026-15 - Ordinance - Interim Zoning OrdinanceIntroduced by
Requested by
Drafted by
Reviewed by:
Introduced
Adopted
ORDINANCE NO. 026-15
Development Director
Development Director
Development Director
City Attorney
November 10, 2015
November 10, 2015
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD,
WASHINGTON, RELATING TO THE ADOPTION OF FINDINGS AND
CONCLUSIONS TO SUPPORT THE CONTINUED MAINTENANCE OF THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE (No. 014-15) ON
PROJECT PERMIT PROCESSING, REPEALING CHAPTER 16.06 AND 16.07
AND ADDING A NEW TITLE 23 TO THE PORT ORCHARD MUNICIPAL
CODE, A TWO MONTH PERIOD BEGINNING OCTOBER 27, 2015.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Port Orchard may adopt an interim
zoning ordinance or interim official control for up to six months, as long as the City
Council holds a public hearing on the interim zoning ordinance within sixty (60) days
after adoption (RCW 36.70A.390); and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2015, the Port Orchard City Council passed
Ordinance No. 014-15, repealing the City's existing project permit processing regulations
in chapter 16.06 and 16.07 of the Port Orchard Municipal Code, and adopting
procedures for permit processing in new Title 23 POMC: and
WHEREAS, as required by RCW 36.70A.390, the City held a public hearing on the
interim zoning ordinance within sixty (60) days of its adoption on October 27, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to enter findings and conclusions in support
of the continued maintenance of the interim zoning ordinance for a period of an
additional two months after the public hearing, which would be January 12, 2016;
Now, Therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, ORDAINS
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of the City's adoption of the interim zoning
ordinance No. 014-15 is to establish project permit processing regulations that are
consistent with law, to be used in the processing of applications defined as "project
permits" in RCW 36.7013.020 (such as boundary line adjustments, short subdivisions
(short plats), preliminary subdivisions (preliminary plats), final plats, binding site plans,
Ordinance No. 026-15
Page 2 of 4
alterations/vacations of such applications, conditional use permits, variances, etc.) while
the City follows the process for adoption of permanent project permit processing
regulations, as required by chapters 35.63 and 36.70A RCW for the adoption of
development regulations, as defined in RCW 36.70A.030(7). The period following the
adoption of the interim zoning ordinance, as well as the two months following the
hearing on October 27, 2015, has been/will be used for the City to obtain public input,
hold public hearings and meetings to develop and adopt permanent project permit
processing regulations.
Section 2. Summary of Testimony during Public Hearing. On October 27, 2015,
the City Council held a public hearing on the interim subdivision ordinance No. 014-15.
The following is a summary of the testimony:
A. Community Development Director Nick Bond presented the staff report,
and recommended that the Council vote to continue the effective period of Ordinance
015-15 for the full six-month period because the conditions which led to the need for
this Ordinance have not changed. Mr. Bond also mentioned that the City had received
a Memo dated October 1, 2015 from Ted Hunter, the Port Orchard Hearing Examiner,
with his comments on the Ordinance. In that Memo, Mr. Hunter stated that: "I am
happy to report that we view the ordinance as a major improvement, and see no serious
concerns in its implementation.... Overall, the ordinance is very well drafted."
B. City Attorney Carol Morris explained that she is drafting a comparison of
the existing project permit processing regulations and the interim project permit
processing ordinance and that it will be available shortly. She further stated that the
public process is being followed, and that staff is asking that the Council keep the
interim project permit processing ordinance in place until the permanent ordinance is
adopted. She noted that Mr. Palmer's letter dated October 27, 2015 was the first
substantive comments received from any member of the public on the interim
ordinances. She will provide a response to this letter for the Council and Planning
Commission. Finally, she reiterated that it would be very disruptive to the permit
processing at the City for the Council to repeal the interim project permit processing
ordinance and reenact the old code. She offered to repeat her concerns to the Council
in an executive session. [An executive session was held on potential litigation under
RCW 42.30.110(1)(i).]
C. William Palmer of the Kitsap Alliance of Property Owners, questioned the
process used by the City involving adoption of the ordinance as an emergency. He
presented a copy of a letter he drafted dated October 27, 2015 describing his concerns
with the interim ordinance.
D. Ms. Teresa Osinski asserted that there is no emergency warranting the
adoption of the interim ordinance. She stated that the people who use the code were
not consulted.
E. Mr. Brian Petro sated that there was no need to adopt the interim
ordinance by emergency. He felt the process in place does not give access to the public.
Ordinance No. 026-15
Pate 3 of 4
F. Ms. Elissa Whittleton recalled that the reasoning behind the interim
ordinance was to protect the City from litigation and she does not want to go back to
the previous code.
G. Mr. Nick Whittleton, Planning Commissioner, stated that the Community
Development Director Bond came to the Planning Commission hearing and explained
that he could not share the communications that had taken place about the Ordinance
in executive session. Mr. Whittleton said that it is hard to make a decision without
knowing what the real problem was.
H. Mr. Mike Eliason would like people to identify themselves when they
come to the podium.
I. Community Development Director Bond stated that the interim permit
processing Ordinance was a major improvement over the previous code. He also
informed the Council that there are permits pending review and if the City reverts to the
old code, the process will be disrupted. He suggested that the risks associated with this
could be explained in another executive session.
Section 3. After the close of the public hearing, the City Council discussed
the need for the interim permit processing Ordinance. Councilmember Clauson stated
that he missed the meeting when the Ordinance was adopted, and that he was unaware
of the risks associated with the previous code. Councilmember Putaansuu expressed
serious concerns about the process. The Mayor reiterated that the Hearing Examiner
had provided very positive feedback on the Ordinance. Mayor Pro-Tem Ashby said that
she was also absent when the interim ordinances were adopted, and does not know the
reasons prompting the need for them. She wondered whether the Council should hold
an executive session to learn the reasons. An executive session was held for the
purpose of potential litigation pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). After the executive
session, the City Attorney was asked to provide a brief description of the problems with
the previous permit processing code and she recommended continuation of the
effectiveness of the interim ordinance.
Section 4. The Council made a motion to continue the effect of Interim
Ordinance No. 014-15, in accordance with Section 9 and 10 of that Ordinance, for 60
days, and in addition, that the City Attorney and the Planning staff provide a matrix of
the changes that will be included or are included in the interim ordinance, to be given to
the Planning Commission in the next two weeks, as well as a letter outlining the specific
issues shared tonight. The motion carried.
Section S. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
Ordinance should be held to be unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of
any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance.
Ordinance No. 026-15
Page 4 of 4
Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force
five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary consisting of the
title.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Port Orchard, APPROVED by the Mayor
and attested by the Clerk in authentication of such passage this 10th day of November,
2015.
Timothy C. Vatthes, Mayor
ATTEST:
Brandy Rinearson, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: SPONSORED BY:
Carol A. Morris, City Attorney °
`;��QRT o��r�,Clau ON son, Councilmember
C�O�,P Oa e$�/,�
a
�y o
® °dt 1 A1, a .
p a
�
/ O
°RP AWASH\r` °°°
NOTICE OF CITY OF PORT ORCHARD
ORDINANCE
The following is a summary of an Ordinance approved by the Port Orchard City Council at their regular Council
meeting held November 10, 2015.
ORDINANCE NO.026-15
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON,
RELATING TO THE ADOPTION OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO SUPPORT THE CONTINUED
MAINTENANCE OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE (No. 015-15) ON
PROJECT PERMIT PROCESSING, REPEALING CHAPTER 16.06 AND 16.07 AND ADDING A NEW
TITLE 23 TO THE PORT ORCHARD MUNICIPAL CODE, A TWO MONTH PERIOD BEGINNING
OCTOBER 27, 2015.
Copies of Ordinance No. 026-15 are available for review at the office of the City Clerk of the City of Port Orchard.
Upon written request a statement of the full text of the Ordinance will be mailed to any interested person without
charge. Thirty days after publication, copies of Ordinance No. 026-15 will be provided at a nominal charge.
City of Port Orchard
Brandy Rinearson
City Clerk
Published: November 20, 2015