Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/07/1989 127 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989 The City Council of the City of Port Townsend met in regular session this seventh day of March, 1989, at 7:30 PM, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, Mayor Brent S Shirley presiding. ROLL CALL I Councilmembers present at roll call were Jean Camfield, Karen Chang, John Clise, Vern Jones, Mike Kenna, Julie McCulloch and Norma Owsley. Also present were City Attorney Keith Harper, Clerk- Treasurer David Grove and Executive Assistant/planner Michael Hildt. PUBLIC COMMENTS John Sudlow was recognized and complained about the service he received from Executive Assistant and Planner Michael Hildt. He rei terated his past frustrations with Mr. Hildt reçrarding the disagreements he has had over the past year with Nr. Hildt' s recommendations and investigations of the short plat application which he had made with Juelanne Dalzell. The decisions made by the Planning Commission and City Council regarding the application were remanded to the City by Jefferson County Superior Court, after appeal by Mr. Sudlow. The final plat approval was completed recently, following an out-of-court settlement. I Richard Romano was recognized and thanked the Council for passing the ordinance relating to "Barns" saying that they had no idea how important it was to him. He then addressed a statement to the Planning Department saying that the department should look at other avenues to approach a situation rather than just saying "No" which may lead to antagonism and bitter feelings. Barbara Bogart was recognized and spoke as an agent for the sale of the Knowles property next to the Sewage Treatment Plant. She went on record stating that her husband stepped down as chairman of the Shorelines Committee because of this. She que:stioned the way the Environmental Impact section of the Enngineers Report was filled out for the expansion plans, the unvacated city streets invol ved, why is the plant so big, and is the County and Cape George the reason for the expansion. She stated that the Knowles house was remodeled in 1983 with a building permit, was given information as to where the street probably was, and had not been purposefully built in the city street (52nd st). She also stated concern for fill being put into the lagoon and does the Washington State Park Department know of the plan. If 52nd Street is vacated and used for oxidation ditches, the contour of the land will be changed causing drainage problems for the adjacent propeÅ“ty. Mayor Shirley explained that he will be recommending that the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Application later on the agenda be held until such time as the Conditional Use Permit and the Street Vacation Application can be brought before Council at the same time. The State of Washington has given permission for some fill as per the plans, the plant is designed for the city population that has been projected for the next twenty-five years. Some pre- planning has been included for Cape George as was recommended by the Department of Ecology, but it is not clear if they are going ahead with the plans at present. Any septage receivE~d from the County will be paid for by the County, the same as Cape George. Neither one of these inclusions would cause the plant to be made any larger in size, it would mean a larger capacity of the treatment plant itself. Mr Grove explained that the Sewer Utility as well as the Water and Storm utilities are not tax supported and are "stand alone" utilities that are supported by revenue generated for providing service. Mayor Shirley stated that the plan is in conjunction with the Department of Ecology requirements for the City, County and Cape George. I Bonzo DeLeo was recognized and asked confirmation of the! person who removed a home at $þeridan and Sims Way in order to make a parking lot. It was indicated that the person was Dr James Tavernakis, who 128 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989, Cont. is on the Planning Commission. Mr DeLeo reported that he stated a single garage on a piece of property would be an "eyesore". CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Jones made a motion to approve the following items on the Consent Agenda which was seconded by Councilmember McCulloch and passed unanimously by voice vote. I Approval of the minutes of February 21, 1989, as written without reading. Approval of the following Bills and Claims: Current Expense Street Library Library Renovation Park Fire Equipment Emergency Medical Services Federal Shared Revenue Water/Sewer Storm & Surface Water Equipment Rental Firemen's Pension & Relief Total $ 44,866.57 659.69 8,192.39 7,985.30 1,417.14 305,110.88 92.40 2,013.99 18,324.20 14,547.36 5,763.83 346.80 $409,320.55 Setting Hearings: Conditional Use Permit Application No 8901-02 -Lamy on 3-21-89 I Communications: A letter dated February 20, 1989, from Erin Sage was copied for Council stating concern for public space both upstairs and downstairs in the plans for the proposed Community Center. She was also concerned about turning the front lawns into parking space. This was referred to the Parks/Property Committee. A letter from Calmar McCune was copied for Council on February 27, 1989, including an invitation to a government sponsored workshop on regional earthquake hazards to be held on March 28-29,1989, in Portland, Oregon. This concludes the Consent Agenda. Response to Public Comments. Mr Hildt explained that the Planning/Building Department has processed 220 Building Permits and over 50 Land Use cases in 1988. Almost all of the time, they have been able to say "Yes", but there have been a few times when they have had to say "No". He does not have the authority to say "Yes" when the ordinances say "No", nor does he want the authority to overrule those ordinances and to decide which provisions to follow and which to ignore. It is up to the City Council to set policy and amend ordinances. Mr Hildt explained that settlement was reached with Mr Sudlow out of court and that the first principle of such settlements is not to disparage the agreement or the parties. Mr. Hildt stated that he would not do that. He clarified that the letter in The Leader was written and signed by both him and Mr Harper and that the findings and conclusions which were agreed to by both the City and Mr Sudlow and Ms Dalzell are available to the public in the Clerk-Treasurer's office. I Mr. Hildt continued, explaining that Mr Romano's proposed barn was BOt permitted without an accompanying house, without amendment to ~he zoning code. The amendment was written by Mr Hildt and passed 129 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989, Cont. by the Planning commission and the City Council. Permit was issued today. The Building I Mr Hildt stated that he serves the citizens of Port Townsend and answers to the Mayor and to the City Council. Sugg estions are always welcome and he will be happy to meet with any complainant and will include the Mayor if desired to take suggestions and go over any concerns. PUBLIC HEARINGS I Street Vacation Application No 8812-02 -Jefferson Count~l. Mr Hildt reviewed the findings, conclusions and conditions of the Planning commission. Mayor Shirley opened the hearing to the public. Bonzo DeLeo was recognized and spoke in favor of the streøt vacation saying it has been a long time coming. He stated the street was needed for parking and he is sorry that a portion of Walker Street was not included. Dorothy Callaway was recognized and spoke against the street vacation saying it isn't necessary to vacate the street since through traffic will be allowed and the! only time there is a problem is during the open house tours. Patti Sullivan was recognized and asked what value has been placed on the street and is there going to be a trade for property owned by the County that is currently being used as a parking lot by the Back Alley Tavern. Mr Hildt explained that there is no value placed on the street as yet because there has been no appraisal done. Appraisals for vacated streets are not ordered until after the Council makes it's decision. Mayor Shirley explained that if there is to be a swap of any kind, the value has to be established after the Council decides if the street is to be vacated. There being no further testimony, Mayor Shirley closed the hearing to the public and turned to the Council for disposition. Mr Harper explained that he does not feel comfortable with a 22 foot strip of the street being retained for access and a separate easement for a sidewalk. Councilmember Kenna asked Carter Breskin, Jeffen;on County Department of Public Works, about the plans of the County. She explained that the County will be responsible for main"taining the street and sidewalk. She stated that the County had planned on a 24 foot right-of-way for vehicular traffic in the strøet. After further discussion of the need of the street for traffic circulation and easements for utilities, Councilmember Kenna made a motion that the Council approve the vacation with th'3 following findings, conclusions and conditions which was s econded by Councilmember Clise and passed unanimously by voice vo.te. Findings: 1. The Jefferson County Department of Public Work.s requests vacation of that portion of platted Jefferson Street extending from platted Walker Street to platted Cass street. The portion proposed to be vacated consists of the entire 73 foot width of the Jefferson street right-of-way. Jefferson County owns the property abutting both sides of the portion of Jefferson Street proposed to be vacated. The applicants's property consists of Blocks 79 and 66 of L B Hastings First Addition. Block 79 is the site of the Jefferson County Courthouse, while a county park is located on Block 66. 2. I 3. The applicants request the street vacation in order to redevelop the street and add parking spaces to serve the Courthouse. The applicants propose to develop 35 parking spaces which would be at a 60 degree angle from the curb. The applicants intend to leave the street open for two-'way traffic circulation and keep the existing sidewalk on the northern portion of the Jefferson street right-of-way. 130 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989, Cont. 4. Water and sewer mains are located in the portion of Jefferson Street proposed to be vacated. The Public Works Director recommends retaining a utility easement should the street be vacated. Conclusions: I 1. The applicants propose to vacate that portion of Jefferson Street to improve parking and traffic circulation in the area. Therefore, the proposed street vacation is in compliance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The portion of Jefferson street proposed to be vacated is not required for current or anticipated overall area circulation. Nevertheless, the applicant intends to leave the right-of-way open for two-way traffic circulation. 3. The effectiveness of fire, law enforcement, medical or other emergency services will not be impaired by the proposed vacation, as conditioned. 4. The portion of Jefferson street proposed to be vacated is not required as a current or anticipated bicycle and pedestrian trail corridor. Nevertheless, the applicant intends to keep the existing sidewalk on the northern portion of the Jefferson Street right-of-way and add a pedestrian crosswalk between the park and the courthouse. 5. The portion of Jefferson Street proposed to be vacated does not abut on a body of salt or fresh water. 6. Because the proposed street vacation conforms with the goals and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan and satisfies the review criteria for street .vacations set forth in section 12.20.050 of the Port Townsend Municipal Code, the Port Townsend ci ty Council approves the above referenced application as conditioned. I Conditions: 1. A 12 foot utility easement for the existing sewer and water lines in Jefferson Street shall be retained. 2. The applicants shall retain all easements in the Jefferson Street right-of-way for electric, telephone, and television cable utilities. 3. The portion of Jefferson Street proposed to be vacated shall remain open and accessible for two-way traffic circulation. No less than 22 feet of the right-of-way shall be retained for vehicular traffic. 4. A final street improvement plan which addresses storm drainage, retention of parking spaces, police services, and pedestrian circulation and safety shall be submitted to and approved by the City Public Works Director. I variance Application No 8812-04 -Port Townsend Honda. Mr Hildt reviewed the findings, conclusions and conditions of the Planning Commission. Mayor Shirley opened the hearing to the public. Dirk Eisinga, co-owner of the Honda Shop, was recognized and spoke in favor the variance and explained that as smaller signs from Honda become available, they will be used. There being no further testimony, Mayor Shirley closed the hearing to the public and turned the variance over to the Council for qisposition. After a brief discussion, Councilmember Clise made a motion that the Council grant the variance and adopt the following findings, conclusions and conditions which was seconq,ed by Councilmember I I I 4. 131 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7, 1989, Cont. Chang and passed unanimously by voice vote. Findings: 1. The applicants propose to install new signs for their business, Port Townsend Honda and Marine, located at 2328 Sims Way. The applicants propose to install six signs which would have a total square footage of 159 square feet. The subject property is located in the C-II zoning district. Because Section 17.34.060 of the Port Townsend Municipal Code limits the sign area for a single-occupant commercial building to 100 square feet, a variance is sought to permit the proposed signs. 2. The applicants currently have six signs which total 202 square feet. Because the signs were erected prior to the Port Townsend sign ordinance, the total square footage of the existing signs is legal and nonconforming. The applicants' existing signs are listed as follows: Sign HONDA, pole sign JOHNSON, pole sign Monument sign POWER EQUIP, window sign PARTS, window sign Financing window sign Dimensions 4 x 6 feet, 2 sides 4 x 6 feet, 2 sides 3 x 13 feet, 2 sides 2 x 4 feet, 1 side 3 x 2.5 feet, 1 side 3 x 5 feet, 1 side TOTAL: Sea: Ft 48 48 78 8 5 ~ 202 The pole sign which contains the Honda and Johnson signs is approximately 25 feet in height. The pole sign and the existing monument sign are located at the southwest corner of the subject property. The remaining signs are located on the building. . 3. The applicants propose to replace their existing signs with six new signs. The applicants intend to remove the exiting pole sign and replace the existing monument sign with a smaller monument sign. The applicants propose the following signs: sign Dimensions Individual Honda letters, (5 signs), wall signs 3 x Motorcycles, wall sign 2.5 ATVs, wall sign 2.5 Monument sign 2 x JOHNSON, wall sign 4 x POWER EQUIP, wall sign 2 x Sq: Ft 3 feet each, 1 side x 6 feet, 1 side x 6 feet, 1 side 13 feet, 2 sides 6 feet, 1 side 4 feet, 1 side TOTAL: 45 15 15 52 24 ---...ê. 159 The applicants propose to locate the monument sign at the southwest corner of the subject property, which is the location of the existing monument sign. The applicants also propose to develop a landscaped planting strip and walkway along the northern edge of the portion of the Sims Way right- of-way which abuts their property. Sims Way is the major thproughfare serving dmmtown Port Townsend. The area surrounding the subject property on both sides of Sims Way is zoned C-II. A service station/ convenience stor¥- is located to the west of t:he subject property. A pol~ sign approximately 25 feet high is located at the southeast corner of this adjacent property. This pole sign contains a two-sided sign totalling 192 square feet, and a two-sided readerboard sign totalling 64 square fE!et. A two- sided gas price freestanding sign totalling 36 square feet is also located in the Sims Way right-of-way to the south of this \ ' . ¡ 132 4. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7, 1989, Cont. adjacent property. The property to the east of the subject property is currently vacant, as is the property across Sims Way to the south. 5. The applicants state that replacing their signs in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.34 (signs) of the Port Townsend Municipal Code would create a hardship in that the abutting property owners to the west have erected signage which severely blocks motorists visibility of their property and signs, and that they are required as a franchised dealer to erect approved product signs. The applicants further state that the area of the signs which they propose would be smaller than any signage in the surrounding area. The applicants also maintain that the proposed sign modification is in keeping with the intent of the sign code in that it would reduce their sign area, move signs further from the street, and remove the existing pole sign. The Port Townsend Gateway Concept Plan, adopted by Resolution No 88-43, includes recommendations for elimination of pole signs in favor of eye-level monument signs, with implementation phased for existing businesses until 1995. Sign area is to continue to be limited to 100 square feet. I 6. Conclusions: 1. The location and nonconforming sign area to the west of the subject property serves to partially block the applicants property and current signs from eastbound vehicular traffic. Therefore, a literal interpretation and strict application of the provisions and requirements of the sign code would cause hardship because of unique or unusual conditions pertaining to the specific property in question. The applicant proposes to remove the existing pole sign which has been partially masked by thee pole sign located on the applicant also intends to reduce the area of the monument sign which is located adjacent to the Sims Way right-of-way. Therefore, the granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to other property owners in the vicinity or to the travelling public. I 2. 3. Because the applicant proposes to significantly reduce the amount of sign square footage and remove the existing pole sign, the granting of the variance would not be contrary to the objects of this chapter relating to the placement of signs and the reduction of clutter. Because the request meets the criteria for variance from the sign code and would not be contrary to the purposes set forth by the City Council in enactment of the sign code, the City Council grants the application as conditioned: Conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. The applicants shall bring all signs on the premises into full compliance with City sign regulations, including any amendments thereto, no later than March 1,1995, provided that total sign area need not be reduced below 100 square feet. From the time of this approval until March 1,1995, the total area shall not exceed 159 square feet. I The existing þole sign shall be removed, as indicated on the application and drawings submitted by the applicants. The variance shall relieve the applicants of only the sign area requirements of Section 17.34.060 of the Port Townsend I I I 138 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989, Cont. Municipal Code. All other applicable provisions of Chapter 17.34 shall be met by the applicants. Rezone Application No 8812-05 -D Lessor and M Lodwic~~. Mr Hildt reviewed the findings and conclusions of the Planning commission. Mayor shirley opened the hearing to the public. David Lessor was recognized and spoke in favor of the rezone. There being no further testimony, Mayor Shirley closed the hearing to the public and turned to the Council for disposition. After a discussion of "spot zoning", a need for more multi-family housing and the small amount of R-II zoned area in Port Townsend, Councilmember Kenna made a motion that the Council approve the rezone and adopt the following findings and conclusions which was seconded by Councilmember Camfield and passed by voice vote, with six Councilmembers voting in favor and Councilmember Clise voting against the motion. ' Findings: 1. The applicants propose a rezone of Lots 5 through 8, Block 196, Eisenbeis Addition, from R-IA to R-II. The subject area is bounded by 10th Street to the north, Sherman S1:reet to the west, 9th Street to the south and Lots 1 through 4" Block 196, to the east. A single-family residence is currently located on Lots 7 and 8 of the subject property. The applicants propose to convert the existing dwelling into a two-family dwelling if the rezone application is approved. The area to the south and east of the subject property is zoned R-l, while the area to thee north and west is zoned R- IA. There are two small areas which are zoned R-II located to the east and southeast of the subject property. The land uses surrounding the subject property are primarily single- family residential. A multi-family development, the Bishop Park Apartments, is located approximately 2 blocks to the southwest of the subject property. The lots directly to the north and west of the subject property are vacant. 2. 3. section 17.16.010 of the Port Townsend Municipal Code outlines the purposes of each zoning district in the City of Port Townsend. The purpose of the R-IA zoning district, which is the present zoning designation of the subject property, is defined as "primarily a single-family residence district with adequate plat areas required and including the! customary accessory and secondary uses, with agricultural use also allowed." The purpose of the R-II zoning district, which is the proposed zoning designation of the site, is defined as "Primarily a single-family residence district, and low density multiple residence district, requiring five thousand square feet of building tract for each single-family dwelling unit, but permitting four or less single-family dwelling units to be contained within one structure upon condition of sufficient tract size: ten thousand square feet for a duplex, fifteen thousand square feet for a triplex and twenty thousand square feet for a fourplex." The applicants' property consists of four lots, which would permit a fourplex to be constructed on the subject property should the rezone be granted. section 17.16.010 of the zoning code also lists the uses which are permissible in the various zoning districts. The uses which are allowed in the R-II zoning district, as either permitted or conditional uses, which are not allowed in the R-IA zoning district are listed as follows: 4. Permitted Conditional Catering establishments conducted as an incidental Assembly halls, coliseums Colleges, trade schools 134 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7, 1989, Cont. home occupation Convalescent, nursing, and foster homes conducted as an incidental home occupation Dwelling, two family Incidental keeping of non-transient boarders by resident family Signs Convalescent/nursing homes for the care of children and the aged Dwelling, multi-family Hotels Motels and motor hotels Nursery, landscape materials Tourist homes Mortuaries, undertaking establishments I 5. There are approximately 33 acres of land in Port Townsend which is zoned R-II. A land use survey undertaken of these areas indicates that approximately 22.5 acres of the R-II land are developed as single-family housing; 2.5 acres are developed as multi-family housing; 4.5 acres are developed as institutional (churches, clinics, etc.) or commercial land uses; and approximately 3.5 acres are currently undeveloped. Approximately 2.5 acres of the undeveloped R-II land are located in areas having steep slopes or bluffs. 6. The subject property is bounded by three platted streets: 9th, 10th, and Sherman. Ninth street is paved and open, and presently provides access to the applicants' property. The portions of 10th and Sherman Streets abutting the subject property are undeveloped. There are an 8-inch sewer main and a 6-inch water main in a portion of 9th Street abutting the subject property. The right-of-way width of 9th and 10th Streets is 73 feet, while the right-of-way width of Sherman Street is 60 feet. I 7. The applicants state that there is a need for additional rental housing units in Port Townsend, and that their property would provide an ideal location for a two-family dwelling. The applicants maintain that a change of use to a duplex would not alter the nature of the existing neighborhood, and that other, larger-scale, multi-family developments are currently located in the area. The applicants state that each unit of the duplex would be approximately 1,100 square feet and have its own entrance, and that hedges would be planted to screen their property from the adjacent single-family residences to the east. 8. In an informal telephone survey, realtors who are familiar with the rental housing market in Port Townsend expressed the opinion that rental housing in Port Townsend is in short supply. 9. The City Council has issued a Determination of Nonsignificance, dated February 21,1989, after review of the environmental checklist submitted by the applicants pursuant to the Washington State Environmental Policy Act. Conclusions: 2. 1. An increasing demand for rental housing units exists in Port Townsend. I section 17.16.010 of the Port Townsend Municipal Code defines the R-II zone and "primarily a single-family residence district, and low density multiple-residence district. ." Furthermore, the density restrictions of the R-II zoning district limit development to one dwelling unit per 5,000 square feet of lot area, which is consistent with the density requirement of thee R-IA zoning district. Therefore, the proposed zoning change would be compatible with the single- family residential character of the surrounding neighborhood. 135 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989, Cont. 3. The amount of land in Port Townsend presently zoned R-II is not adequate to meet the need for low density mult:iple family development. 4. The proposed rezone is consistent with the goals and policies in the Port Townsend Comprehensive Plan related to housing and residential development. The two-family dwelling proposed by the applicants and the density restrictions of the R-II zoning district are consistent with the land use patt:ern of the properties adjacent to the subject property. The site is also adequately served by developed streets and utili t.ies. I 5. Housing and demographic conditions in Port Tmmsend have changed since the last zoning of the property and justify additional R-II zoning in the city. I Rezone Application No 8807-04 -Wm Amburn. et ale Mr Hildt explained that this is a continued hearing and that an E~rror in the mailing for the prior hearing has been corrected wi'th everyone living within 200 feet being re-notified as well as others who testified earlier. He stated that the recommendations of the Planning Commission of January 12, 1989, have already been introduced. A memorandum dated March 7,1989, which is a review of the proportion of multi-family zoned properties in similarly sized cities from Kevin O'Neill and a memorandum dated March 1, 1989, including the rezone criteria worked up by Kevin O'Neill and Keith Harper from Kevin O'Neill have been copied for Council. An alternative draft of findings and conclusions has been prepared as there are those who are opposed to the rezone. Mayor Shirley opened the hearing to the public. Councilmember Jon-3S left the Council Chambers to avoid an appearance of fairness problem in connection with this application. William Amburn was recognized and spoke in favor of the application saying there isn't too much more to add since this has been going on for eight months and eight hearings except that there are letters from Mabel Campbell, president of the Real Estate Board, William White, broker for Carroll Realty, and Wayne Montgomery, B J Johnson and Patricia Archer from Century 21 Realty all stating the need for rental property in Port Townsend. He has not figured out why traffic on Sims Way from his eight units will be any more probl.3m than two motels being built in Port Townsend and the proposed move of a bank and another business to Sims Way. He also feels that the objections of Dr Tavernakis, since he moved a house and built a parking lot on the curve on Sims Way next to his dental clinic are unjustified. Louise Kendall was recognized and resuJbmitted the petitions from the last hearing with a few more signatures against the rezone. Janelle Weyhmiller, Mike Hoy, Gary Schryver, Lonnie Gould, Leonard Traekenshuh, Roy Parkinson, and Frank Vane were all recognized individually and spoke against the rezone stating that there is enough R-III property in the area that is vacant and there are 320 apartment units in Port Townsend, the traffic problems on Sims Way, "spot rezoning" and the fact that the whole neighborhood is against the rezone. Peter Badame was recognized and spoke as "other" rather than "for" or "against" the rezone. His concern is against making any land use changes, particularly on that side of Sims Way, until the existing problems on Sims Way have been addressed. The lower speed limit has helped, but there is a need for a left turn lane at the Hancock Street intersection in both directions, and there is a real need for the Planning Commission to look at the current conditions in the City of Port Townsend and where it can be rezoned. He cautioned against any change in land use designation on the south side of Sims Way until there are some highway improvements. There being no further testimony, Mayor Shirley turned to the Council for disposition. After discussion of the amount of R-III property in the city, the traffic problem the topography of the neighborhood, the "spot rezone" and the opposition in the neighborhood, Councilmember Clise made a motiofi I 136 4. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989, Cont. that the Council adopt the following findings and conclusions and deny the rezone which was seconded by Councilmember McCulloch. Councilmember McCulloch made a motion to amend the motion to remove the sentence in conclusion No 1 which says "The applicant has not submitted data supporting this conclusion." which was seconded by Councilmember Camfield and passed unanimously by voice vote. During discussion, it was determined that in order to keep from prohibiting this property from being rezoned at a future time when study may indicate that a rezone is warranted, Councilmember Clise amended his motion to deny the rezone without prejudice which was agreed to by Councilmember McCulloch. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. Councilmember Jones returned to the Council Chambers. I Findings: 1. The applicants propose a rezone of Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 279, and Block 280, Eisenbeis Addition, from R-I to R- III. The area is bounded by a vacated portion of 4th Street to the north, McClellan street to the west, 3rd street to the south, and Sherman street to the east. Single family dwellings are currently on Lots 6 and 7 of Block 279, while Lots 2-5 are vacant, as are Lots 1-8 on Block 280. An eight- unit, 2-bedroom apartment development with parking garages is proposed for Lots 2, 3, 4, and 7, Block 279, if the rezone application is approved. The owner of Lots 1-8 on Block 280 has indicated an interest in developing multi-family housing if the rezone is approved, but has not submitted any specific proposal. 2. The site is surrounded by a variety of land uses and zoning districts. The northern portion of Block 279 and the area to the northeast and northwest of the site is zoned C-II, and is developed as a strip commercial area along Sims Way, which lies approximately 200 feet north of the subject area. The area to the west of the subject property is zoned R-III. The R-III area encompasses Blocks 281,282,286,287 and 288. The rezone application, if granted, would have the effect of expanding this R-III zone. Much of the land in the R-III zone is vacant; however, a large quantity of this land is difficult.- to develop due to severe slopes. Lots 7 and 8 of Block 276, which is located east of the site, are also zoned R-III. The land to the south and east of the subject property is zoned R-I or R-IA, and is developed primarily as single family residential. I 3. In July, 1988, Mr Amburn submitted an application for a rezone of Lots 2, 3, 4 and 7 on Block 279 only from R-l to R-III. Mr Amburn proposed an 8-unit apartment complex for the site if the rezone was approved. At a public hearing on October 13,1988, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezone application with a concomitant agreement limiting the use of the rezone area to an 8-unit apartment complex developed in accordance with the applicant's site plans. On November 15,1988, the City Council held a public hearing on the application, at which time they expressed interest in seeing the area covered in the request expanded to include Lots 5 and 6 on Block 279 and Lots 1-8 on Block 280. The original application was amended by Mr E R Tice, owner of Lots 5 and 6 on Block 279, and by Mr George L Olson, Jr, owner of Lots 1-8 on Block 280, to include their respective property as well. The amended application has been remanded to the Planning Commission for public hearing. I The applicants maintain that the proximity of the site to the adjacent commercial area and sims Way makes the site unattracti ve for single family development, and that no interest has been shown in developing the lots as single I I I 137' MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989, Cont. family housing since he has owned the propE~rty. The applicants also state that there is a demand for low/middle income rental units in Port Townsend, and maintains that developing the site as multi-family units would be the best use of the property. 5. These areas are currently zoned R-III in the city.. Area 1 is west of the proposed rezone and is described as Blocks 281, 282, 286, 287 and 288, Eisenbeis Addition. Area 2 is Block 209, Eisenbeis Addition, which was rezoned from R--II to R-III in March, 1987, and is currently undeveloped. Area 3 contains Block 169 and Tax Lot 4, Kuhn's Ranch Addition. 1m apartment house is located on Tax Lot 4, while Block 169 is currently undeveloped. Area 4 is Block H, Kuhn's Ranch Addition and Area 5 is Block 82; Lots 2, 4, 6, and 8, Block 83; Block 84; Lots 7 and 8, Block 85; Lots 1-4, Block 109; Block 108; Block 107; Lots 1, 3, 5, and 7, Block 134; Lots 1, 3, 5, and 7, Block 133; Lots 1 and 3, Block 132; Lots 7 and 8, Block 60, Original Townsite. Areas 4 and 5 are currently developed primarily as single family residential. 6. The Port Townsend comprehensive Plan presents several performance and locational standards for the siting of multi- family housing. Among these standards is that multi-family housing "should be restricted from being utilized as a buffer between other land uses as a determinant of location". The Plan also states that "a broad range of housinq types and densities should be available for Port Townsend residents" and that "residential areas should be buffered from adverse conditions originating from industrial operation, commercial areas and the like." 7. section 17.16.010 of the Port Townsend Municipal Code lists the uses which are permitted in the various zoning' districts. The uses which are allowed in the R-III zoning district, as either permitted or conditional uses, which are not allowed in the R-I zoning district are listed as follows: Permitted Apothecary shop operated within a hospital, clinic or physicians' office Apartment house Catering establishments conducted as an incidental home occupation Clinics Dwelling, two family Incidental keeping of non-transient boarders by a resident family Signs Conditional Dwelling, multi-family Hotels not catering to transient gues.t:s Libraries, museums, art galleries Lodges, social organizations Tourist homes, seasonal Trailer camps Undertaking establishments, mortuaries, funeral homes 8. There are currently 16.3 acres of land in Port Townsend which are zoned R-III. A land use survey undertaken of these areas indicates that 4.5 acres of the R-III land is developed as multi-family housing. Another 4.9 acres are: currently undeveloped; however, approximately 2 acres of the undeveloped land would be difficult to develop due to severe s.lopes. The remaining portion of the R-III land is developed as single family residential. 9. Block 279 is served by three opened streets: Hancock, 3rd and Sherman. Hancock and Sherman Streets run north-south and feed into Sims Way. The surfaced, or developed portion of these streets surrounding Block 279 is approximately 18 - 20 feet. Block 280 is currently only served by Hancock Street to the east. Third Street is open and unpaved for approximately 100 138 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7, 1989, Cont. feet west of Hancock. Platted McClellan street slopes very steeply into a gully adjacent to the site. The portion of McClellan street north of the site is vacated, so McClellan street does not have access to Sims Way. The area is served by City water and sewer. Eight inch sewer mains are located in Hancock, 3rd and Sherman Streets; 6-inch water mains are located in Hancock and Sherman Streets, while a 4-inch main is in 3rd street. The right-of-way for Hancock, Sherman and 3rd streets is 73 feet. I 10. In an informal telephone survey, realtors who are familiar with the rental housing market in Port Townsend expressed the opinion that rental housing in Port Townsend is in short supply, particularly rental units in the 2-3 bedroom range. 11. The city Council has issued an amended Determination of Nonsignificance, dated December 16,1988, after review of the amended Environmental Checklist submitted by the applicants pursuant to the Washington state Environmental Policy Act. Conclusions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The applicant states that a demand exists for low and middle income rentals in Port Townsend. There is also land available which is presently zoned R-III which is currently undeveloped. There are currently no multi-family residential uses in the area adjacent to the site of the proposed rezone. The land uses to the north are commercial while the other surrounding land uses are single family residential. Thus, the proposed use would be contrary to the established land use pattern in the area. I The area is served by three open, developed streets. The site's proximity to sims Way ensures that traffic generated by uses on the site would not interfere with the adjacent single family areas. The site is also served by several City water and sewer mains. The proposed rezone meets many of the locational standards in the Comprehensive Plan for the siting of multi-family housing: the location of the site would minimize traffic generation, would not obstruct views, would not be located in an environmentally-sensitive area, and would be located in an area with suitable drainage, slopes, soils, and utilities. However, the rezone would serve as a buffer between the commercial and single family zones, which is contrary to the Plan's policy that multi-family housing "should be restricted from being utilized as a buffer between other land uses as a determinant of location." The applicant has not demonstrated that housing or demographic conditions in Port Townsend have changed to the extent that the zoning of the site should be changed from single to multi- family. I In consideration of the aforementioned findings and conclusions, the City Council finds that the above-referenced application be denied without prejudice. Ordinance Prohibiting Polystyrene Foam containers for Food Packaging. Mayor Shirley reviewed the proposed ordinance saying this was patterned after an ordinance passed by the city of Portland in January, 1989, and is primarily concerned about the use of polystyrene foam hot food containers for anyone preparing food on site. The City of Winslow passed legislation banning the use of non-biodegradable containers last week and the Council has letters of support from Representative Evan Jon~s and Senator Paul 139 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989, Cont. I Conner. Copies of this ordinance and the ordinance from Portland will be given to representatives of the cities of Seat1:le, Renton, Tacoma and Bellevue during a meeting on March 9, 1989, by Mayor Shirley. Mayor Shirley opened the hearing to the public. Molly Pearson, Recycling and Litter Control Coordinator for Jefferson County was recognized and spoke in favor of the ordinance saying that the polystyrene containers never degrade and are on the earth forever. She stated that she would be proud to live in a city that is designated as a "Foam Free Zone". Janet Welsh and Michael LeVine were both recognized individually and spoke against foam products and were in favor of going back to paper or other biodegradable products and were in favor of adding egg cartons and other foam products to the ban. Marty Johnson, an RN at Kah Tai Care Center, was recognized and stated that she is an "other". She personally does not use any styrofoam and is against it:. However, she stated that the additional cost to the Care Center if polystyrene was banned and paper products used would be over $3,800 yearly, thus the Care Center does not support a ban in Jefferson County if it were to extend to all styrofoam. Mayor Shirley stated that one of the main targets is coffee or hot food cups. Cherie Myers from Safeway, Public Affairs, was recognized and spoke against the ban saying that it is necessary to have an alternative that is safe for the consumer before a ban is enacted. Safeway has been reviewing this for over three years and is 100Jdng for an effecti ve al ternati ve. She thinks that instead of a til'l1,e deadline, that everyone should be working together to make surH that this gets done without a ban. There being no further testi:mony, Mayor Shirley closed the hearing to the public. ORDINANCE NO 2147 I AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO HEALTH, SANITATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT; PROHIBITING THE USE O:F POLYSTYRENE FOAM CONTAINERS FOR FOOD PACKAGING; AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS TO TITLE 6 OF THE POR'r TOWNSEND MUNICIPAL CODE. Mr Grove read the ordinance by title.After further discussion of "unlawful food packaging" of prepared food in section 3 and the suggestion that the word "prepared" be inserted between the words package and food, Councilmember Kenna made a motion tha't the first reading be considered the second and the third be by title only with the above change, which was seconded by CouncilmeIWber Chang. After discussion of the use of al ternati ve products to package meat and eggs and whether or not to include them in the ban, the cost to the planet in continuing the use of plastic and foam and the fact that this will be sending a message to retailers that banning polystyrene is the coming thing. The motion passed by voice vote with five Councilmembers voting in the affirmative and Councilmembers Clise and owsley voting against the motion. After discussion of the readings of ordinances, Councilmember Clise made a motion to continue this until the next meeting which was seconded by Councilmember Jones and passed unanimously by voice vote. COMMITTEE REPORTS I Communi ty Services. Councilmember Chang reported that she was appointed to the 03A Task Force (Olympic Area Agency on }~ging) last year. One of the most important things they wanted worked on was a network whereby Seniors could walk into one place in their own area and with one form or computer, access one of 'the eleven agencies, either Federal, State or County, available to them. As of yesterday, Fred Meyer has given a grant in the amount of $205,000 to fund th~project. It is the first time in the State of washington that this has been done and only the second time for the whole country. 140 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989, Cont. Ladder Truck. Mayor Shirley announced that the new ladder truck for the Fire Department was delivered last week and that it fits into the Fire Hall. Union Wharf. Mayor Shirley announced that word was received today that the Department of Ecology Ecologic Commission has approved the permi t for Union Wharf and written approval is on its way. Working with the developer for the parking and setting up the lease between the Department of Natural Resources, the city and the County are the next steps before it comes back to the Council. I Cook Avenue. Mayor Shirley announced that Cook Avenue has been blocked off to one lane of traffic due to the problems with the bluff. Councilmember Camfield reported that the school bus drivers and parents of school children are concerned about the safety of the road and whether the road will eventually be closed. Mayor Shirley stated that as long as it is safe, the road will remain open, but if it continues to sluff off, the road will be closed. He has been trying to work with the MacFarlane property owner regarding relocation of the road but may have to make other arrangements. It was suggested that the school be sent a letter suggesting that the school buses be re-routed and that load restrictions be imposed. street Committee. Councilmember Jones reported that the Committee had met and asked the Police Chief and the Fire Chief to be present. The two groups who want to operate carriage rides during the months from May to September were turned over to the Fire and Police Chiefs to work with them on routing, etc. It was recommended that Water Street not be used and that they work out routes primarily uptown around the bed and breakfasts and the Rothschild House. I Councilmember Jones made a motion to approve the request from Terry Steben to cut down about a dozen trees in the street right-of-way at 23rd and Thomas Streets which was seconded by Councilmember Owsley and passed unanimously by voice vote. Councilmember Jones reported that the traffic problems at 31st and 32nd streets near the Hickenbottom school were discussed: a traffic count has been requested, a parking problem that irritates the neighbors, school zone signs and a speed limit of 15 miles per hour, improvements to 32nd street, and storm drains were brought up. These are subjects that the Committee is requesting the Legislati ve/Environmental Committee consider for the renewal of the Condi tional Use Permit for the school. It was noted that the neighbors were present at the meeting but Mrs Hickenbottom was not even though she had been present when the meeting was set up. The requests for a crosswalk at 7th and Sheridan and a stop sign at 7th and Hendricks were discussed. with the construction being completed at the hospital and the improvement of the parking along Sheridan these two items were not recommended. Councilmember Jones and Mr stricklin had met with Mr Merrill of US Bank regarding the drainage problem at the entrance of the bank. Mr stricklin is working up the costs for putting in the drain which the bank and the city might possibly share. The Committee suggests making Handicap parking Signs more visible in the downtown area since it could be that a lot of the violators really cannot see the signs. I The cost of a street light on Van Ness street is being looked at. Legislative/Environment~l. councilmember Kenna questioned why Mrs Hickenbottom was not at the Street Committee meeting. It was stated that she had been presøpt when the meeting was set up but 141 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7, 1989, Cont. no one knew why she did not attend. Councilmember ~rones stated that one of the questions they had wanted answered \\ras: what is child care and what is private school and how much of each is there. I Health Board. Councilmember Chang reported that the State of Washington regulates day care and the County regula1:es schools. The County Health Department had not been aware that there was a school at the Hickenbottom's. The County went out and checked and said that except for some minor things it is fine. Parks/Property. Councilmember Camfield set up a meeting to discuss setting up an Ad Hoc Committee for immediate and future plans for City Dock with Mayor Shirley and Mr Hildt for March 15, 1989, at 5: 00 PM. They would also like to meet with David Hero at that meeting. Woodstove Heating. A meeting to discuss woodstoves and pollution on March 23, 1989, at 7:00 PM in city Hall was announced. UNFINISHED BUSINESS ORDINANCE NO 2146 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF THE ALLEY LOCATED WITHIN BLOCK 4, JAMES HUSSEY'S ADDITION LYING BETWEEN 27TH STREET AND A POINT 12 FEET NORTH OF THE NORTHERN LOTLINE OF LOTS 6 AND 11 OF SAID BLOCK 4; ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS ~~O THE VACATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I Mr Grove read the ordinance by title. Mr Hildt reconÅ“ended that the ordinance be held until payment for the vacated street is received. Councilmember Jones made a motion to that E~ffect which was seconded by Councilmember Clise and passed unanimously by voice vote. NEW BUSINESS Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Application No SDP88-0020 -ci ty of Port Townsend. Mayor Shirley requested that this be continued until such time as the Conditional Use permi1: and Street Vacation Application ready. Councilmember Jones made a motion to that effect which was seconded by Councilmember Clise and passed unanimously by voice vote. COUNCILMEMBERS GENERAL DISCUSSION After discussion of the memorandum from Mr Harper regarding the hedge of Leone Richmond and her intent to leave the hedge as it is until a lawsuit that has been filed against her has beE!n resolved, Copncilmember Owsley made a motion that the City file its own lawsuit to require the removal of the trees which was seconded by Councilmember Chang and passed unanimously by voiêe vote. I 'Councilmember Clise asked the status of the checklist he requested f:J;'om the Police Department. Mayor Shirley reported tha't he had not given the request to the Police Department until yesterday and that a report is forthcoming. Councilmember McCulloch stated that it might be an idea for the Council to call for the first reading of an ordinance em the night it is introduced so those members of the Council who do not want the ordinance to be voted on will not have to vote "no". Councilmember Clise stated that there are ordinances that do not need to be held over. Discussion of the adoption of ordinances and the reasons for three readings ensued. 14~ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 7,1989, Cont. Councilmember McCulloch commended Mr Hildt and staff for the work done on the Development Guide which was echoed by other Councilmembers. Mr Hildt announced that the parking and access plan for the Senior Community Center has been agreed upon by all parties. The next step is to finish the construction drawings which is being done through the County. Some additional work is to be done on a formal agreement with the Seniors on actually managing their space, but the project is going on well. There will be a formal scheduling policy worked out with the Seniors and the County to be sure that the space on the upper floor will be used as intended. I ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Shirley declared the meeting adjourned at 11:07 PM. 63:D Attest: 1LJ~ Clerk-'rreasurer MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF MARCH 21, 1989 The City Council of the city of Port Townsend met in regular session this twenty-first day of March, 1989, at 7:30 PM, in the Council Chambers of city Hall, Mayor Brent S Shirley presiding. I ROLL CALL Councilmembers present at roll call were Jean Camfield, Karen Chang, John Clise, Vern Jones, Mike Kenna, Julie McCulloch and Norma Owsley. Also present were Clerk-Treasurer David Grove, Executi ve Assistant/Planner Michael Hildt and Assistant Planner Kevin O'Neill. UNFINISHED BUSINESS ORDINANCE NO 2147 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO HEALTH, SANITATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT; PROHIBITING THE USE OF POLYSTYRENE FOAM CONTAINERS FOR FOOD PACKAGING; AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS TO TITLE 6 OF THE PORT TOWNSEND MUNICIPAL CODE. Mayor Shirley explained that this public hearing was continued until this meeting in order for more people to comment on the ordinance. He then re-opened the hearing to the public. Sheila Westerman, Jack Westerman and Linda Atkins were all recognized individually and spoke in support of the ordinance, congratulating the Council for their forward thinking, the reduction of waste in landfills, litter problems and questioning why egg cartons and meat trays were not included. Mayor Shirley explained that the ordinance is limited to polystyrene hot food containers because they seem to be the highest waste producers and they are used for the shortest period of time. The Council may take up the issue of egg containers and meat trays later. Mayor Shirley also read part of ESHB-1671, a Recycling Bill in the State Legislature, that will not allow any local or regional subdivision of the State to have the authority to ban any type of packaging unless the authority is I