Kisela says it could conceivably pass through the DEP and Corps of Engineers review process and come up before council review this year. Might not be until 2009.

Will have more detail in Wednesday’s paper.

The final, unanimous decision: Hold a workshop as soon as possible on ways to finance the proposed public parking on Harbor Boulevard.

Much debate over when to schedule a workshop on the multimodal system and parking. Should it be done fast? Should it wait until the new council is installed and can vote on it?

Unfortunately, this doesn’t make for enough to liveblog about, which is why my posting is slowing.

That’s the proposal: Stop development until the council’s questions about the parking and the city’s multimodal development rules can be worked out.

Councilor Dewey Destin has raised the issue–brought up in previous meetings–that approving projects that hinge on the public parking planned for the area is a mistake, since the city doesn’t have any parking and due to a court decision last year, doesn’t have the funding it expected to.
The councilor has suggested this would only apply to major Tier Three projects, the ones council actually reviews. However, City Manager Greg Kisela has said this would discriminate unfairly against smaller projects that pass through without council review, but might be affected by the same rules.

You can never tell when an issue will pop up that’s not on the agenda. Right now it’s a debate over harbor parking and plans for “multimodal development” and imposing a temporary moratorium on development that’s affected by the city’s multimodal guidelines.

Laptop crash! First Firefox, then my appleworks program, and I found myself scribbling on spare paper (which I have the sense to keep handy) until I could reboot.

Fortunately whatever it was, it doesn’t seem to have caused permanent damage. Phew. Because I rely on this laptop for my own writing and I can’t afford to have it die just now.

The motion: Propose second reading to March 4 council meeting. This would allow the council to discuss the fees at at Feb. 28 workshop on a proposed workforce housing fee.
Jim Bagby: “We do nothing well if not kick the can down the road.”
Sam Seevers: “We’re going to table this after discussing it over and over and over instead of deciding to man up.”
End result: 4-3, with Seevers, Bagby and Corcoran voting no, Marler, Destin, Williges and Windes voting yes.
Bagby predicts that the transportation fee, at least, will wind up being voted on by the next council when the new members take their fees in March.

The council is now considering postponing the impact fee votes until after a workshop (Feb. 28). Councilor Larry Williges has pointed out he made exactly the same suggestion last time and got voted down.

The last two posts said more or less the same thing, due to a screwup in the system that didn’t show me the first post was up. Rather than delete it, I’ll let it stand as a monument to the goofiness of liveblogging … which was further reinforced by Firefox crashing on me a second ago (but at least it restores all my settings when I boot it up again).