Loading...
08/22/2005 - Regular - MinutesCity of Port Orchard Council Meeting Minutes Regular Meeting of August 22, 2005 PRESENT: KIM E. ABEL, MAYOR COUNCILMEMBERS: John Clauson, Excused Todd Cramer Robert Geiger, Mayor Protem Rita Diienno, Excused Carolyn Powers Ron Rider Rick Wyatt ALSO PRESENT: Planning Director Long-Woods, Public Works Director Abed, Treasurer Kristine Tompkins, City Clerk Etgen, and City Attorney Combs. 6:30 P.M. CAll TO ORDER Vivian Henderson led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council Member Wyatt requested the removal of Business Item "Discussion - Recommendation re Financing of Marquee Improvements" from the agenda to be placed on the next Council meeting agenda. COUNCIL MEMBER EXCUSED FROM MEETING Council Member Wyatt moved and Council Member Cramer seconded a motion to excuse Council Member Clauson from the meeting. Upon vote, motion carried unanimously. Council Member Powers requested the discussion regarding the marquee be retained under Business to address a recommendation from the Public Property Committee, and that the consent item "Authorization for Mayor to Sign Agreement for Display of the Virginia V Replica in City Hall" be moved to Business. AUDIENCE COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT LISTED ON AGENDA Patrick Lucas, resident, asked questions about Council's prior action regarding the authorization of the agreement for the Waste Water Treatment Facility with Entranco. At the request of Council Member Rider, City Attorney Combs responded to Mr. Lucas' questions. Raymond and Elisa Miller, residents, reported on their need to hook up to the City's sewer system due to a failing septic system. Mayor Abel assured the Millers that a response to their request would be delivered to them the next day. Minutes of August 22, 2005 Page 2 of 9 Vivian Henderson, Kitsap Alliance of Property Owners representative, expressed her concern about remarks the City Attorney made at the July 26, 2005 Council meeting regarding Council's legal obligation to provide public notice. Gil Michael and Fred Chang, residents, asked about the public's ability to address agenda items during the meeting. COUNCIL MEMBER EXCUSED FROM MEETING Council Member Cramer moved and Council Member Wyatt seconded a motion to excuse Council Member Dilenno from the meeting. Upon votef motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING Rezone 1148-Rl Paul Berg (continued from August 8, 2005 Council Meeting) Mayor Abel opened the continued public hearing at 6:45 p.m. for further testimony. Planning Director Long-Woods reported that was a draft ordinance and addendum to the staff report was given to Council at the beginning of the Council meeting. She reiterated that the request before Council is consideration of a site-specific rezone, originally approved in 2004, for a 4,500 square foot medical building and parking lot at the corner of Pottery Avenue and South Kitsap Boulevard, with approved access off of South Kitsap Boulevard. After discussions with the City Engineer, the applicant has decided access off South Kitsap Boulevard would not be the best alternative and submitted a plan providing for access off of Pottery Avenue, along with a request to double the building size. Ms. Long-Woods stated the August sth hearing included questions about frontage improvements, landscaping and reduced parking. The applicant met with the Planning and Engineering staff on August gth or 10th and discussed how the issues could be addressed. The applicant responded with a letter dated August 16th that is included in the addendum packet with a site plan and conceptual landscaping plan. There is still no full landscaping plan showing species and size of plants, which will be part of the condition for the site development permit for the facility. The applicant wanted outstanding issues regarding the Pottery Avenue access addressed by Council before spending money on an engineering design for the landscaping and final building design. New conditions of approval were recommended as a result of the meeting and the August 16th letter is included and underlined in the addendum. Some of the conditions were not viable and those were struck out with new language submitted. Condition 14 regarding the access easement was stricken and Condition 15 was rewritten with the landscaping requirements in accordance with Chapter 12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Condition 18 was also amended, and Condition 19 was stricken and rewritten so that the sign permit application would be handled in the site development process. Condition 20 was amended regarding the required number of parking spaces. During Minutes of August 22, 2005 Page 3 of 9 the August 8th public hearing Council requested a rideshare plan for employees be developed. Ms. Long-Woods indicated the applicant has discussed it with the City Engineer and agreed to come up with an appropriate plan before a certificate of occupancy is issued. Condition 21 was added to include a concrete walkway in the front area and Condition 22 addresses off-street parking, which had been questioned at the last Council meeting. Paul Berg, applicant, reported after a lengthy meeting with the City Engineer and Associate Planner that they had worked out the conditions as presented. He expressed his gratitude to the City Attorney and Council Member Powers for pointing out areas of concern at the last meeting. Patrick Lucas, resident, questioned where the handicapped parking spots were. City Engineer Abed reported they are close to the building on the site plan and meet ADA requirements. With no one coming forward to provide further public testimony, Mayor Abel closed the public hearing to public testimony. Council Member Rider moved and Council Member Wyatt seconded a motion to approve Ordinance No. 019-05 amending Ordinance No. 1943 regarding certain site plan conditions for the site-specific plan known as the Berg office/patient clinic with the conditions as listed in the addendum received on August 22, 2005. Council Member Rider questioned what type of physical separation was required for the driveways and parking spaces, and asked if there were lighting requirements for the parking lot. Ms. Long-Woods reported curbing would be used to provide a physical separation from areas like the parking lot, and City Engineer Abed reported there were lighting requirements for the parking lot. In response to questions by Council Member Cramer, Mr. Abed advised there would be lighting for the walkways. Council Member Powers questioned whether the applicant understood that the landscaping in the right-of-way could be removed at the City's convenience in the future. Mr. Abed reported they did, although the possibility of the City needing the right-of-way in the future was slim. City Attorney Combs advised he would make sure the wording in the condition make it clear that the landscaping could be removed at the City's sole discretion in the future with no compensation to the applicant. Council Member Powers noted she had lived on a street where residents have used the right-of- way for 50 years without the City taking it away from them. Council Member Geiger requested information on whether a pleasant face for the building would be presented to the Pottery Avenue side of the building. Minutes of August 22, 2005 Page 4 of 9 Greg Morgan, architect, stated the landscaping provides a screening but not necessarily a nice facade. He stated they did not have a clear understanding of what specifically was concerning to Council about the building. Council Member Geiger responded that a large bare wall with a minimum number of windows facing Pottery was the concern. He stated there had been discussion of turning it around at one point and he wondered if this was the final design. Planning Director Long-Woods stated this issue had been addressed at the last meeting and that there was a concern that the building faced a main route into the City. Page 138 of the Zoning Code addresses building entries and in the illustration provided by the applicant there are three doorways going into that side of the building but no improvements to clearly indicate it is a public entryway. Mr. Morgan stated it was not their intention that it be used as a public entryway. The doors are fire exits and people accessing the building from the bus stop would go around the building. Ms. Long-Woods stated that Council Members have discussed design features on buildings facing frontage streets to include columns, arches, porches or other concepts. Mr. Morgan stated he understood the concern and that there were other buildings that were disappointing in their exterior presentation. He stated they are cognizant of the desire for an attractive building and it is their intention, even though there are no entry doors on the back side of the building, that all walkways and other access points are clearly marked to lead pedestrians to the proper entrances. Council Member Geiger reported they had experienced similar problems with different buildings. He spoke of the Holiday Inn, stating the original front wall had been devoid of features. Modifications were made to the front facade. The building on the corner of Tremont and Sidney comes close to the road with a bare back wall with the entrance on the opposite side. Council Member Geiger reported he hoped for some architectural features to complement the plantings. Mr. Morgan stated this was not the final design; they had contemplated visual depth to the facade with the use of colors and perhaps more windows. The stairwell coming down the back was shown in the drawing. Council Member Powers noted that there were very few windows on the backside of the building and that it did not aesthetically provide an enhancement to the City. Mr. Morgan agreed, stating it was a design in process. Planning Director Long-Woods stated there was no revised layout of a new building submitted, and reminded the applicant that this was a site-specific approval, and that any changes to the proposal in front of them needed to be conditioned before approval could be granted. Mr. Morgan stated he was confused and had not gotten definitive input about the design; he stated he could submit another design if there was time with conditional approval. Mr. Abed reiterated that Council had asked for some type of architectural treatment for the back of the building. Minutes of August 22, 2005 Page 5 of 9 City Attorney Combs advised Council that they could continue deliberations to the next meeting if the requirements are important to Council; they should be included in the conditions. Council Member Cramer asked Planning Director Long-Woods about her comfort with giving final approval, noting he would like to expedite the request. Ms. Long-Woods stated she was comfortable with enforcing the conditions Council set forth. Responding to a question by Council Member Rider, City Attorney Combs stated Council has to provide the parameters of enforcement with conditions for staff and could not delegate their legislative authority to staff. He emphasized that details such as wanting a public entrance on the backside of the building and pillars or roof projections are items Council would need to determine for staff to enforce. Council Member Cramer stated he felt the directions had been made clear, that there needs to be ingress and egress from the backside of the building, and that the elevations need to be more clearly defined on the drawings. Mr. Berg asked for more direction on what Council wanted on the backside of the building. He stated directions were not given at the last Council meeting or at the meeting with staff, but if Council wants a facade at the backside making a door look like an entry, they can do so. Council Member Rider apologized that there were no design standards in place. He recommended there be public access entry doors on both sides of the building. City Engineer Abed noted the variance in parking stalls was in response to an encouragement for ridesharing and use of public transportation like the bus. Ms. Long-Woods stated one of the previous architects had presented a plan with a public entry as one of the three doors on the backside of the building. City Attorney Combs stated it was his understanding that Council wanted one public access with the same architectural exterior treatment on the Pottery Avenue side of the building as on the other side for pedestrians to be able to enter the building. Council Member Geiger stated the City should not be put into the position of being an architect or planner, but should make a judgment about the proposal. Council Member Wyatt agreed with Council Member Geiger's concerns and asked about the possibility of the exit doors being turned into public access entrances. Mr. Morgan advised they were well into the design process and that none of the back doors were intended to be public entrances. Planning Director Long-Woods stated there had been three architects on the project, each having different variations in design. Mr. Berg stated this was not true. Council Member Wyatt stated he was okay with the 25 conditions. Council Member Cramer expressed frustration over not having design standards in place for developers. He stated he was in favor of requiring a public access in the back similar to the front access in design. He commended Mr. Berg for encouraging bus ridership, but stated an easy entrance at the bus stop was important. Mr. Morgan stated it would affect the design of the entire building to put public access on the backside of the building and Minutes of August 22, 2005 Page 6 of 9 stated it should have been brought up before this time. Mayor Abel responded that it had been been discussed by Council in June of 2004. Council Member Powers stated the issue had come up in the beginning several times, because they did not want another building with an unattractive presentation to the street. She stated she believed it had been discussed also at the last Council meeting during the first part of the public hearing. She stated Council Member Dilenno specifically stated there should be public access from the side of the building facing the street and Mr. Berg suggested the building might be able to be turned around. Council Member Diienno had stated it was not her intent to change the view for the building, but rather to maintain a good streetscape. Council Member Powers stated she did not want to delay the project, either, but felt it was imperative that there be access at the backside of the building. Council Member Rider stated it was Council's desire to process the application, and asked Mr. Berg if he had any ideas about how to meet the requirements. Council Member Cramer stated the locations of the handicapped parking spaces required access from the other side of the building. In response to a question by Mr. Morgan, the Mayor stated this project was different than the Tremont and Pottery building because it had to come through Council as a site-specific rezone request. Council Member Cramer stated the building was now twice the original size, and felt there was room within the building to make accommodations for the entrance requirements. City Attorney Combs reported he had heard three modifications to the original conditions: 1) Landscaping required on the right-of-way would be maintained at the applicant's sole expense and that the City maintained the right to remove or require the applicant to remove the landscaping at any time; 2) Lighting is provided for pedestrian safety along the five-foot pedestrian walkways on both sides of the building from the building entrance on the west side to the bus stop on Pottery Avenue; and 3) One public access on the Pottery Avenue side of the building be created with the same exterior treatment as the west side entry. Council Members Rider and Wyatt both agreed to the three modifications to the motion. Upon vote, the motion to approve Ordinance No. 019-05 amending Ordinance No. 1943 regarding certain site plan conditions for the site-specific plan known as the Berg officejpatient clinic with the conditions as listed in the addendum received on August 22, 2005 along with the additional conditions of 1) Landscaping required on the right-of-way would be maintained at the applicant's sole expense and that the City maintained the right to remove or require the applicant to remove the landscaping at any time; 2) Lighting is provided on South Kitsap Boulevard for pedestrian safety along the five-foot pedestrian walkways on both sides of the building from the building entrance on the west side to the bus stop on Pottery Avenue; and 3) One public access Minutes of August 22, 2005 Page 7 of 9 on the Pottery Avenue side of the building be created with the same exterior treatment as the west side entry passed unanimously. RECESS The Mayor called a recess at 7:44 p.m. Council reconvened into regular session at 7:53 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Powers moved and Council Member Rider seconded a motion approving the Consent Agenda as modified. Upon vote, motion carried unanimously. A. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of August 8, 2005 B. Approval of Claim Warrants #43935-44013 in the amount of $1,898,914.34 C. Adoption of Resolution 022-05 Surplus of 1987 Chevrolet Blazer D. Authorization for ~1ayor to Sign Agreement for Display of the Virginia V Replica in City Hall Moved to Business BUSINESS ITEMS Authorization for Mayor to Sign Agreement for Display of the Virginia V Replica in City Hall Council Member Powers moved and Council Member Wyatt seconded a motion to authorize the Mayor, subject to the other party's signature, to sign an agreement for the display of the "Virginia V" ship replica in City Hall. Upon vote, motion carried unanimously. Approval of Mayor's Recommendations of Lodging Tax Advisory Board Committee Members Council Member Geiger moved and Council Member Wyatt seconded a motion to approve the Mayor's recommendations of the Lodging Tax Advisory Board Committee members. Council Member Cramer expressed his desire to have members of groups who have not been previously appointed to the committee serve on the committee. He also expressed frustration with the committee's recommendations not being followed by Council in the past. Upon vote, motion carried with Council Members Geiger, Powers, Rider, and Wyatt casting affirmative votes, and Council Member Cramer cast a dissenting vote. Discussion -Community Renewal Act City Attorney Combs reported on RCW 39.89, Community Revitalization Act, allowing for tax increment financing for the urban renewal process. Council Members asked several Minutes of August 22, 2005 Page 8 of 9 questions, and City Attorney Combs agreed to provide a full copy of RCW 39.89 to Council for their review. Discussion -Recommendation from Public Property Committee re Marquee Improvements Council Member Powers moved and Council Member Geiger seconded a motion that the City Engineer be authorized to prepare a contract for consideration by the full Council for a structural engineer to perform services pertaining to the marquee as defined by a scope of work developed by the City Engineer, after the City Engineer reviews the Rice Fergus Study, selecting a local business if possible, with a review by the Public Property Committee before consideration by Council. Upon vote, motion carried with Council Members Geiger, Powers, Rider, and Wyatt casting affirmative votes, and Council Member Cramer cast a dissenting vote. Adoption of Resolution 023-05 Final Plat Approval of Highlands at Karcher Creek Public Works Director Abed reported the required improvements for final plat approval have been inspected and accepted. Council Member Cramer moved and Council Member Rider seconded a motion to adopt Resolution No. 023-05 granting final plat approval for Highlands at Karcher Creek. Upon vote, motion carried unanimously. Authorization for Mayor to Sign Extension of the Robinson Noble Saltbush Inc .. Contract for Water Rights Council Member Geiger moved and Council Member Powers seconded a motion to authorize the Mayor to sign an extension of the Robinson Noble Saltbush, Inc. contract for water rights. Upon vote, motion carried unanimously. Authorization for Mayor to Sign Change Order No. 8 for the Joint Waste Water Treatment Plant Council Member Rider moved and Council Member Wyatt seconded a motion authorizing the Mayor to sign Change Order No. 8 for the Joint Waste Water Treatment Plant. Council Member Cramer moved and Council Member Rider seconded a motion to amend the main motion to exclude Item No. 4 on the Change Order for the $62,031.77 driveway modification. Upon vote, motion carried unanimously. Upon vote, the amended motion authorizing the Mayor to sign Change Order No. 8 for the Joint Waste Water Treatment Plant, excluding Item No. 4 for the $62,031.77 driveway modification, carried unanimously. Minutes of August 22, 2005 Page 9 of 9 Authorization for Mayor to Sign Phase II Municipal Stormwater Grant Program Council Member Cramer moved and Council Member Powers seconded a motion authorizing the Mayor to sign Phase II of the Municipal Stormwater Grant Program. Upon vote, motion carried unanimously. COUNCIL/MAYOR & STAFF REPORT Mayor Abel advised Council she would like to have a study session in the near future to address several pending issues, including the intertie, the Ad Hoc Committee representative, Critical Areas ordinance and Comprehensive Plan timing. Council Member Cramer reported the Utilities Committee would be discussing the location of a station at Anderson Hill and Cook Roads along with discussing the intertie. Council Member Powers updated Council on her activity with the Transpol Committee and recent discussions regarding local ferries. Planning Director Long-Woods reported they had approximately 130 to 150 people come to the open house on the Subarea Plan last week. Public Works Director Abed reported interviews have been completed for the Assistant City Engineer and the Building Inspector applications are now being reviewed. The following committee meetings were set during the Council meeting: Public Property Committee-August 24, 2005, 7:30a.m.-City Hall ADJOURNMENT At 9:32 p.m. Mayor Abel adjourned the meeting. Kim E. Abel, Mayor