was on the same playing field due to their presence at public meetings but now they have taken precipitous action and declared their intention to become vested under the existing ordinance. She wishes to invite the Port back into the cooperative process and would like to be protective of the work in process. Ms. Sandoval stated she does not like to have items on the agenda that have not been well publicized and require suspension of Council rules but she stated she has received comments from people who read about the Port's proposed action in the paper and are concerned. Mr. Finnie stated he won't support the motion as he believes moratoriums are bad ideas with high associated risk. He noted this will affect all buildings and structures in the District and since he just saw the Ordinance he doesn't even know how we would vote. He definitely will not support passing an emergency ordinance. Mr. Kolff stated an emergency moratorium will give the Port a signal and the Council can reverse it once it has further information. He stated this gives a strong message we want to be at the table and decide how to go forward for the Port and the City's best interests. Mr. Youse stated that the Port will be looking at the issue from the standpoint of how to make the most profit from the property. He would like to have the time to look at the proposal carefully. Ms. Robinson then stated she is interested and concerned about the issue, supports the work being done on the regulations, and looks forward to the ordinance being complete. But she does have an issue with the proposed process. She stated she has just seen the ordinance and it is late in the meeting; it does not seem appropriate to waive rules for a City Council Business Meeting Page 17 January 6, 2003 last minute item. She stated she may support a first reading but would rather have it come through the regular process. Ms. Fenn offered to withdraw both motions (adopt emergency ordinance and divide the question). There were no objections: Motion: Ms. Fenn moved for first reading of Ordinance 2828, with the effective date to be five days afier publication and the public hearing to take place on February 18, 2003. Mr. I/ouse seconded Mr. Finnie stated he will not support a first reading tonight; the Port is not represented and he would like to hear both sides, as well as from staff. He stated he is a property owner with buildings in the Historic District and takes umbrage at having something laid down at the eleventh hour and feels other property owners might react the same way. He stated even though he is on record as wanting to preserve the Port buildings, he needs time to think the issue through. Mr. Masci stated that moratoriums are risky to pass and he is generally against them unless there is a compelling reason. He urged the council to arrange a meeting to discuss the issue with the Port rather than enacting a moratorium. Mr. Youse stated he does not think the proposed ordinance is a slam at the Port but simply a showing of concern on the part of the Council. He stated he likes the idea of a special meeting with the Port. Ms. Sandoval proposed a friendly amendment to schedule a meeting with the Port Commissioners as soon as possible. There was not consensus, with Masci and Finnie opposed. Vote: motion for first reading of Ordinance 2828 carried 5-2, by voice vote, with Masci and Finnie opposed Motion: Ms. Robinson moved that staff be asked to set a time for a special meeting with the Port within a week. Ms. Sandoval seconded The motion carried unanimously, 7-0, by voice vote. EXECUTIVE SESSION Due to the lateness of the hours, consensus was to dispense with the scheduled executive session. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m. Attest: Pamela Kolacy, CMC, City Clerk City Council Business Meeting Page 18 January 6, 2003