Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/18/99 AGENDACITY COUNCIL AGENDA AUGUST 18, 1999 PRE-COUNCIL SESSION: 5:00 - 5:30 P.M. · General Council Business CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M. · Pledge of Allegiance · Invocation CONSENT AGENDA Items listed below have been distributed to Council members in advance for study and will be enacted by One motion. If separate discussion is desired on an item, it may be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed on the Regular Agenda at the request of a Council member. A. Minutes of Meeting - July 21, 1999 #AB99-165 B. Minutes of Meeting - July 28, 1999 #AB99-166 C. Resolution No. 2722 Converting Tax Title Strips into #AB99-167 Rights-of-Way CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS 5. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS 6. MAYOR'S REPORT o LEGISLATIVE REPORT PUBLIC RECOGNITION -- (Comments Limited to 3 Minutes) RESOLUTIONS Resolution No. 2724, Approving Falcon Cable Change Of Control to Charter #AB99-169 5'0 (CONTINUED ON BACK) 10. 11. 12. NEW BUSINESS A. Confirmation of Cris Gears To Parks & Recreation Director Budget Adjustment No. 99-9 for Staffing Authorization Changes Co Bid Award for Asbestos Removal No. 4 Contract for SR 304 Transportation Project Purchase of Three (3) Wastewater Pump Assemblies and Three (3) Variable Frequency Drives for Pumps for Pump Station CW-2 ORDINANCES A. Ordinance No. 4663 (Second Reading) Repealing B.M.C. Chapter 2.80, "Rulemaking Procedures" Ordinance No. 4664 (Second Reading) and Summary Relating to Vacation of Public Rights-of-Way (B.M.C. Chapter 11.20); and amending B.M.C. Chapter 21.02.850 Ordinance No. 4665 (Second Reading) Setting Fees for Vacation of Public Rights-of-Way PUBLIC HEARING - 6:00 P.M. OR LATER A. Resolution No. 2702, Adoption of 1998 Comprehensive Plan Amendments #AB99-170 #AB99-171 #AB99-172 #AB99-173 #AB99-158 #AB99-159 #AB99-160 #AB99-075 8O 13. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL !. SUBJECT: MINUTES FOR MEETING -- JULY 21, 1999 FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: AUGUST 18 1~9 CITY COUNCIL HIKE SHEPHERD~ PRESIDEN AUGUST 9~ 1999 2. ~: (commenE on back 3. ~: if necessary) ENDORSEMENT MAYOR INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL P.RESIDENT FOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT 4. S~Y STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: 8. RECOM26_ENDATION: RESPONSIBLE OFFiCiAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: i0. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: !1. AGENDA BILL NO: TAPES #1632 & #1633 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES July 21, 1999 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4th Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, July 21, 1999, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President Mike Shepherd presiding. Council members present were Cados Montgomery, Carol Arends, David Farr, Lon Overson, Cecil McConnetl, and Wayne OIsen. Council members Jim Reed and John Law were absent. Also present were City Attorney Glenna Malanca, Deputy Clerk Paula Johnston, and Legislative Assistant Lori Smith. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Shepherd and invocation given by Deacon Roy Mclnnis of Sinclair Missionary Baptist Church. President Shepherd made the following announcements: (1) City Council held a Study Session prior to the meeting to discuss general Council business; (2) City Council will hold a Study Session following the City Council Meeting to discuss "HOME Fund Allocation for Home Ownership", in the Council Conference room; and (3) City Council will hold the next Monthly Study Session on Wednesday, August 4, 1999 at 5:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers, in place of the regular business meeting. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting - June 30, 1999 #AB99-135 #0045 M/S/C/U (McConnell/Montgomery) Motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090 have been recorded on a listing that had been made available to the Council. #0075 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Farr) On July 21, 1999, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 232651 through 232779 in the amount of $151,116.98; and Regular Payroll for the period ending July 15, 1999 in the amount of $811,917.37. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Overson reported on a recent trip, where he had a chance to visit many other cities. He is positively impressed with what we have here in Bremerton and the Northwest. He reported on an upcoming tour of Naval Station Bremerton. TAPES #1632 & #1633 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 21, 1999 Page 2 of 8 Mr. Farr invited the public to the next District 6-7-8 meeting to be held Thursday, August 19, 1999 at the Bremerton Administration building at 134 N. Marion Avenue to discuss "Future Park Projects" with Cris Gears, the City's Parks & Recreation Director; and Mayor Horton. Mrs. Arends reiterated the information about the District 6-7-8 meeting, and also thanked the "World Changers" group for their recent visit to the City. Mr. Montgomery thanked Mr. & Mrs. Bob Tulp for organizing the "World Changers" stop in Bremerton. He also announced that the next Ferry Advisory Meeting will be Tuesday, July 27'h at 6:45 P.M. at the New City Hall located in Port Orchard. President Shepherd reported on his attendance at an event to welcome the "Wodd Changers", and was overwhelmed at their enthusiasm. He also attended a neighborhood meeting with Gregory Way residents to discuss parking, traffic and speeding issues, and an Open House in celebration of the Literacy Council's 20th Anniversary. He encouraged the public to view their newly remodeled quarters and computer lab located in the basement area of the downtown library. Lastly, he spoke from personal experience to convey the importance of bike riders remembering their helmets. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Horton reported on the accomplishments from the "World Changers" and complimented them for their efforts, as well as City staff and all others in the community who helped make this event possible. She stated they would be back next year, and encouraged any citizen who would like to apply for a rehabilitation of their home to call 478-5275. Mayor Horton commended Captain Baugh for all that he did for the community during his command of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, and wished him much luck on his new endeavors. LEGISLATIVE REPORT President Shepherd addressed the questions asked by Susan Brown at the July 14, 1999 City Council meeting regarding the timetable for rewriting the City Council Rules & Procedures. He provided summary of issues that Council has been working on for the past several months, as well as issues they hope to address in the next few mor~ths. However, citizens can now submit any ideas or suggestions they would like to contribute regarding the updating of the City Council Rules & Procedures. President Shepherd also reaffirmed that no personal attacks or derogatory comments towards the Council, members of the public, or staff would be tolerated. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Don McDaniel, Corporate Relations Manager with Puget Sound Energy, provided an update on deregulation at the Federal and State level, as well as Puget Sound Energy's position. He also provided additional information on non-exclusive franchise acquisition. TAPES #1632 & #1633 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 21, 1999 Page 3 of 8 Paul Drn|evic speaking on behalf of Citizens for Safe Water reiterated his concern that Council is not addressing all questions regarding disposition of fluoride equipment. E.L. Sturdivant voiced his concems and frustrations with the City's Animal Control Department, particularly the lack of response to messages left on the Department's voice mail system, and the process of filing a complaint. He also had concerns with parking on Halverson Street. John Becker asked for better communication, such as periodic updates of major projects such as the Gateway Project, and to provide this information on the City's web page. Carol Atkinson, Bremerton Main Street Association, invited the public to attend the Concerts oh the Boardwalk. For more information about the Concerts or the Blackberry Festival, she provided a new web site address, ~. t~z'e_mez'~_oz'zzr~±z~st.z'ee'c o o~"q'. Gordy Byrd discussed plans for a "walk-a-thon" to benefit a "Byrd's Nest" homeless shelter. Susan Brown looked forward to participating in discussions on the updating of the Council Rules & Procedures. Roy Mclnnis volunteered to assist the City in any way he can. 8A - BID AWARD FOR TIMBER SALE 99-1, #AB99-136 Bill McKinney, Forestry Manager, stated the timber sale was planned and prepared within the guidelines of the Water Utility's Forest Management Plan and the Washington State Forest Practice regulations. A forest practices permit has been obtained for this harvest operation. Harvest will be of both even-age and shelter-wood types on a total of 31 acres. Total estimated harvest volume is 600,000 board feet. Advertisement for bids was prepared according to administrative procedures and bids were received on July 19, 1999 (summary is attached as Exhibit B). It is recommended that the City Council award the timber sale to Rayonier for the amount of $312,540.00. John Becket asked what was the projected revenue, and what was the next closest bid. Mr. McKinney stated the minimum value was $150,000, and the second high bid was $290,115.00 for Timber Sale 99-1; and the minimum value was $75,000, and the second high bid was $117,362.00 for Timber Sale 99-2. Mrs. Arends commended staff for their efforts in getting very favorable bids. Mr. Overson asked why a tree-count was not included in the second timber harvest. Mr. McKinney responded that Timber Sale 99-2 was merely a "thinning." #1420 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Farr) Motion to approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the attached Bill of Sale and Contract to Pay for and Remove Forest Products from City Lands for Timber Sale 99-1, with Rayonier for the amount of $312,540.00, in accordance with established administrative policies and procedures. TAPES #1632 & #1633 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 21, 1999 Page 4 of 8 8B - BID AWARD FOR TIMBER SALE 99-2, #AB99-137 i: ,.. -: Bill McKinney, Forestry Manager, stated the timber sale ~s planned and prepared within the guidelines of the Water Utility's Forest Management Plan and-the Washington State Forest Practice regulations. A forest practices permit has been obtained for this harvest operation. This is a selective harvest of pole quality Douglas Fir timber on a total of approximately 22 acres. Total estimated harvest volume is 166,000 board feet. Advertisement for bids was prepared according to administrative procedures and bids were received on July 19, 1999; Summary is attached as Exhibit B. It is recommended that the City Council award the timber sale to McFarland Cascade for the amount of $126,371.00. There were no comments or questions from the public. #1508 M/S/C/U (FardMontgomery) Motion to approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the attached Bill of Sale and Contract to Pay for and Remove Forest Products from City Lands for Timber Sale 99-2, with McFarland Cascade for the amount of $126,371.00, in accordance with established administrative policies and procedures. 9A ORDINANCE (FIRST READING), AUTHORIZING THE ISSUE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS TO REFINANCE THE OLYMPIC COURSE AT GOLD MOUNTAIN GOLF COMPLEX, AND ACCEPTING THE PURCHASE OFFER OF SEAFIRST BANK, #AB99-138 Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, stated that the City currently has outstanding $4,605,000 of Limited-Tax General Obligation Bonds which were issued to provide funds for the construction of the Olympic Course at Gold Mountain. These bonds mature through the year 2007. The proposed ordinance will refinance the current bond issue with a new one, which will be structured to mature through the year 2018. The refinancing will provide a lower annual debt-service obligation over a longer time period. This, in turn, will provide the golf course operation with greater financial flexibility both in current operations and in future capital improvements to the courses. The total net-present-value cost of the original issue, and the refunding issue are virtually the same. John Becker asked 1) Why does revenue not meet projections; 2) What is the comparison between the net present value of the current loan and the net present value of the new loan; 3) What is the current loan value; 4) What are the projected costs to generate the new loan; 5) Will the City pay any fees to refinance this loan; 6) Will there be any additional costs; 7) What is the current annual payment; 8) What will the projected annual payment be; and 9) How much will the City really pay. Mr. Hanna responded that 1) projections were off; 2) & 3) the net present value is vir[ually identical to the value of the new loan; 4) & 9) the cost of loan generation will be approximately $75,000, which is included in the net present value calculations; 5) & 6) fees and additional costs have also been included in the net present value calculations; and 7) & 8) the annual payment on the new debt service will be approximately $400,000 per year. He explained the current debt service is slightly higher than that, but will grow to almost $750,000 beginning in 2001, which is what the City is trying avoid). He stated the approximate total principal and interest, if current bonds ran to maturity, would be $5.7 million; and the new bonds will be approximately $6,150,000.00. TAPES #1632 & #1633 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 21, 1999 Page 5 of 8 .Mrr M0.,ntqomerv asked what is the net affect to the Parks Department if this does not pass. · ~' Mr. Hanna responded there would be no money coming from the golf course operation to fund the Parks Capital Improvement Program for the years 2001 to 2007. Mr. McConnell raised concerns that golf course funds are being generated for other parks. Mayor Horton stated the existing Cascade course was funded with State grants, with the stipulation that funds would be put back into Parks Capital, and it has been the policy of the Council up to this point to spread the net revenue among all parks. Mr. Fart was concerned about the previous revenue projections and asked for reassurance regarding the revised revenue projections. Mr. Hanna explained that in 1994, a firm was hired to perform a market analysis, which essentially showed his own revenue numbers to be "conservative". Analysis showed the market to be under served. Subsequently, other developers looked at the same market and a great deal of construction of new golf courses then occurred, and he admittedly regrets not seeing that "dynamic" at the time. He further stated the new financial projections for the golf course at this time are based on 60,000 rounds per year on the Cascade Course, and 50,000 rounds per year on the Olympic Course, which he believes are realistic numbers. He cautioned that this is a '~Neather dependent" business, which was also a factor in the original miscalculations. He pointed out that although it was an unusually wet spring, the course is doing very well. Mayor Horton reminded the Council that although Mr. Hanna's revenue projections were a little bit off in this instance, his track record speaks for itself. She further explained that if the bond market had been more favorable at the time the bonds were originally financed, they wouldn't need to refinance. Mrs. Arends said she would hate to see no other improvements possible for other City parks, since the parks are a good investment for now and the future. Mr. Overson believes this is a better deal and a smart move for the City. He appreciated Mr. Becker's comments. TAP E #1633 #0114 MISIC/U (Montgomery/Arends) Motion to approve the ordinance, authorizing the refunding bond issue on first reading. 10A - RESOLUTION NO. 2713, AUTHORIZING THE. CITY TREASURER TO MAKE APPLICATION FOR BANK CREDIT CARDS, #AB99-139 Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, reported that in some portions of the City's business, use of bank credit cards is the most efficient and cost-effective method of payment. In order for the City to have this payment option, the issuing bank, Seafirst, requires a statement of legislative approval to be included with the application documents. The proposed resolution is intended to fulfill this bank requirement. Mr. Hanna further added that he has worked with the State Auditor, as well as the City's Internal Auditor, on this issue. Our Senior Center travel programs need a better method of payment for services other than the current practice of relying on staff to use their personal credit cards. TAPES #1632 & #1633 '- City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 21, 1999 Page 6 of 8 Mayor Horton showed support for providing. credit cards and indicated that the concept of a credit card is currently being used by C~tyemployees for gas purchases and for particular retail purchases. John Becker asked the cost and what internal control process will be in place, and why did the other City credit cards not have to be approved by Council. Mr. Hanna responded 1) There are no costs associated with the credit cards; 2) Controls are included within a draft policy which limits purchases to purchase orders, general claims, and advance travel purchase. There will be limits made to the number of cards issued and credit limits. Mr. Overson asked what controls would be in place to ensure the City does not get left with any "unpaid" balarfce or additional charges. Mr. Hanna stated that there is more protection in using credit cards than in issuing checks for purchases in terms of receiving refunds. Mr. McConnell requested clarification on the process of activity sign-ups and purchasing of services. Mr. Hanna answered that there is a sign-up period prior to the purchase of services. Mr. Olsen wanted to know how often would there be a purchase made by credit card rather than purchase order, such as a computer. Mr. Hanna emphasized that purchases made by credit card rather than purchase order are rare. #0649 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Overson) Motion to approve Resolution No. 2713 authorizing the City Treasurer to make application for bank credit cards as needed. llA - PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION NO. 2714, REGARDING THE RECOVERY OF FEES FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS CONDITIONS ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2039 WHEATON WAY. #AB99-140 Janet Lunceford, Building & Development Specialist [;[, reported that on April 3, 1998, the City boarded up the former Bridgetender Restaurant located at 2039 Wheaton Way, after the owner, Sam Fitz, failed to do so as ordered by the Building Official. The building had been vandalized and was being used as a harbor for vagrants and vandals, as reported by the Bremerton Police Department. In the interest of not cost saving, the building was not boarded on the water side, since the windows had not been damaged and it appeared difficult for anyone to access the building from that side. On May 6, 1999, the Police Department reported that the water-side windows were broken, and the building was again being used by vagrants. Public Works boarded up the remaining windows and doors. The cost of the work done by Public Works totaled $379.80. Administrative fees will not be charged on this item because they were included on the lien filed in 1998 and this action is a continuance of that abatement. Council must now decide if the fees are just and reasonable, and how they should be collected. There were no comments from the public. TAPES #1632 & #1633 - City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 21, 1999 Page 7 of 8 #0778 MtSICIU (Farr/Montgomery) Motion to pass Resolution No. 27:14 and order that the fees incurred for the abatement of dangerous conditions located at,2839 Wheaton Way be collected as reasonable abatement costs and become a lien against the property. 11B - PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION NO. 2715, REGARDING RECOVERY OF FEES FOR THE ABATEMENT OF GARBAGE AND DEBRIS ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 315 & 317 E. 30TM STREET, #AB99-141 Janet Lunceford, Building & Development Specialist [[, reported that on March 22, 1999, an Order to Remove Refuse within 72 hours was posted on the property located at 317 E. 30% ordering that the carpet, padding, and other debris and garbage be removed from the property. The cer[ified mail receipt shows that the owner received the notice on March 26, 1999. On Apdl 2, 1999, Public Works removed a roll of carpet pad from the common driveway between 315 and 317 E. 30% The cost of the abatement, including administrative fees, totaled $384.06. Council must now decide if the fees are just and reasonable and how they should be collected. Theresa McDonald responded that she is a tenant at the subject address, and described the piece of carpet picked up by the City as a "very small" piece. Mr. McConnell questioned the cost of the abatement for a "small piece" of carpet. Ms. Lunceford responded that 1-hour is the minimum time charged, plus the truck and the dumping fee. She further added that only half of the administrative fees were added in this particular case. President Shepherd asked why only half of the administrative fees were charged. Ms. Lunceford responded they are going to request the other half of the administrative fees to be paid by the tenant who initially generated the carpet. #1124 M/S/C (Montgomery/Overson) Motion to pass Resolution No. 2715 and order that the fees incurred for the abatement of garbage and debris located at 315 and 317 E. 30~ Street be collected as reasonable abatement costs and become a lien against the property. Vote on motion: Motion carried. In favor: Opposed: OIsen, Montgomery, Arends, Farr, Overson, Shepherd McConnell 11C - PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION NO. 2716. FINAL PLAT FOR 5 LOT SUBDIVISION IN SINGLE-FAMILY ZONE; APPLICANT: GERARD VERGEER; LOCATION: NE CORNER OF SHERIDAN ROAD AND RICKEY ROAD, #AB99-142 Jon Holan, Planning Manager, reported that on January 20, 1998, the Planning Commission recommended approval of this project as a Preliminary Plat for single-family unit development. On February 25, 1998, the City Council approved the project as a Preliminary Plat for a single-family unit development with conditions. The Planning Commission on June 15, 1999 recommended approval of the final plat as presented in the Staff Report which is attached. There were no substantial issues discussed at the Planning Commission meeting. The applicant has satisfied all conditions of the preliminary plat and all applicable requirement of RCW 58.17. TAPES #1632 & #1633 '- City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 21, 1999 Page 8 of 8 President Shepherd announced this was a Quasi-Judicial issue, and asked if any Council Membec,.;:~believed:their participation would conflict with the "Appearance of Fairness Doctrine", and if they should be excused? Mr. Fart stated that he had previous contact with Mr. Vergeer when he sold a home to him in the past. Mr. Mont.qomery stated he discussed this issue briefly with a constituent. President Shepherd then asked members of the public if they believed any Council members should excuse themselves due to a conflict with the ''Appearance of Faimess Doctrine". All Council members remained seated. There were no comments from the pubfic. #1360 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Farr) Motion to approve the Final Map for "Hand's Corner" Subdivision pursuant to Resolution No. 2716. With no further business meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M. PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President City of Bremerton P J/MS/Is C: Normal Distribution File AGENDA BiLL BP~E.~RTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF I~EETING -- JULY 28, 1999 FOR AG---~DA OF: AUGUST 18, 1999 ORiGiNATING DEPT: C i TY COUNC I L ORIGINATOR: MIKE SHEPHERD. PRESIDENT DATE SL-BM!TT~ED: AUGUST 13, 1999 (co~en'a cn kack 3. ~: ENDORSEI~KENT MAYOR iN-FORlW_ATION__ kPPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SJ-BMiTTAL: 4. S%iML-~__ARY STA~NT .~_ND REOLTTREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: RESPON~=s~ OFFiCiAL: ENFORCE}~NT OFFICIAL: EXP!A~T!ON DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABHD COUNCIL DiRECTiVE: !0. NOTICE OF ACTION .... RO~D DISAPPROVED DATE: !i. AGENDA BiLL NO: ND D TAPES #1634, #1635, & #163~ UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES July 28, 1999 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4th Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, July 28, 1999, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President Mike Shepherd presiding. Council members present were Jim Reed, Carlos Montgomery, Carol Arends, Lon Overson, John Law, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Council member David Farr was absent. Also present were City Attorney Glenna Malanca, Deputy Clerk Paula Johnston, and Legislative Assistant Lori Smith. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Shepherd and invocation given by Reverend William Wambsganss of West Side Baptist Church. President Shepherd made the following announcements: (1) City Council held a Study Session prior to the meeting to discuss general Council business, followed by a 15-minute Executive Session to discuss "Litigation", in the Council Conference Room; (2) (3) City Council will hold a 15-minute Executive Session immediately following the Council meeting to again discuss "Litigation", in the Council Conference Room; and City Council will hold their Monthly Study Session in place of a regular business meeting next Wednesday, August 4, 1999, beginning at 5:30 P.M., in the Council Chambers. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting - July 7, 1999 B. Change Order No. 1 for SR 304 Transportation Project, Burwell Street Improvements C. Change Order No. 2 for SR 304 Transportation Project, Asbestos Removal No. 3 Contract #AB99-143 #AB99-144 #AB99-145 #0025 M/SIC (McConnell/Montgomery) Motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Vote on Motion: Motion carried. I n favor: Abstained: OIsen, McConnell, Law, Arends, Montgomery, Reed, Shepherd Overson CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090 have been recorded on a listing that had been made available to the Council. I( TAPES #1634, #1635 & #1636 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 28, 1999 Page 2 of 8 #0040 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Arends) On July 28, 1999, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 232806 through 233041, and EFT 5530 in the amount of $526,242.87; and Retiree Payroll for the period ending July 31, 1999 in the amount of $120,877.32. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Montqomery invited citizens to attend the next District 6-7-8 meeting scheduled Thursday, August 19, 1999, 6:30 P.M., at the Bremerton Administration Building located at 134 N. Marion Avenue to discuss "Future Park Projects" with Cris Gears, the new Parks & Recreation Director. Mrs. Arends assured that treats would be available for attendees of the upcoming Distdct 6- 7-8 meeting! She also provided a brief report on a recent tour of Bremerton Naval Station with her fellow Council members, which she found very interesting and impressive. Mr. Overson stated the next District 4 meeting planned to be held in August would possibly include discussions on Streets, the ferry system, Parks, or Downtown Development. Mr. Law announced the next District 3 meeting would be held on September 21. He also commented that TCI is in the middle of a very large change to replace cable, etc. However, some people are not receiving service, and not getting appropriate response after phone calls to the TCI Cable offices. He encouraged citizens to report any loss of service to the Cable Company, and asked that the appropriate amount of charges be deducted. He further added that other cities are filing suits to allow other cable vendors to supply service. Mr. McConnell announced that District 2 is aiso planning a meeting to be held either the last week of August or the first week of September, as soon as a location is determined. He complimented the Street Department for their recent work installing rounded sidewalks at the corner of Sheridan & Cherry. Lastly, he announced a "Watermelon & Treasure Hunt" event sponsored by the Parks Department to be held August 1, 1999 at 1:00 P.M. at N.A.D. Park. Mr. Olsen added further comments regarding TCI Cable service, and stated that after the switch to fiber optics, he lost some channels. He suggested the company send out notices to identify the new locations of the channels. He did add his compliments to them, however, at how quick they are trying to accomplish the upgrades. He also commented on the recent ruling to slow down the Chinook foot ferry, and questioned why the Sun could not report the names of the four witnesses who testified in support of slowing down the ferry. President Shepherd reported on the recent District 5 "picnic/meeting" held last week on the steps of Memorial Lutheran Church. He also reported on a very successful Bible Vacation School held at the church last week, and was amazed at the number of young families who have moved into Bremerton. A meeting is being planned to celebrate the grand re-opening of Evergreen Park, possibly on September 11, 1999, and he asked anyone who might have pictures showing the history of the park, to provide them for a planned display. He briefly provided a report on a "fish raising" activity to increase the salmon population.. TAPES #1634, #1635 & #1636 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 28, 1999 Page 3 of 8 MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Horton announced several upcoming events in the community, and provided ah update on the next course of action regarding the slowing of the Chinook Foot Ferry. A Proclamation was read proclaiming that on August 2, 3, & 4, 1999 the City of Bremerton reaffirms its alliance with its Sister City, Kure, Japan, on the 30"~ Anniversary and agree to continue its support of the program in every way possible. LEGISLATIVE REPORT A response was provided by the legal department reporting Mr. Paul Drnjevic submitted a Request for Public Records on July 21, 1999, however, he did not request specific, identified records. The request actually comprised of a series of letters containing questions. Although the City Council believes that every issue has been addressed, they are reviewing the series of 5 letters sent over a 6-month period to ensure nothing has been left out. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Louis Mentor and Susan Brown offered their comments on the recent ruling on the slowing of the Chinook Foot Ferry. Tom McDonald reported on the upcoming SCI Escape School program to teach parents and children how to avoid abductions. Carol Atkinson reported on the next "Concert on the Boardwalk" this Friday night. She urged anyone interested in purchasing a brick or granite, to turn in the request right away. Gordy Byrd reported on his plans for a walkathon, and invited the Council to participate. John Becker was concerned that items placed on the Consent Agenda do not allow for public comment. Paul Drnievic commented on the response received from the City regarding his inquiries. Mark Bensik was disappointed that the City's web page has not been updated recently. President Shepherd responded that a contractor has recently been hired by the City to update and maintain the City's web page. 9A- HABITAT FOR HUMANITY EASEMENTS, #AB99-146 Gene Sampley, Director of Public Works & Utilities, showed a visual to illustrate the location, and reported that the Habitat for Humanity has purchased two parcels of land owned by the City near the Wastewater Treatment Plant. They intend to construct homes on the parcels. After purchase of the properties, it was discovered that there was no hookup for sewer. The easements that are before Council are through other pieces of property owned by the City. The properties purchased by Habitat for Humanity are identified on each drawing by an "X" across each parcel. There is an advantage for the City in granting these easements to Habit for Humanity at no cost. TAPES #1634, #1635 & #1-636 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 28, 1999 Page 4 of 8 John Becker questioned if these parcels were near the property purchased by the City to avoid further lawsuits.due to the wastewater treatment plant; was there any costs to add these easements; and questioned when the sale of these properties occurred. Mr. Sample¥ responded that the City purchased the properties, which are approved for residential development. He clarified the only properties designated to not be constructed as residential were north of the treatment plant. The developers, not the City, will pay for the costs for development of the properties, and further stated the properties were surplussed by the Council approximately two years ago, and have been actively marketed during that time. There will be no additional cost to the City for the easements, and he clarified the properties are all on septic systems. #1840 M/SIC (Montgomery/Overson) Motion to approve the easements as written and authorize the Mayor to sign. Vote on Motion: In Favor: Abstain: Motion carried. Overson, Arends, Montgomery, Reed, Olsen McConnell, Shepherd Law 9B - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ANDERSON COVE CSO PUMP STATION CW-2 MODIFICATIONS WITH CASNE ENGINEERING, INC, #AB99-147 Gene Sample¥, Director of Public Works & Utilities, reported that the Facility Plan for CSO reduction in the Anderson Cove Basin recommends modifying wastewater pump station CW- 2 to convey the peak stormwater flow. Casne Engineering, Inc. is identified as having a demonstrated ability in electrical engineering, and was selected from the professional services roster to perform the electrical design of the pump station modifications. The action before the City Council is approval of a contract for Professional Services with Casne Engineering, Inc. #1965 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Olsen) Motion to approve contract for $16, 600 with Casne Engineering, Inc., for Professional Services, and authorize the Mayor to execute the same. 9C - FLUORIDATION EQUIPMENT DISPOSITION, #AB99-148 Gene Sample¥, Director of Public Works & Utilities, stated the recommendation before the City Council is that they approve the Mayor's plan for the disposition of fluoridation equipment as follows: · Surplus and sell the fluoride analyzer · Leave the chemical piping, injection yard piping and storage tank in place, and · Surplus and remove items 7 through 13 to either sell or maintain as watedwastewater utility inventory as shown in exhibit (2). Mr. Sampley stated that three foreseen uses were provided to Council in response to a request for additional information at the July 12, 1999 Monthly Study Session, and discussed three additional alternatives. He did not see any benefit to move and destroy the materials. TAPES #1634, #1635 & #16:36 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 28, 1999 Page 5 of 8 John Becker asked the cost for the City to provide the labor to takeout the equipment and sell it? Ruth Natividad did not understand what the "future regulations" were; and Paul Drnjevic questioned why it took four months for this issue to be addressed. Mr. Sampley responded that a number of options were explored. He placed the value of the tank at approximately $15,000, but stated there were several obstacles to removing it intact. He discussed the "knock out wall", however estimated a cost of $10,000 to remove the wall, and then replace it. He stated a reasonable estimate of 60% was used for salvage costs. He also explained that there are still costs involved in using City staff for labor, which must be accounted for. He further discussed future Water Quality regulations, which have had a history of "increasing" rather than "decreasing". Mr. Reed asked other uses of the tank if left in place, and would it deteriorate. Mr. Sampley stated no, as long as it was not exposed to sunlight. Mayor Horton explained the issue of fluoridation was brought to the City and the Council by a group of citizens representing members of the community. After extensive time, research, and input from numerous professionals in the field of dentistry, a policy decision was made by the Council to fluoridate the City's water system. The administration was then directed to move forward with implementation. Once the fluoride issue went to a vote of the people, it was the understanding of the administration that the construction project would continue to move forward so as to not incur additional costs, but the actual implementation of the fluoride would not occur until after the election. When the vote of the people came back saying "no" to fluoride, the issue then became "what to do with the equipment", which Council decides. Mr. McConnell asked for clarification on Alternative 2; and asked if there is anyone interested in purchasing the equipment if it was removed entirely. Mr. Sampley clarified that Alternative 2 is saying that the higher priced equipment that can be removed could be disconnected from fittings that would remain in place; and further stated that there are a number of entities that might be interested in the equipment, but only at a 60% return. Mr. Montgomery, for the benefit of the public, asked for reassurance that the water could not be fluoridated without the fluoride analyzer. Mr. Sampley assured him it could not. Mr. Law personally viewed the inside of the building, and questioned if Mr. Dmjevic and John Becker had also viewed it. Mr. Drnjevic stated that he and Mr. Becker had. Mrs. Arends and Mr. Olsen offered their comments to support the Administration's decision. President Shepherd stated the tumultuous period is over, and clarified that the issue tonight is a business decision to make the most effective recovery of costs for the City. #0596 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/McConnell) Motion to surplus and sell the fluoride analyzer, and prohibit any fluoride analyzer be purchased without a vote of the citizens of Bremerton, and items 2 -13 remain in place until such time that they are needed. TAPES #1634, #1635 & #1636 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 28, 1999 Page 6 of 8 Vote.on motion: In favor: · ' Opposed: Motion failed. Arends, Montgomery, Olsen, Reed, McConnell, Law, Overson, Shepherd M (Reed) Motion to adopt "Alternative 2", but remove items 1 and 5 through 13. Motion died for lack of a second. #0698 M/S/C/U (Law/Arends) Motion to approve Mayor Horton's proposal for disposition of fluoridation equipment, and prohibit the purchase a fluoride analyzer without pdor approval by City Council. Vote on motion: Motion carried. In favor: Opposed: Olsen, McConnell, Law, Overson, Arends, Reed, Shepherd Montgomery 10A - ORDINANCE NO. 2662 (SECOND READING), AUTHORIZING THE ISSUE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS TO REFINANCE THE OLYMPIC COURSE AT GOLD MOUNTAIN GOLF COMPLEX, AND TO ACCEPT THE PURCHASE OFFER FROM SEAFIRST BANK, #AB99-139 Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, reiterated the City currently has outstanding $4,605,000 of Limited-Tax General Obligation Bonds which were issued to provide funds for the construction of the Olympic Course at Gold Mountain. These bonds mature through the year 2007. The proposed ordinance will refinance the current bond issue with a new one, which will be structured to mature through the year 2018. The refinancing will provide a lower annual debt service obligation over a longer time period. This in turn will provide the golf course operation with greater financial flexibility both in current operations and in future capital improvements to the courses. The total net-present-value cost of the original issue and the refunding issue are virtually the same. Mr. Hanna provided the Purchase Offer From Bank of America and the final copy of Ordinance No. 4662 to the City Council members. John Becker offered his opinion that this item be "tabled" until it can be figured out why the golf course is not making enough money, possibly increasing or decreasing green fees. Paul Dmievic concurred, and further suggested additional advertising. Mr. McConnell asked what were the current payments on the existing bond, and why was a shorter term looked at. Mr. Hanna assured the Council that pricing of green fees has been looked at, and stated that decreased fees are offered during off-season. He stated the shorter term provided greater financial latitude, and has a call provision at year ten, allowing greater flexibility. Mayor Horton clarified that if the bond market would have been different, they would have purchased 20-year bonds, and this issue would not have been before Council tonight. #1568 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/McConnell) Motion to pass Ordinance No. 2662, authorizing the refunding bond issue on second reading and to accept the purchase offer of Seafirst Bank. TAPES #1634, #1635 & #1636 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 28, 1999 Page 7 of 8 Vote on Motion: Motion carried. In Favor: Opposed: Montgomery, Reed, McConnell, Law, Overson, Arends Olsen, Shepherd 1lA - PUBLIC HEARING AND APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRETATION OF A SIDE YARD SETBACK AT 2111 MADRONA POINT DRIVE (PL99-0037), #A..B. 99-149 Jon Holan, Planning Manager, reported the appellant is appealing the issuance of a Zoning Ordinance Interpretation of BMC 21.02.070, the definition of appurtenance, decks and porch as well as BMC 21.02.170, and 180 that appellant states allow intrusions up to three feet from the property line. The appellant states that the deck/porch should be allowed by existing setback rules in effect and seeks Council review. Pursuant to Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) Section 21.02.845 (d), this Type ;[]; decision can be appealed to the City Council. A sedes of questions and options, with an analysis on each, were supplied to the City Council. President Shepherd announced this was a Quasi-Judicial issue, and asked if any Council Member believed their participation would conflict with the "Appearance of Fairness Doctrine", and if they should be excused? Mr. Overson and Mr. Olsen both stepped down. Mr. Law stated he received phone calls on this issue, and although he requested the conversation to stop, he volunteered to step down if/t was requested. President Shepherd then asked members of the public /f they believed any Council members should excuse themselves due to a conflict w/th the "Appearance of Fairness Doctrine". Paul Scheyer suggested Mr. Law step down, and Mr. Law complied. All other Council members remained seated (Shepherd, Arends, Montgomery, Reed, and McConnell). Paul Scheyer asked for the "rules" of the hearing to be clarified. He then proceeded to provide testimony (original documents were submitted, and are now part of the official record), which contained information on 1) his views on staff interpretation of accessory structures; 2) references to B.M.C. 21.02.210(b) and B.M.C. 21.2.170; 3) his views on staff interpretation of rules concerning "attachments"; 4) B.M.C. 21.02.030; 5) questioning authority of Planning Director in this determination; and 6) his opinion that staff is "bypassing legislative process. TAPE #1636 Linda Hahn was opposed in any change to the Planning Department's decision, and referred to B.M.C. 21.02.090. She stressed that if Mr. Scheyer is allowed to construct this structure within 3 feet of her property, it will place the edge of his deck within 6 feet from her living room, and will invade her privacy. Mr. Montqomery referred to page 38 of the packet, and asked Mr. Holan if there were any obstructions to the view corridor, and asked for clarification of the definition of view corridor. He then referred to the memo from the City Attorney, and verified that an accessory dwelling is different from an accessory structure (detached). TAPES #1634, #1635 & #1636 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 28, 1999 Page 8 of 8 Mr. McConnell stated that the Council must apply all codes and laws of C'urrent Ordinances. Mr. Shepherd asked how far the porch is from the property line? Mr. Scheyer stated it was only one corner, which was estimated to be about 10 feet from the property line. #1400 M/S/C/U (Reed/Montgomery) Motion to affirm Staff's interpretation of the code that an attached deck/porch is not considered an accessory structure, but an addition to the pdmary structure. Vote on Motion: In favor: Opposed: Arends, McConnell, Reed, Montgomery Shepherd With no further business meeting adjourned at 9:32 P.M. PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President City of Bremerton P J/MS/Is C: Normal Distribution File AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Resolution No. CONVERTING A CITY OWNED TAX TITLE STRIP 12qTO RIGHT-OF-WAY AT WERNER ROAD AND UNION AVENUE. FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: August 18, 1999 PW&U En~omeerm~ Div. Randy Win. Ci~' August 5,1999/ 2. CLEARANCES: (conmlent on Director, Public Works/Utilities A. Map of location of subject property. Ci~ A~omey Ciw Clerk Co~cil Budget & France Co~i~e~~~~ ~eratio~ Co~Ree E~ORS~ ~' ~ ~O~ON ~PRO~D BY CO,Cra P~SmE~ FOR S~MI~: 4. su v Om Sx Foa cO--cra ac os: When the property located at the southeast comer of Wemer Road and Union Avenue was sold bv the Citw in 1994, a portion of the property was retained by the City for street purposes. With the impending improvements on Wemer Road, this property should be converted to street right-of-way. Engineering staff recommends adoption of the proposed resolution designating the Ci~ owned property (a tax title strip) as City. street right-of-way. S. RECOMMENDATION: Ciw Council adopt the proposed Resolution designating the City property located at the comer of Werner Road and Union Avenue as part of the right-of-~vay of the City of Bremerton street system. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: Director Public Works and Utilities Director Public Works and Utiliv. es PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED 11. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Development of road not in the City right-of-way. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: None RESEARCH SOURCES Engmeering records 99244 Filed for Record at Request of: When Recorded Return to: Name: City Clerk Address: 239 Fourth Street Bremcrton, WA 98337 Document Title: Project Name: Developer Name: Location: Tax Parcel # Abbreviated Legal Description: Resolution Transfer city owned property to the right-of-way for City street system City of Bremerton Werner Road aud Union Avenue 212401-1-120-2005 Portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Sect/on 21, Township 24 N, Range 1 E; W.M., situate in Kitsap County, Washington. RESOLUTION NO. ~'7 ~- D WHEREAS, the City. of Bremerton owns property at the southeast corner of Werner Road and Union Avenue, and WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton Department of Public Works and Utilities will be widening and improving Werner Road and Union Avenue for safer motor vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle usage, and WHEREAS, in order to make these improvements, additional property, for right of wa5; is needed. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL, that the following described City of Bremerton property be desig-nated as part of the right-of-way of the City of Bremerton road system: That portion of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 21, Township 24 North, Range 1 East, W.M., situate in Kitsap County, Washington, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 21; thence N89° 47'21"E along the centerline of Werner Road, a distance of 309.48 feet; thence S0°34'22"W 40 feet to the True Point of Beginning; Thence S89°47'21"W 74.66 feet to the beginning of an arc of a curve; thence along the arc of a curve to the left a distance of 54.62 feet, said arc having a radius of 30 feet, a central angle of 104o19'33'' to a point 40 feet easterly of the centerline of Union Avenue, measured at right angles; thence southerly along a line parallel to and 40 feet east of the centerline of Union Avenue to a point 280 feet south of the centerline of Wemer Road measured at right angles; thence S89°47'21"W to the easterly right-of- way of Union Avenue; thence northerly along said easterly right-of-way to an intersection with the southerly right-of-way of Wemer Road; thence easterly to the True Point of Beginning. Also known as Kitsap County Tax Assessor Parcel Number 212401-1-120-2005. 1999. PASSED by City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President APPROVEDthis day of ., 1999. LYNN HORTON, Mayor ATTEST: tC~_THLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk Approved as to form: GLENNA MALANCA, City Attorney AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Resolution: Adopting Solid Waste Management Plan 11/6/98 as revised FOR AGENDA OF: August_~,~ __~usa ORIGINATING DPT. Adminlstrauive OIGINATOR: Kathleen McCluskev DATE SUBMITTED: August i !999 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back if necessary! Attorney ~/-. -~.~-/- 3. EXHIBITS: Resolution and a%tachmenms MAYOR ~-- ~~N__ COUNCIL PRE,SIDENT ~__~F_~_j ~ 4. SUP94ARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The Washington Solid Waste Managemenn Recycling and Recovery Act requires each ccun5'; wizhin %he State in association with m= t..~ cities within it 5o plan an inBegra~ed sc!il wasze management system that emphasizes 'wa~ reduction and recvc!ing.~ The Act re~alres the --r_an 5o specify the managemen~ actions %hau will be taken over a six year and 20 year Der/cd. Kitsap County Public Works/Solid Waste Division is %he lead planning agency for scllh wasue management in Kitsap County. The curren5 Plan was adopted in 1990 and mt. ended in 1992. The 11/6/98 revision was rou~ed to council==__~=_--~-~ +~s year and -~ .... ~ . .... _ ~-~-_~_ DresenLatLu~s were i~--~L by county staff. [. RECO~ldENDATION: Motion nc annrove Resc!uzi #~7~3 adou%inc the ~l%sau Ccunzv ~m ..... = .... e Sslafi Wasze Managemen~ u~an,v=~4o~ ~'-~' =~ 6, 19 revised _ _.__ -- =' - ......... ~.~ .... ~- 98, as Der -~ ~_LL~iiZR sidle i'eearBmen5 of Ecology in its ureiirlnarv approval. RESPONSIBLE OFF!C/A~: A~r~n St'is. ENFORCEMENT OFFiCiAL: Ki%saz Count-- EXPiRATiON DATE: N/A REVIEW DATE: N/A PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: AP PROVE D NOTICE OF ACTION DISAPPROVED DATE: 1!. AGENDA BILL NO: CLEARANCE COMMENTS (cont.): 4. S~Y STATEMENT (cont. 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: We delegated planning responsibility to the county. DOE requires an updated plan. -~ ...... r ~ EQUi_~-U~NT OR OTHER RESOURCES IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, ~--~.~==_Es, None - RESEARCH SOURCES: RESOLUTION NO. ~ '7,,.q. ~ WHEREAS the Washington Solid Waste Management Recycling and Recovery Act (RCW 70.95) requires each county within the state, in association with the cities and towns located within it, to prepare a 20-year comprehensive solid waste management plan (CSWMP) and to update the CSWMP at least every 5 years. The Washington State Department of Ecolo~' has issued Solid Waste Planning Guidelines that interpret and expand upon the planning requirements of the Act; and WHEREAS this CSWMP establishes a comprehensive system of pro,ams and facilities to reduce waste generation, recycle, direct valuable resources away from the landfill, maintain and improve levels of service in the solid waste system which includes drop-box facilities, landfill and Moderate Risk Waste Facility, and continues to mitigate the impact of closed landfills; and WHEREAS the CSWMP speaks to the needs of all citizens in Kitsap County in regards to solid waste management proposes action to satisfy those needs; and WHEREAS the Kitsap County Solid Waste Advisory Committee participated in each phase of the Plan Development and reviewed the dratSs of the CSWMP; and WHEREAS the CSWMP identifies costs of carrying out the responsibilities and offers an implementation and financial plan: and WHEREAS all the incorporated cities in Kfitsap Count,,' have adopted, bv resoiution. :he C SYVMP; and WHEREAS, Kitsap County finds that it is in the interest of public health, safety and welfare to adopt the CSWMP pursuant to RCW 70.95.080; and WHEREAS, the Kitsap County Board of Commissioners adopted the Kitsap Count',, Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan; and WHEREAS. the City of Bremerton participated in the preparation of the CS%%{P pursuant to RCW 70.95.089, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLYTD that the City of Bremerton hereby adopts the IGtsap County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, version: November 6, 1998, as revised per the Washington State Department of Ecology in its preliminary approval. APPROVED this day of .. ,1999. MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President Kitsap County Department of Public Works 614 Division Screet (MS-_ ,), Pon; Orchard, WA 98366-4686 R. Vv: Casteel, P.E., Director July 15, 1999 Lynn Horton, Mayor City of Bremerton 239 4th Street Bremerton, WA 98337 jUL i9 MAYOR'S OFFICE Dear Mayor Horton: This letter is a formal request that the CiW of Bremerton adopt the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (CSWMP) prepared by Kit~sap County Public Works. The Kitsap County Board of Commissioners have also been asked to adopt the CSWMP. The draft CSWMP was submitted to the Department of Ecology and the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) in February 1999. Presentations on the CSWMP were made to the Board of County Commissioners and to each City throughout 1999. We have now received comments from Ecology and the WUTC and have prepared a responsiveness summary, which is enclosed. The CSWMP draft (version: November 6, 1998) which was routed to your city earlier this year will be revised to incorporate the comments from Ecology and the WUTC. This draft was previously revised to incorporate comments from the public, from each city's representative on the Solid Waste Advisory. Commit'tee, the tribes, the U.S. Navy, and the solid waste industry, prior to submission to Ecology. We worked extensively with Ecology during the plan development and are pleased that the comments we received from them will be easy to incorporate and will not constitute major changes to the content of any of the chapters. A copy of the comments and our changes is enclosed and is entitled Responsiveness Summarx'. We are asking you to adopt the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan by resolution. A sample resolution is enclosed. When ~ve have received resolutions from the participating jurisdictions, we will reprint a limited number of plans and submit them to Ecology for final approval. Ecology can take up to 45 days to review' the plan. Upon receipt of final approval, we will reprint the plan and will distribute it to all participants, advisory council members and the usual public repositories. We are asking that you process the resolution as soon as possible, preferably by the end of August. Resolutions from each participating jurisdiction are required before Ecology will give final approval. We would like to resubmit the plan to Ecology by the first week of September so that they can begin their final review. Please feel free to call Gretchen Olsen at 337-4626 or Linda Worden at 337-5783 with any questions. Director, Kitsap County Department of Public Works enclosures The Open Line 360-337-5777 or 800-825-4940 · FAX 360-337-4867 --printed on re~. cled paper-- EXECUTI-v-E SUMMA.RY COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE ~L-kNAGEMENT PL.~N' T'nis Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (Plan) responds to the needs and ideas presented by gove:-m-nent officials, the Solid Waste Advisory Corem/tree (SWAC), solid waste indusu-y, and public. It reflects a parmership approach to solid waste management in Kitsap County.. This Plan continues to bring Kksap Court .w and its cities, tribes, the Navy, and citizens together to meet the needs of solid waste management in Kitsap County.. Purpose of this Plan This Plan establishes a comprehensive system of pro,ams and facilities to reduce waste generation, recycle, direct valuable resources away from the landfill, maintain and improve levels of sea'/ce in ~e solid waste system which includes drop-box facilities, landfill and Moderate Risk Waste Facility, and continues to mitigate the/mpact of closed landfills. This Plan is not the final solution, but a picture of ex/sting conditions and proposed actions based on current le~slation, the available facts, and the beliefs and attitudes of the agencies and people involved in this process. This Plar~ was prepared in accordanc: with the Washin~on Solid Waste Management Recycling and Recovery Act and Washington State Ecoio~"s Guidelines. It updates all components of the solid ~ as~ management system and incomorates the Moderate Risk Wasze Mana_~ement Plan resumed under RCx,V 70.105, Section 220. Authorities, Roles and Responsibilities The roles and rest~onsibiiiv~es, of _~-overv-ment to :rovide services, m.c~ ' et: c,~';-,"~_-- to chan~e *oenawor.' ' must continue to evolve. This Plan rezornmends pro,ams, camtal pr~ezts, and 5zndm_~ sources and ass~.s res¢ons~bili>' fo .... omp,,~-,_,= pro,am obieztives. ~ne Iccai juMsdictions cu~enrlv ~ ~ '~-r;~,' ' o...o~ ........ : r~sTonsibie for sohd waste .... Z .... include seven general-pu~ose municlnaiities (Count; government, four cities, and u:,'o kdian ~%es) and nvo spez~al-pu~ose a~s~cts ~re.me.~on K~,~ CounE~' Health Die,ct and P~=.~ Sound A2 Kitsa7 Coun¢' Public Works, Solid Waste Division has prkncipat iong.-tenm solid waste plamnm___, and syste~ faciiiv.,' development responsfciii .fy within the counD'. The Breme:-ron-Kitsap County Heakh DisMc: is the ?rimar-y re~uiato~: auSxofiEv for solid waste management in Kitsa~ Cotmb' and through its po.writ and approval process, regulates ~e consu-uction and operation of att solid waste faciiifies £n Kiuap Count-3.'. In addit/on to local authorities, Ecolo~' and the Washin~on Utilities and Transportation Commission perform planning, financial assistance, and regulatoD' functions. Through Ecolog'y, the state controls compliance with the Washin~on Solid Waste Management Recycling and Recovery Act CRCW 70.95) through its review and approval of solid waste management plans and facility permits. Kitsap County 1 Executive Summary -January, 19, 1999 EXECSUM.KVA Inventory. of Solid Waste Facilities , Name I Owner i Operator , Location Disvosal Olympic View Sanitary Landfill (OVSL) OVSL OVSL CK - SK Solid Waste Collectkpn Olalla Drop-Box KC OVSL SK Hansvitle Drop-Box KC KC NK Silverdale Drop-Box KC OVSL CK Bainbridge Island Drop-Box KC Bainbridge Disposal (BD) BI Residential Recvclable~ Collection Olalla Drop-Box KC OVSL SK Hansville Drop-Box KC KC NK Silverdale Drop:Box KC OVSL CK Bainbridge Island. Drop-Box KC BD BI Poulsbo.Drop-Box Poulsbo BD Nq~i Bangor Recycling Faciliry US Navy. US Navy. CK - N-K RecvctabIe Materiais..Processing Faciii~: Peninsula Recycling I Peninsula Peninsula CK - ' Household Hazardous Wasr. e Kirsap CounE: Moderate Risk Wast.= Facility iRC KC CK-SK Closed Landfii!s Oialla KC Private operator SK Hansville ' KC Private operator NK Bainbridge KC Private operator BI Norse!and I Pon of Private operator CK - Si( } Brem Sourc:: Kitsap Count7 Soiid Waste Division CK - Cenu-'al K. itaap SK - South Kinsap N% - Nord~. Kiuap BI - B~qbridge Island Over,'iow of Solid Waste Management Stratos' - blajor Themes The recommended practices embody the following six integrated strategies: 2. 3. 4. 5. Improve the quality of solid waste system monitoring and measurement data Expand the list of prioritized recyclable materials Expand the recovery, of construction, demolition, and landclearing mater/als Develop a system to process organics Develop a waste-export disposal system that ensure competitive pricing and that enhances the solid waste system in Kitsap Count' Secure reliable and long-term funding for major solid waste management activities Kitsap County 2 January 19, 1999 Executive Summary EXECSUM.RVA Recommended Implementation Actions Based on the authority and responsibilities of the CounDr, specific actions wiI1 be required to impiement the recommendations contained in this Plan. The following list does not include all recommendations listed in each chapter, but is a summary of key recommendations. Chapter 1: Waste Stream To improve the reliability of waste quantity and composition information: · Determine the composition of disposed and recycled wastes in Kitsap County.. · Coordinate with the Bremerton Kitsap County. Health District and disposal facilities to improve the tracking of imported problem wastes, particularly contaminated soils. · Ensure uniform reporting of municipal solid waste and recycling data for the single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, and drop-offwaste streams. · Coordinate with Ecology and Navy facilities to ensure commercial and residential recycling from Navy activities is counted in the Ecology survey and Kitsap CounW's recycling rate. Chapter 2: Wast~ Reduction · Develop and implement waste reduction progam performance measurements to annually evaluate program effectiveness. · Implement a Home Waste Reduction Outreach campaign which includes various waste reduction initiatives consisting of general information about and techniques for waste reduction, promotion of used goods donation, sales and purchase; and how to remove names from commercial mailing lists. · Continue with the Home Composting pro.am with emphasis in rural areas where burning is an issue. · Invest in developing a new section for remodeling and light commercial construction with Build a Better Kitsap. · Implement an in-house waste reduction pro.am that involves all departments and Ccun? institutions. · Implement an in-house procurement pro.am that targets waste-reducing products. Chapter 3: Recycling · Review se, vice level boundaries by end of I998 and ever3.' five years thereafter. · : Extend yard waste and residential mixed paper collection to curbside and drop-off pro.m-ns. · Work with service providers and jurisdictions to ensure uniform and consistent repo~hng of data. · Conduct recycling composition studies for all residential and multi-family pro.ams. · Revise the Buy-Recycled Resolution (Kitsap Coun~ Ordinance I43-1990) to reflect chang_es in state and federal laws and guidelines. · Revise the current zoning ordinance to incorporate the building code changes related to recycling space and screening requirements. · Ensure that management alternatives for landfilling wood waste are in place prior to the bum ban that begins in the year 2001. · Explore possibilities ora regionalized approach to industrial recycling. · Increase industrial recycling through information targeted at generators and specific recyclable waste streams. Kitsap County 3 January 19, 1999 Executive Summary EXECSUM.RVA $0 Chapter 4: Composting Short Term · Develop a shor~ te,wn out-of County. yard waste transfer option. · Modif7 drop-box stations for transferring curbside collected yard debris. · Modify drop-box stations to allow yard debris collection. · Select a long-term organics processing approach Long Term · Determine composting feedstocks and develop memorandum of understanding with wastewater treatment plants and Conservation District and other generators to determine volumes available to compost. · Develop a conceptual design, cost estimate and identify, a suitable site for a composting facility, to process 10,000 to 20,000 tons of mixed feed~ocks. Chapter 5: Construction, Demolition, Landclearing Debris (CDL) · Up~ade the Build a Better Ydtsap program to include small remodeling and light commercial projects. · Develop and maintain a contractor's information packet. · Develop ahd distribute fact sheets about successful job-site recycling and waste reduction pro=m-ms. · Plan for and develop an RFP for a CDL waste management processing facilit-v. Chapter 6: Solid Waste Collection System · Form a solid xvasre collection district in accordance with RCW 36.58A ifa solid waste collection district is a necessary' precursor to possible formation of a solid waste disposal district. · Provide specialized collection services including "Spring Cleanups" of bulkw waste, such as yard waste, tires and burn ban-els. Chapter 7: Solid Waste Transfer System · Add commercial waste capabili .fy as a short-term solution at Bainbridge and Hansville drop-box stations with BKCHD approval. · Improve existing drop-box facilities to enhance traffic flow and queing capacit3.'. · Cons~TaCt a waste export transfer station near the indus~ial park and OVSL as a long-term dis~osaI alternative. Chapter 8: Solid Vv'aste Disposal System Waste expor~ to a regional disposal faciliD' is recommended for implementation. This option provides for adequate disposal capaciD' for Kitsap County. over the required 20-year planning period and involves the following: · Continue to use OVSL as an interim disposal facility until a 20-year disposal location can be secured. · Determine what mix of public and private-sector responsibilities are desired among the jurisdictions to site, construct, own, and operate the facility. · Establish some means of disposal management that would include ordinances and interlocal agreements to ensure all ~vaste not diverted from disposal by reuse or recycling is delivered to the waste export contractor. · Procure long-term waste disposal services. Kitsap County 4 January 19, 1999 Executive Summary. EXECSUM.RVA C loser Landfills · Norseland, Bainbr/dge, and Hansville sites · Olalla · Funding system for known sites needed. · Funding contingencies for future sites needed. Chapter 9: Specially Controlled Wastes · Incorporate the handling ofnontreatable contaminated soil, asbestos, and dredge spoils into the waste export contract should OVSL close. · Develop a pilot project, to chip small woody debris at t~vo of the drop box facilities. · Desi~ a pro?am for management, reuse and recycling of tires and implement a public education pro.m'am. Chapter 10: Moderate Risk Waste Management (MlqW) · Develop additional used motor oil facilities, as necessary., to meet increasing demand. · Expand household hazardous waste collection at the drop-box stations to include drycell batteries, antifreeze and other specific household hazardous waste types. · Examine feambd~ .ty ofass~snng residents, such as the elderly or disabled, who are unable to deliver their household hazardous waste to a collection facilit)'. · Develop an active materials exchange for reusable products at the Moderate Risk Waste Facility. · Develop a work plan with Bremerton Kitsap Court .t3/Health District to identify, planned activities, lead and support agencies, schedules, budgets, and performance and impact objectives. · Work wkh Mason Count-y.' elected officials and managers to reach a satisfactory a~eement on use of the Kirsap County Moderate Risk Facili~' by Mason CounD' res/dents, businesses, and institutions. · Explore possibilities of procuring re-refined oil for use by Kksap Count?' agencies and use as an example for cities, school districts, transit agencies, and local agencies and businesses. Chapter 11: Administration and Enforcement · Evaluate implementation ora disposal district or other means ro ensure continued revenue to Kitsap County Solid Waste Division and Bremexon Kitsap County Health Dis~icr. · Provide funding for increased staff as programs requirements expand, the solid waste cleanup program, and the educationaI pro,ams recommended in the CounE~"s Illegal Dumping Con~o! Plan (1995). : Chapter 12: Solid 'sVaste Systems Financing · Continue to structure the funding and financing of the solid waste system on a "user pa)-" basis. · Meet wihh each incorporated area within the counD~ to discuss the establishment of a Disposal District. · Establish a Disposal District if deemed necessary by all affected jurisdictions. Plan Review Process The CSWMP has been developed by Solid Waste Division staff, consulting firms, solid waste industry. representatives and solid waste advisory committee (SWAC) representatives. There is a representative fi-om each commissioner district, each ciD', the Suquamish tribe, the Navy, and two private solid waste companies serving on the SWAC. We also have active participation from the Health District and the Kitsap County 5 January. 19, 1999 Executive Summary. EXECSUM.RVA Department of Ecolo~' in the process. There is an extensive mailing list for the solid waste committee that includes interested citizens, newspapers, consulting firms, and past SWAC members. Al1 SWAC meetinzs_ are public meetinzs_ and notices are published. The a_oenda_ for each me~,m=~*' o has been sent to the mailing list. Copies of chapters have been available upon request throughout the process to SWAC participants and have been distributed at meetings or mailed. The CSWM~P dra~ has been commented on chapter by chapter by SWAC. Those comments have been incorporated and the draft was reviewed in its entirety, by the SWAC. Comments from that review have been incorporated. The November I998 draft is now being circulated to Ecologpj, the cities, the libraD' system and interested parties. This phase of the process is called the preliminary, review and is required by RCW 70.95.094. The draft has been officially sent to Ecology with a request for review. They have 120 days but may complete their review in less time. Concurrently, the plan is undergoing the non-project SEPA review and the public process required by Ecology in their "Guidelines for the Development of Local Solid Waste Management Plans and Plan Revisions." During the 120 days that Ecology is reviewing the draft, presentations are being concurrently scheduled with the Commissioners, cities, and public works committees. We are asking that any comments from interested parties be sent to us by March 15, approximately one month before Ecology's comments are due to us. After incorporation of these comments, the plan wili be submitted for adoption by the Commissioners, Cities, Tribes, and Nay-,'. SEPA Process 12/10/98 i2/11/98 12/30/98 SEPA pape,~vork to DCD Dete:-rnination of Ncnsig-nificance Comment period ends Concurrent Review Process ~ ~ 98 through 03/99 Final Adoption Process The long-th of this process wilt be dependent on when Ecolo~' comments are received. the extent of revision reauired by' Ecology, and the extent of revision rezuired by comments from other parties. A revision is expected to be prc, duced within 45 days of receipt of Ecoiogy comments. Regulations Directing Solid Waste Issues Washin~on Solid Waste Management Recycling and Recovery Act, RCW 70.95, requires each county. within the state, in association with the cities and towns located within it, to plan an inte~ated solid waste management system that emphasizes waste reduction and recycling. Management of solid waste ~vhich cannot be recycled or managed alternatively can be incinerated, landfilled, or a combination of the two. It requires the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan to specify the management actions that will be taken over a six-year (detailed) and 20-year (general) period. WAC 173-351, known as the Minimum Functional Standards (MI:S) for solid waste handling facilities, are regulations promulgated under the authority, of RCW 70.95. N[FS set minimum performance standards for Kitsap County 6 January. 19, 1999 Executive Summary. EXECSUM.RVA the proper handling of all solid waste generated from residential, commercial, agricultural, industrial, and other sources. Substitute House Bill 167I, known as the Waste Not Washin~on Act was approved by the State Legislature and the Governor in 1989 and amended statutes including RCW 70.95. The state's solid waste management priorities were revised making reducing waste the top priority., followed by recycling, incineration and tandfitling of separated wastes, and incineration and landfilling of mixed wastes. It established a 50 percent statewide recycling goal to be realized by 1995. RCW 70.95.092 requires that each local comprehensive solid waste management plan include service levels set forth in RCW 70.95.090. As a result, IZ-dtsap County. Ordinance No. 157-1993 establishes sera'ice levels for residential recyctables collection in unincorporated Kitsap Countw. The Hazardous Waste Management Act (RCW 70.105) requires local governments to address moderate risk waste management in their jurisdictions. Moderate risk waste is defined as hazardous wastes produced by households, and by businesses and institutions in small quantities. Guidelines and requirements for establishing a Moderate Risk Waste Management Plan is found in RCW 70.105.220. In 1991, the Used Oil Recycling Ac*.' (RCW 70.951) requires the need for collection and recycling of used motor oil produced by residential "do-it-yourselvers." Kit~ap Coun .fy 7 January 19, 1999 Executive Summary. EXECSUM.RVA ! m KITSAP COUNTY ' MRW FACILITY, ~' BOUNDARIES SHO~ ARE INEXACT, ~ ~ } ~ ~ , 0 1 2 ~ ~ 5 Sc=le in Miies SC8 ENGINEER8 o+~7oo~ ~~ s~Ns. CONR~ ~O S~OT ~ ~'~ KITS~ COUN~ MRW FACIUTY CONSUL~N¢ ~GIN[[~S, INC. ~ ~0~ ~N AND DROP-BOX STA~ONS X~01 &27 STATE OF WASHINGTON WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION 1300 $. Evergreen Park Dr. S.W., P.O. Box 47250 · Olympia, (360) 664-1160 · TTY (360) 586-8203 February 10, 1999 Ms. Gretchen Olsen Solid Waste Program Manager Kitsap County Department of Public Works 614 Division Street, MS-27 Port Orchard, Washington S8366-4699 RECEIV FEB I I b%Sgg l~ublic Wot/ti ~ . . RE: KitsaD County 1998 Draft Comprehensive Solid Waste Manacement Plan Dear Ms. Olsen: The WaShington Utilities and Transportation Commission (Commission) has completed its review of the preliminary draft Kitsap County Solid Waste Management Plan. Staff analysis finds that the plan should have a minimal zm~act on ~zid wast r=tes for regulated ratepayers. Enclosed is Commission staff's k. ack-uu memorandum ~ the Commission's February !0, 1999, Oven Public Mae=iht, and Commission s~=== comments. As the county finalizes this drafn of the solid waste plan, staff hopes this review proves helpful ~:--~- ' ' . z~=.,,~ you for conszder!n~ cur comments as you move forward in the plan approval and implementation process. Please direc= any questions abou~ this letter or the enclosures to ~ob Co!bo, Transportation Program Consultant. He can be reached at: (3gO) 664-1246. Sincerely, Caro!e J. Washburn Secretary cc: Peter Christiansen, Department cf Ecology, Northwest Rewional Office Enclosures STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Northwest Regt~. al Office, 3190 - 160th Ave $.E. · Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452 ° (425) 649-7000 May 11, 1999 Ms. Gretchen Olsen Kitsap County. Department of Public Works 614 Division Street (MS-27) Port Orchard, WA 983664686 Dear Ms. Olsen: RE: PRELIM/NARY REVIEW OF TI-~ KITSAP COUNTY COMPREI-IENSi-V'E SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN On December 29, 1998, Ecology received a partial submittal of the Kitsap County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (Version: November 6, 1998) and a request for prelimina~ review. The submittal was complete on January 22, 1999, when the countv forwarded the required cost assessment to Ecology and the WUTC. Per the statuto~' requirements of Chapter 70.95, and under the ~?DOE 90-J ] Guidelines for the Development of Local Solid Waste ]Vlanagement Plans and £lan Revisions O~'DOE 90-]] Guidelines), I have conducted a preliminaO' review- of the Plan. I would like to commend the efforts of the Count.,,', the SWAC and ail other involved parties in _~ettinz the Plan to this point. This planning effort has occurred in a period of very dynamic change in solid ~vaste in the County, and all involved parties have staved focused on producing a workable, usable document. We are confident this document will guide the County in making the tough decisions it will face in the near future in the solid waste arena. The attached comments are categorized in two wavs. The comments under the first heading must be addressed prior to Plan approval. The comments under the second heading, "General Comments", are not required to be addressed prior to Plan approval. However, Ecology feels that addressin~ these issues will help clarify the plan. EcoloD' has focused its comments on substantive issues a~d has nor addressed editing details in this review questions please ?11 mejp~t lteter D. ~nn~Uanseff ~ Solid Waste Plannei- I look forward to working with your staff.towards final approval of this plan. If you have any 425-649-7076. PDC:nat:bas Enclosure Responsiveness Summary In response to Department of Ecology letter dated May 11, 1999, regarding Preliminary Review of the Kitsap CounW Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (CSWMP): Items That Must Be Addressed Prior to Plan Approval: Interlocal A~eement: RCW 70.95.080 requires each participating jurisdiction to enter into an interlocal agreement with the county. Copies of all interlocal agreements must be provided to Ecology. Response: The County and its incorporated cities have agreed to participate in the planning process by resolution. Copies of the resolutions will be included in the final plan. Resolutions of Adoption: Kitsap'County and all the participating jurisdictions (with interlocal agreements) need to approve the updated comprehensive solid waste management plan pr/or to Ecology's approval of the final draft. Please include a statement assuring that the plan acceptance process outlined in the interlocal agreement has been fulfilled. Response: Resolutions will be included in the final plan. SEPA: The draft Plan does not include documentation of SEPA compliance (no SEPA checklist or threshold determination by the responsible official). SEPA requirements must be satisfied prior to Ecology approval of the Plan. Response: A SEPA Determination of Non-si?~ificance was ~anted on December 11, 1998. Documentation will be included in the final plan. The WUTC conducted a formal review of the Plan and forwarded their comments to Ecology and to the Count' in a letter dated Januars.' 13, 1999. The WUTC comments, assigned as an attachment to Ecolo_y s comments, must be consolidated into the Plan. Response: Those comments are addressed herein, see page 8. The Plan should include documentation of public involvement including documentation of SWAC involvement. Response: Documentation of public and SWAC involvement has been inserted into the Introduction under a new section, Planning Process, and reads as follows: July 14, 1999 3~ This CSWMP has been prepared by the Kitsap Coun~ Solid Waste Division, SCS En~neering and several subcontractors. The Solid Waste Advisow Committee (SWA C), which includes representatives from the county, the cities of Bremerton, Poulsbo, Port Orchard, and Bainbridge Island, the Suquamish tribe, the Port Gamble S'Klallam tribe, the US Navy, and the solid waste industry, have reviewed and commented on each section of the CSWMP draft. (21 membership list is included in Appendix A.) The SWA C met monthly beginning in May 1996 to discuss revising the CSWMP and moved to twice a month meetings in March 1998 through dune 1998 during plan development in order to keep to the schedule. Each SWAC meeting was publicized as a public meeting in the local newspaper. Verbal comments were noted during SWA C meetings. Written comments were received throughout the planning process. A preliminary agency draft, a SWAC review draft, and an agency' review draft were developed in succession. The agency, review draft has been presented to each ci~, to the Kitsap County Board of Commissioners and to a number of civic organizations. The agency draft was submitted to the Department of Ecology in early 1999 for preliminary review. Ecology's and Washington Utilities and Trade Commission's comments are addressed in the Responsiveness Summary (Appendix B) and routed to each participating jurisdiction with a request for adoption by interlocal agreement. General Comments: Ex_ol.o~: The Plan should discuss how minor changes will be made to the document and define a process to determine if a change to any component of the plan would require falling into a formal amendment. ~: Language was added to the Introduction under Planning Back~ound and reads as follows: The Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan's (CSWMP) purpose is to shape. monitor, evaluate, and improve the solid waste system serving Kitsap Coun&.'. Minor changes to the CSWMP and to the solid waste indust~, are expected to be continuous. Changes to the CSW~V[P will be formally incoJporared by written amendment when necessary. Minor changes in the CSWMP will be tracked and included with the next CSWMP update. A plan adjustment can be made bt' written communication and approval fi'om all participating jurisdictions. For example, a major change which would require an amendment would be a proposed facility that is not identified as a recommendation in the adopted CSWMP. The Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWA C) and all participatingjurisdictions would assist with a plan amendment if there was agreement that the proposed facility would support or enhance the goals of the CSWMP. Changes to the solid waste system costs which would significantly' impact rate-payers will be handled as a plan amendment or a plan adjustment. July 14, 1999 2 9 E_colfl~: The Plan should include an overview description of the planning process including identifying the participating jurisdictions, outlining the schedule and adoptiqn process, describing schedules for furore re,Sews and updates, etc. This section should also discuss the potential impact of other plans and their relation to the CSWMP, including GMA, City/County comprehensive land use, etc. Reagtm~: The overview of the planning process, schedules for future review, and potential impacts are covered in the previous answer to question 5 of Ecology's, "Items That Must Be Addressed Prior to Plan Approval." City names have been added to the Introduction under Jurisdictional Roles and Authorities, first paragraph. The section now reads: The Iocal jurisdictions currently or potentially responsible for solid waste management in Kitsap County include seven general-purpose municipalities (County government; the cities of Bainbridge Island, Bremerton, Port Orchard, and Poutsbo; and two Indian tribes) and two special-purpose districts (Bremerton Kitsap County Health District and Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agenq). Each of the municipalities must formally adopt this plan for it to be applicable within its jurisdiction. There has been a concerted effort to use consistent data throughout our planning efforts. The County's Comprehensive Plan required by the GMA was undergoing revisions at the same time the CSWMP was being developed Plan recommendations in the CSWMP are included in the solid waste section of the Capita! Facilities Plan for the Comprehensive Plan. There are a varieD' of Watershed Protection Plans that have been developed throughout the region. Solid Waste Division staff have participated in the watershed planning e~forts whenever invited Recommendations in the CSr~)[P have been inclusive of the watershed planning goals. EC.o. lox~: Kitsap County alloxvs certain residential customers to exempt themselves from participation in the curbside progam. It ~vould be helpful to include a ~eater analysis of the impacts of exemptions on the collection system. Resp_anae: The following para~aph was inserted after the last paragTaph into Chapter 3, under Section 3.3.2.1 Unincorporated Kitsap County. The exemptions for senior and low-income disabled citizens are modeled after the State's property tax exemption program. There has nor been a recent study conducted to analyze the impacts for either the exemption or voucher program. An analysis of the drop-box rates is planned. This will take the impact of the voucher program into account and will be helpful in the next rate review of the curbside recycling contract for the County program. It will be important to identify the costs of handling recyclables through curbside pick-up and drop-box collection as well as the administrative costs to process the exemptions and vouchers. July 14, 1999 Er, olt}g~: The Plan should provide a listing of all local Solid Waste Ordinances and Regulations in the County and cite who is responsible for the enforcement of them. ~: A table listing resolutionS and ordinances has been included in the Introduction under the Jurisdictional Roles and Authorities section and is as follows: Ordinance Number Description Who Responsible 93-03 Amending se~on 8.16.040 of ~e Pouts~o Muni~Dal Code to amend C[~ of Pouisbo garage pinup fees 93-0-1992 ~endmen~ to ~e ~ap Coun~ Zoning Ordinan~ Con.ming Regulation ~ap Coun~ of Solid Waste and Readable Materials S~mge 7-1990 Ordinan~ limiting ~e dis~l of out~f-~un~ ~ste ~KCBH 199~11 Bmme~on-~ap ~un~ Board of Heal~ Solid Waste Regulations BKCBH 157-1993 Ordinan~ es~blishing se~i~ level boundaries and minimum levels of Ki~ap Coun~ se~i~ for residential m~ding ~lle~on in unin~omted KiBap Coun~ 157-A-1997 ~ending Se~on 4.A.5.a. of 157-1993 and ~Bap Coun~ Code Semion Ki~ap Coun~ 9.48.040(1)(E)(I) to mOu~ ~side re.ding ~n~iner size and dsk of inju~ to handlers 4219 Es~blishing solid waste management poti¢/for ~e Ci~ of Bremenon C[~ of Bremenon 233-1 ggg Ordinance to decrease solid waste in KiBa~ Coun~ government operations K]ts~p Coun~ aha establish re~din~ as the ~mfe~ed solic waste management s~stem Ecal_o~: It would be helpful to include the corresponding FTE's with the financial costs of implementation as outlined in chapter 1.3. R.esg_onse: The CSWMP includes staff as described and recommended in Chapter 11. The Pro,am Component table in Chapter i 3 is a compilation of activities that will be implemented by two government agencies and private companies. Ecol_o~: It has been acknowledged that the Ecology generated recycling numbers for Kitsap County have been historically high due to the inclusion of metals from recycled naval vessels. A little more detailed discussion of this on page 1-13 and again on page 3-2 would be helpful to give the reader a better perspective on the fluctuation of the rate. R.esp_oxtse: The fin-st para~aph text under 1.4 Recycled Materials Data, Ecology Annual Recycling Survey has been replaced with: Ecology calculates recycling rates based on the definition of MSW as outlined in RCW 70,95. This rate estimate does not include antifreeze, CDL wastes, and materials reacted from industrial facilities. Only ten percent of tires and three percent of used oil were July 14, 1999 4 included in Ecology's 1995 survey total as truly, being recycled. Most tires and oil are used as alternative energy sources, which Ecology does not consider re©'cling. Although these materials are not counted in Ecology's official recycling rate for Kitsap County, they are recycled from Kitsap County, and are shown as a separate category (Other Recyclables) in Table 2.5. The results of Ecology's Annual Recycling Survey are shown in Table 1.5. Between 1990 and 1995, Ecology reported that Kitsap County's recycled tonnage increased steadily. According to Ecology's data, Kitsap County's recycling rate increased from 9.5% to 48% during these years. This trend apparently reversed in 1996 and resulted in a count' recycling rate of 30%. A similar drop was reported by Ecology in 1997, resulting in a reported recycling rate of 20% for Kitsap County. Ecology's Annual Survey does not accurately measure the progress made in residential and commercial curbside recycling in Kitsap County. Between 1990 and 1997, there were a number of data collection errors which resulted in unreliable recycling rates being reported for Kitsap County. These errors included: Including industrial materials in a survey designed to measure the success of residential and commercial collection programs. For example, Ecology' reported that Kitsap Coun~ recycled 122,893 tons of material in 1995. Scrap metal accounted for 67,818 tons of this 1995 total. Since most of this tonnage came fi'om rec?'cled naval vessels, it should never have been included in the calculation of Kitsap County's re~'cting rate. Wood waste accounted for another 17,495 tons i;~ I995. Most of this material was actually hog fuel ground from unmarketable trees. Thzts, in 1995, Ecolog3' 's rel~orted 48% recycling rate for Kitsap Counn' was g-reatly skewed by the addition of inappropriate data. In 1996, Ecolo~oS.' bega~ to identi~ these mislabeled industrial materials and by 1~97 had eliminated them for the residential and commercial progwam recycling rate calculation. Double counting of materials. This occurs when a recycling conkz2any rej2orts t]ze tonnage collected from their curbside and drop off progv'ams. They deliver this material to a broker. 7he broker also reports this same tonnage. This results i~t artificially high recycling rate reported for the count),. £colo~' redesigned the survey and began to eliminate double counting in 1996. Lack of reporting. Participation in Ecology' 's Annual Survey is voluntary. On several occasions, major recycling companies did not respond to Ecology' 's annual request for survey data. When a major recycling company's data is not included in the annual survey, everyone's recycling rate decreases. This problem can be expected to continue periodically for a voluntary survey. Ecology has worked with local government and industry since 1995 to improve survey methodology and to determine the origins of recycled materials. County' staff has an increased level of confidence that Ecology's 1998 recycling rate for Kitsap County will July 14, 1999 5 be more accurate. However, the County will need to independently monitor residential and commercial recycling programs to better understand how to improve program performance and increase recycling tonnage. The last two paragraphs in Chapter 3 Recycling, under the Introduction to the Recycling Chapter has been deleted and replaced with the following: During this same period, Kitsap County's US Navy, installations recycled 323, 082 tons of industrial materials. Some of this industrial tonnage was included incorrectly as part of Ecolog ' 's Annual Survey of residential and commercial recycling programs between 1990 and 1995. This resulted in artificially high recycling rates reported for Kitsat2 County. According to Ecology's Annual Survey, Kitsap County's recycling rate increased to 48% in 1995 and dropped to 20°/3 in 1997. This fluctuation does not accurately represent the steady progress made by Kitsap County's residential and commercial recycling programs. It is due in large part to inaccuracies in surveys for recycling rates. For a detailed discussion of Ecology's Annual Survey, see Section 1.4. Ee_olo_~: It would be helpful to show table 5-9, CDL Recovery facilities in a condensed table similar to the one used to show recycling in Appendix 3.1. ~: The table could not be formatted the same way because there are so many variables for each material in the CDL table. Eea[ag3:: Discussion should be included in Chapter 13, Financing, of alternative financing the county would seek should grant monies not be available from Ecology. Rekug_n~: A paragaph has been inserted in Chapter 4 Solid Waste Systems Financing under 12.4.1 Capital Improvement Financing, The State Grant Progam, as the last paragaph for that section and reads as follows: If the State grant progwam is discontinued at some £oint in the future, it ;viii be a major impact to solid waste pro,'ams throughout the state. We would consult with all the participating jurisdictions to re-prioritize the programs and determine the level of support needed to fund programs through an increase in user se~wice fees. Ee_akog~: A list of SWAC membership with affiliations should be provided in the document. ~: The list has been included as an appendix to the CSWMP and referenced in the Introduction under the Planning Process section. 10. E.c.oJlh~: The County should document the successes of their programs as noted by others. For example, Ecology has reco~maized the county for outstanding achievement in July 14, 1999 11. several programs. Other awards should similarly be noted in the document. ~: State and National associations have recogrfized the county for outstanding ach/evemem in several programs. A list has been included in the Introduction of the Plan under Service Level Assessment and is as follows: Education The Solid Waste Division develops educational programs for all age levels and is active in delivering the information at a wide varie~, of venues. Educational materials about solid waste issues are regional and relevant throughout the cities and jurisdictions in Kitsap Count.. Our programs have been recognized for outstanding achievement in several areas. A list follows: National Association of Counties 1995 Achievement Award Winner for Recycled Treasure Hunt 1996 Achievement Award Winner for Danger and Danger Household Detectives Washington State Department of Ecology ]994-95 Business and Local Government "Best Western Washing'ton Government Waste Reduction and Re,cling Program" ]994-95 Business and Local Government "Best Media Coverage ora Waste Reduction and/or Reo,cling Event" 1997 Waste Reduction and Recycling Awards Most Innovative Program "Build a Better Kitsap" ]998 Certificate of Appreciation "Clunker Clean-up Program - Kirsap County and Chico Towing" United States Environmental Protection Agencs.' 1999 Recog-nized as a Waste WiSe Partner ~: RCW 36.58.040 specifically authorizes a county to "... desi~,~ate a disposal site or sites for .all solid waste collected in the unincorporated areas pursuant to the provisions of a solid waste plan..." Such an activity, may be open to legal challenge. though Ecology is not in the position to offer a legal opinion in this area. If the Countw' hasn't already done so, you may want to look at examples of other counties utilizing RCW 36.58.040 successfully, including Clark County., Spokane County. and Kirtitas County. Resp._onse: Text has been added to Chapter 8 Solid Waste Disposal System, section 8.6.3 Establish Means of Disposal Management and second sentence now reads as follows: Disposal management generally includes ordinances that allow the County to desig-nate a disposal site pursuant to RCW 36. 58. 040 and require waste collected in the unincorporated areas to be delivered to the contractor. July 14, 1999 In response to WUTC comments of February. 10, 1999: Specific Comment by Page Number: ° Page 2-2, Table 2.1 (line 2): WUTC: The Commission does allow variable can rates. The commission cost of service method is a predominately weight based methodology, and customer classes with larger volumes of service do pay higher rates. The Commission does not believe its rate desizn discourages waste reduction and recycling. And, in fact in regulated companies (there ~re no regulated residential curbside recycling programs in Kitsap County), recycling participation percentages are quite high. The Commission does discourage incentive or linear rate desi~mas. Added text to Table 2.1 to replace text with the following: W-UTC does not allow rates which are set artificially high in order to promote rea?cling and discourage disposal. Page 6-2, Second Para~aph (line 1): WUTC: Insert the word "motor" (as distinguished from "solid waste") benveen "to" and "carrier". As of January 1, 1995, the Commission no longer regulates general fi:eight or commercial recycling activities as to commodities hauled, territory served, and insurance. At county discretion, however, we still do regulate source separated recyclable materials for residences (and "multi-family" facilities) per RCW 81.77. Response: The word "motor" was inserted. Page 6-3. Third Para~aph' WTITC: Kitsap County. has exercised its fight to contract for residential pickup recyclable in un/ncorporated areas. Resgoxtse: As a last sentence to the paragraph, the following text was added: Kitsap Count., has exercised the right to contract for the collection of re©,clables in the unincorporated areas. Page 6-8, Table 6.4 (last 1/ne): WUTC: The City of Bainbridge Island is served by Bainbridge Disposal under regulatory. authority of the WUTC, not under a contract. Response: Change made. July 14, 1999 4-5 Page 6-11, Last Paragraph: W-IJTC: The City of Bainbridge Island has elected not to exercise its authority over solid waste operations w/thin its boundaries. Accordingly, all current service provided by Bainbridge Disposal within the city. is under WUTC regulatory authori~. See above comment. o 10. ~: The paragraph was replaced with the following: The Ci~. of Bainbridge Island has elected not to exercise its authori&' over solid waste operations within its boundaries. Current service provided by Bainbridge Disposal is under W-UTC regulatory authori~.'. Pages 6-13/14, Last/First Paragraph: WUTC: See comments related to page 6-2 above. Effective January 1, 1995, this Commission no longer has any jurisdiction over motor common carriers as to specific commodities hauled, at what rates, or in what geographic area they operate. Reko2nae: Deleted first paragraph. Page 6-22, Last Paragraph: WUTC: We agree with your last sentence (regarding Special Collections) stating that "... local roll-off drop boxes and free access to drop-box stations would likely have to be funded by the County". We would be opposed by anv county-wide special collection program funded (or donated) wholly or in part by regulated companies or their customers. Res. glllL~: Noted. Page 6-23. Recommendation 2: WUTC: We are aware of no requirements that mandate a Collection District must be formed before a Disposal District. Each is separate and distinct from each other. RekU_Olme: Noted. Page 6-24. Recommendation 4: WUTC: See comments for Page 6-22 above. Reaglms_e: Noted. Page 11-1, Last Para~aph: WUTC: The county has exercised its authority to contract for residential recycling service in the unincorporated areas of the county. Rekuons_e: The paragraph has been replaced with the following: The County contracts for recycling collection service in unincorporated areas. July 14, 1999 46, 11. Page 12-3, Last Sentence: WUTC: The legality of flow- control ordinances is highly unlikely in lieu of the US Supreme Court's decision in C&A Carbone, Inc. v. Town of Clarkston, 511 US 383, 128 L.Ed.2d 399, 114 S.Ct. 1677 (1994). Noted. July 14, 1999 10 RESOLUTION NO. ~ w~--¢4~ A RESOLUTION designating KJtsap County as the Lead Agency for development of a Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan WHEREAS, Chapter 70.95.020 RCW assigns primary responsibility for solid waste planning to local government; and WHEREAS, Chapter 70.105.007(3) RCW assigns responsibility for moderate risk waste planning to local government; and WHEREAS, for solid waste and moderate risk waste planning purposes, Kdtsap County attributes to the federally-recognized tribes the same status as a city, as referred to in Chapter 70.95 RCW and Chapter 70.105 RCW; and WHEREAS, Chapter 70.95.090 RCW requires the comprehensive solid waste management plan to include the estimated long-range needs for solid waste handling facilities projected twenty years into the future; and WHEREAS, Chapter 70.95.110 RCW requires all solid waste management plans to be reviewed and revised periodically as may be required by the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, Chapter 70.95.130 RCW requires a city preparing an independent solid waste management plan to provide for disposal sites wholly within its jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, Chapter 70.95.080 RCW requires each City to (1) prepare an independent solid waste management plan for integration into the county plan; or (2) enter into an agreement with the County to participate in the preparation of a joint City-County plan; or (3) authorization of the County to prepare a plan for the City's solid waste management for inctusicn in the County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan; and WHEREAS, Chapter 70.105.220 RCW requires each local government to prepare a local hazardous waste management plan whici~ may be amended as the need arises; and WHEREAS, local governments may choose to either include a moderate risk waste element in their solid waste plans, or develop moderate risk waste plans separately from their solid waste plans, recognizing that if a local government chooses not to combine the two plans, both plans should be coordinated; and WHEREAS, the 1990 KJtsap County Final Moderate Risk Waste Management Plan is separate from the Kitsap County Solid Waste Plan and, in the interest of management and administrative efficiency Kitsap County is desirous of including this plan as an element of the solid waste management plan; and WHEREAS, Chapter 70.95.010 RCW, as amended by SHB1671, state that solutions to the state's solid waste management problems require regional solutions by local governments as well as intergovernmental cooperation; and WHEREAS, KJtsap County has established a Solid Waste Advisory Committee in accordance with Chapter 70.95.165 RCW to assist in the development and review of programs and policies concerning solid waste handling and disposal; and WHEREAS, the Solid Waste Advisory Committee consists of representatives of the incorporated cities, Indian tribes, federal facilities, County Commissioners' districts, and solid waste industry of Kitsap County; and WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton participated in the preparation of the 1990 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, the 1992 Amendment, and the 1990 Moderate Risk Waste Management Plan through its representative on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for grant application purposes to designate the lead solid waste planning agency, establish the size of the planning area, and for local governments participating in the solid waste management planning process to obtain resolutions for the planning process; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved: 1. Kitsap County, shall act as lead agency for review of the 1990 Kitsap County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (1990 CSWMP) and the 1992 Amendment to the 1990 Kitsap County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (1992 CSWMP Amendment), and for preparation of a Revised Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (Revised CSWMP). 2. KJtsap County is authorized to review solid waste planning for the City of Bremerton for inclusion in the Revised CSWMP. 3. Kitsap County is authorized to review the moderate risk waste planning for the City of Bremerton contained in the 1990 Kitsap County Final Moderate Risk Waste Management Plan, and to prepare a Revised Moderate Risk Waste Management Plan for the City of Bremerton to be incorporated into the Revised CSWMP. 4. It is understood that the work associated with resolution items #2 and #3 will be coordinated through the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, and that the Department of Ecology will consider approval of the Revised CSWMP only after all local jurisdictions participating in the Revised CSWMP planning process have adopted the Revised CSWMP by resolution. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this~..~day of ~.z..~_.z.~:~, 1996. ouncT_AW L il President Falcon Cable Chan~e of · Control to Charter AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL FOR AGENDA OF: ~ ~i%~ ORIGINATING DEPT: Adm/n. Srvs ~; _ f ORIGINATOR: K. McCluskev DATE SUBMITTED: 7/12/99 2 o CLEARANCES: ~omment on back 3. EXHIBITS' --,~/Lf.nece~sar~) ----' ENDORSEMENT X ~FO~ON__ APPROVED BY COLqqCIL PRESIDENT FOR- ; , MAYOR 4. SUPSqARY STATEMENT ~D REQUIRE~NT FOR CO~CIL ACTION: Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC has requested approval of Transfer cf Control of Falcon Cable TV to Charter. Falcon currently serves 84 customers in the City of Bremer%cn and has confirmed that they have no written complaints or service calls on file at 5his 5ime. Further Falcon has indicaZed %hat Zhe system upgrade as required in Sec%ion 4.3 cf 5he franchise_~ very near completion. ~ta,~ ~= recommends aDDroval~ of the attached Resolution wi~h conditions: _. Compliance wi~h the franchise 2. Provide srganization and proxy sua%ements _. Non __=_ ..... n~to=3 access Yo caDie modem platform ~. ComPlY_ _ wi~h ~mme~~_a_~ ~ ~ leased ~_c~==~ .... requirements f. Rei~.~ursemen~ cf cisv costs ~c review ~ransfer, if any 6. Compliance with all other applicable legal requirements P. espcnslsall5v fcc any non-comp!lance by franchises 9 Provide --~--~n acceptance of ccnci~ions 5. RECS~NEATION: Hozicn us Auurcve__ ~Res°~-~cn~7~~---= - s~=~_ ........ .... ~ transfer of con5rcl .cf Faiccn Cau_e ~ ....... Ho!dine Company, LLC. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: n/a REVIEW DATE: n/a A~min Srvs Admin Srvs PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: APPROVED NOTICE OF ACTION DISAPPROVED DATE: AGENDA BILL NO: 50 CLEARANCE COMMENTS 4. SD14MARY STATEMENT (cont.): 9. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: If there is no action by council it is automatically transferred within 120 days. O. IMPACT ON ~A_._~G, BUDGETS, :.~ .... = .... ~ .... -~,~ None RESE~SCH SOURCES: RESOLUTION NO. ~2-1 ~,¥~ A RESOLUTION approving the change of control of Falcon Video Communications, L.P., holder of a Cable Franchise in Bremerton, Washington, to Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC 1. Falcon Video Communications, L.P. ("Franchisee") holds a valid franchise to operate a cable television system in Bremerton, WA ("Franchising Authority") issued by City, of Bremerton Ordinance No. 4635, passed by the City Council on November 4, 1998. 2. Charter Communications, Inc. ("CCI") and certain affiliates of the Franchisee (including the Franchisee's ultimate parent company, Falcon Communications, L.P., ("Falcon") have entered into a Purchase and Contribution Agreement (the "Agreement") dated May 26, 1999, pursuant to which CCI's affiliate, Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC ("Charter"), will acquire control of Falcon. 3 Section 2.7 and 2.8 of the Falcorv'Bremerton franchise prohibit a franchise transfer or change in control without the prior written consent of the City of Bremerton. Section 2.7 of the franchise provides that the Citv of Bremerton may condition a transfer upon such terms and conditions related to the technical, legal, and financial qualifications of the prospective transferee to perform according to the terms of the Franchise as the City deems appropriate, including those conditions deemed necessary by the Cit,: to ensure the strict performance of the requirements of the franchise. 4 The proposed change in control of Falcon is subject to the requirements of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1992 ("1992 Cable Act"), and applicable implementing regulations of the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC"). Falcon and Transferee filed FCC Form 394 pursuant to the 1992 Cable Act and FCC regulations, which was received bv the Ci~, of Bremerton on June 25. 1999. In conjunction with such filing, Falcon and Charter have stated that the filing involves only a change in control at the parent level of Falcon, that the Franchisee will continue to hold the Falcon/Bremerton franchise, that local management and employees of Falcon will remain in place after the change in control, and that all commitments, obligations, and liabilities will remain in place, whether or not such commitments, obligations, or liabilities pre- dated the consummation of the proposed change in control. 5. It is recommended that the City approve the transfer of control subject to certain conditions, including: (a) assurances regarding Transferee's obligation to cause Franchisee to comply with all existing Falcon/Bremerton franchise requirements; (b) documentation of Transferee and Falcon corporate organization and proxy statements issued in connection with the merger: (c) assurances regarding completion of current Falcon/Bremerton upgrade; (d) assurances regarding construction and completion of Bremerton institutional network commitments; (e) commitments to comply with all applicable laws regarding nondiscriminatory access to Franchisee's proposed Internet cable modem platform and services; (f) commitments to comply with all applicable laws regarding commercial leased access; (g) reimbursement of all direct, out- of-pocket costs of the City incurred in analyzing and acting upon change of control request; and (h) compliance with all other applicable legal requirements, including carriage of broadcast distal and high definition television signals, and interconnection of cable system with potential competkors for purposes of sharing cable PEG channels, to the extent required by the FalconfBremerton franchise agreement. 6. The City should approve the change in control of the Falcoru'Bremerton franchise to Transferee subject to the formal acceptance by Transferee of the conditions set forth in this Resolution. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton that: a. The City of Bremerton hereby approves the transfer of control of the cable franchise of Falcon Video Communications, L.P., Ordinance No. 4635 passed by the Council November 4, 1998 to Transferee subject to the following conditions: (1) Compliance with franchise. Transferee shall cause Franchisee to comply, with the law~-ul requirements of the Falcon/Bremerton franchise, including all applicable ordinances, orders, contracts, agreements, commitments, side letters, and regulatory actions taken pursuant thereto. including but not limited to system upgrade commitments, support for Public, Educational. and Governmental (PEG) cable access; and institutional network construction requirements in all respects and without exception. (2) Or__.amzation and proxy statements. Within thirty, (30) days of the earlier of closure of the merger transaction or public release of the requested information. Transferee shall submit (a) updated Transferee and Falcon corporate organization charts; and (b) all publicly available pro.cs., statements issued in connection with the merger. (.3) Non-discriminatory access to cable modem platform. Transferee shall comply, and cause Franchisee to comply with all lawful federal, state and local legal requirements with respect to nondiscrimmato~ access, to the Franchisees' cable modem platform for providers of Internet and on-line services, whether or not such providers are affiliated with Transferee or the Franchisee. So long as cable modem services are deemed to be "cable services", as provided under Title VI of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Transferee and the Franchisee shall comply with all lawful requirements regarding such services, including but not limited to, the inclusion of revenues from cable modem services and access within the gross revenues of the Franchisee's cable franchise. (4) Commercial Leased Access. Transferee shall comply and cause Franchisee to comply with all lawful federal, state and local requirements with respect to commercial leased access. (5) Reimbursement of costs. Upon invoice by the City, Franchisee shall within thirty, (30) days of the invoice reimburse all reasonable direct, out-of-pocket costs of the City incurred in analyzing and acting upon Transferee's change of control request, not to exceed $23500. Pa,vment of such reimbursement shall accompany the form of written acceptance, as Provided in subsection c., below. (6) Compliance with all other applicable legal requirements Transferee shall cause the Franchisee to comply, with all other applicable legal requirements that are now or may hereafter apply to Falcon's/Bremerton's cable operations, including, but not limited to, carriage of broadcast digital and high definition television signals, interconnection of cable system with potential franchised cable competitors for purposes of sharing cable PEG channe~Is, and adherence to applicable federal and state emergency notification provisions to the ex tent required by the Falcon/Bremerton Franchise agreement. (7) Responsibility for any non-compliance by franchisee,. Franchisee agrees that as a result of approval of this transfer transaction, the City has not waived or diminished any compliance enforcement rights it possessed prior to the approval of the transfer transaction. All such rights are enforceable against Franchisee pursuant to paragraph 6 (a) (1) above. b. Written acceptance. ( 1 ) This resolution shall not be effective until accepted in writing by Transferee. The acceptance, which shall be contingent upon final closing of the transaction shall be substantially similar in form to that attached hereto as Exhibit I. (2) Within thirty (30) days after passage of this resolution by the Council. Transferee shall file in the Office of the Administrative Services Director such written acceptance of this resolution meeting the approval of the City Attorney (3) A failure on the part of Transferee to file such written acceptance within such time shall be deemed an abandonment and rejection of the rights and privileges conferred hereby and this resolution shall thereupon be null and void. Such acceptance shall be unqualified and shall be construed to be an acceptance of all the terms, conditions and restrictions contained in this resolution. c. Automatic nullification in event of failure to close or closure on materially different terms. In the event the transaction which is the subject of this resolution is not consummated or does not reach final closure for any reason, or in the event such closure is reached on terms substantially and materially different to the terms described in the FCC Form 394 and subsequent information provided by the Transferee and relied upon by the City, then this resolution, together with the written acceptance provided hereunder, shall be null and void. PASSED by the City. Council of the City of Bremerton this 1999 day of MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President EXHIBIT I ACCEPTANCE Director of Administrative Services City, of Bremerton 2~ o9 Fourth Street Bremerton, Washington 98337 This is to advise the City of Bremerton, Washington that Charter Communications, Inc. hereby accepts the terms and provisions of Resolution No. , passed by the City Council on ,1999, consenting to a change in control of Falcon Cable franchise to Charter Communications, with conditions. Charter Communications agrees to abide by, and to cause Charter Communications and its subsidiaries and affiliates to abide by, each and every provision of the franchise agreements, including all applicable ordinances, orders, contracts, agreements, side letters, commitments, and regulatory actions taken pursuant hereto, as applicable, and without exception. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC. gv~ Title: Dale~ State of Countv of SS. This Acceptance was acknowledged before me on the day of 1999, by as duly authorized officer of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC. ,a Notary Public for FALCON VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS, L.P. ~519 S E. M:le ~il[ Drtv¢- Port Orchara, \¥A 98300 Tel 360 ,~7~ 4043 · Fax 360.~?1.5418 Falcon Ms Paula Johnson DepuW City. Clerk City of Bremerton 23~ 4th St. Bremerton, WA. 98337 July 1, 1999 Re: Transfer of Control of Falcon's Franchise to Charter Ms. Johnson, Following up on our phone conversation on June 30, I offer the following information to you. The system upgrade as required in Section 4.3 of the Franchise is vet near completion. We have the forward system completed and have added 7 new analog channels to the system to date. The forward system has 750Mhz capacity., more than enough to meet the 83 channel minimum required by the franchise. We are now' in the process of ordering equipment that will activate the return lines which will enable the system to offer new services including high speed Internet access. Falcon currentlv serves 84 customers in the City. of Bremerton. I have had no written complaints or service calls on file. We have had several letters-thanking Falcon for adding the new services and improving the picture qualits.' through the system upgrade. I am still working on a short list of other Falcon cities that are going through the transfer. S ~rely, / ~/~J:e rry R6~ofldo Regional Manger Falcon Cable TV Your Access to Entertainmont, Information and BeyondTM AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Confirmation of appointment .' - Christofer Gears, Director cf Parks & RecreaSion FOR AGENDA OF: A~c~ust ~/', 199 ORIGINATING DPT. Execu%ive OIGINATOR: Mayor Horton DATE SUBMITTED: July 28, 1999 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back Attorney j ~ssary! 3. EXHIBITS: Contrac% 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Attached contrac5 for Christofer Gears, Director of Parks & Recreation. RECOPP~_NDAT!ON: approve the confirmation of Cris Gears to Parks S Recreation Director. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Mavcr Hcrucn ENFORCEHENT OFF!CIA~: Mavcr HcrLsn EXPIRATION DATE: N/A REVIEW DATE: N/A PULLED i~SLED COUNCIL DiRECTiVE: AP PRCVE l NOTICE OF ACTION DiSAPPROVEE DATE: 1!. AGENDA BILL NO: CLEARANCE COMMENTS (con~.): 4. SUMSInJ~Y STATEMENT (cont.): IM]PACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Parks and Recreation Department would not have a Director 6. IMPACT 3~N STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACiLiTIES, EQUIPMENT OB OTHER RESOURCES Budge 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT TITLE: DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION This Employment Contract is entered into this ~ day of August, 1999 by and between the City of Bremerton, a chartered first class municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Washington, (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and Cdstofer Gears, (hereinafter referred to as "Director of Parks and Recreation'). In consideration of the mutual benefits and promises herein contained, the parties agree as follows: 1. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES: The Director of Parks and Recreation agrees to fumish full time professional services as defined in the job description for Director of Parks and Recreation which is attached and~hereby incorporated as a part of this Agreement, which may be amended by the City upon thirty (30) days notice to the Director of Parks and Recreation. 2. SUPERVISION: The parties understand and agree that the Director of Parks and Recreation is an individual skilled in administration and management and can perform independent functions and responsibilities in the exercise of his field of expertise. In the performance of these duties, the Director of Parks and Recreation shall work under the direction of the Mayor of Bremerton. 3. TERM: The Director of Parks and Recreation shall serve at the pleasure of the Mayor commencing August , 1999 and continuing until termination or removal by terms of this Agreement infra. 4. COMPENSATION: The Director of Parks and Recreation and City agree that compensation for services rendered uncter this agreement shall begin at band 4, rate 7. Two Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety-seven and 12/100 ($2,997.12) per semi-monthly pay period with a monthly rate of approximately Five Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety-four dollars ($5,994.00). The salary for the Director of Parks and Recreation shall be adjusted upon completion of a satisfactory performance evaluation prior to the end of the year and adjusted to band 4, rate 8 on January 1, 2000. After January 1, 2000 salary shall be adjusted from time to time in conformance with the provisions of the Management and Professional Staff Compensation Program (BMC 2.50) applicable to the position of Director of Parks and Recreation. Said salary shall be paid on the City's regular payroll system. It is expressly understood by and between the parties that the Director of Parks and Recreation shall be expected to work at least forty (40) hours per week, inclusive of approved leave. 5. BENEFITS: Upon commencement of this contract, a one-time credit of ninety-six (96) hours of sick leave will be received and will continue to accrue at the standard rate of ninety-six (96) hours per year. Additionally, twenty (20) days of vacation will be credited, and will continue accruing twenty (20) days until such time as qualification for additional annual leave is described by City ordinance. All other benefits shall be afforded as provided in the Management and Professional Staff Compensation Program (BMC 2.50) and as provided under the laws of the State of Washington for the position of Director of Parks and Recreation. 6, PERFORMANCE REVlEVVS: Performance reviews shall be conducted in compliance with applicable Human Resources Policies, and the Mayor shall utilize review standards and forms approved by the Human Resources Department. 7. EXCLUSION FROM COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AND CIVIL SERVICE: The Director of Parks and Recreation acknowledges, understands and agrees that the position he is accepting with the City is not included in the City's Civil Service system, and is exempt from Union Membership. 8. TERMINATION OF SERVICES: The Director of Parks and Recreation is an "at will" employee and the City may terminate him without cause, at any time, with thirty (30) days notice required. In the event that the Director of Parks and Recreation shall terminate employment with the City, he agrees that he shall provide the City not less than thirty (30) days pdor notice of the effective date of said termination in order to afford the City a reasonable opportunity to find a replacement. The parties further agree that in the event a replacement is found who is able to commence employment pdor to the expiration of thirty (30) day's notice, that they may, in good faith, negotiate an eadier termination date. This Agreement may be terminated for cause, without notice, and no severance pay shall be paid. "Cause" is defined as any reason for which a regular employee may be dismissed under the Bremerton Civil Service Rules. 9. MEMBERSHIP/SUPPLIES: Memberships to professional organizations approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation shall be in the name of the City, to the extent allowed by law, and paid for by the City. All supplies, equipment and materials purchased for use of the Director of Parks and Recreation by the City shall belong to the City. 10. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and both parties acknowledge that there are no other agreements, written or oral, that have not been fully set forth in the text of this Agreement. B. The parties hereby further agree that this Agreement cannot be amended or modified without the written concurrence of both parties. C. Any notices required to be given shall be in writing and delivered to the following parties at the following addresses: Human Resources Department 239 Fourth Street Bremerton, WA 98337 Cristofer A. Gears Director of Parks and Recreation c/o City Hall 239 4th Street Bremerton, WA. 98337 D. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. In the event of a dispute, such dispute shall be litigated in the Supedor Court of KJtsap County, Washington. E. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision hereof shall, in no way, affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision. F. Failure to insist upon stdct compliance with any terms, covenants, or conditions of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of such, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of such right or power at any time be taken to be a waiver of any other breach. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. Cdstofer ~. ~ears Director of Parks and Recreation REVIEWED BY: CITY OF BREMERTON: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY Interim Human Resources Manager LYNN HORTON, Mayor Received for Filing: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: GLENNA MALANCA, City Attomey Classification Specifications May, 199,* DIRECTOR, PARKS AND RECREATION No. 4107 GENERAL FUNCTION Department head responsible for providing and managing community parks and recreation services in conformance with applicable statutes, regulations and administrative policies. DISTINGUISHING CHARA~ERISTICS This is a professional executive management parks and recreation classification. Work consists of planning, organizing and directing the operations of multiple parks and recreation services and personnel. ESSENTIAL JOB DUTIES professional Services: Provides information, data and advice supportive 'to the development of policy and legislation related to the preservation of open space, urban landscaping, parks and recreation facility acquisition, and construction. Manages the maintelmnce and safe operation of parks, recreation facilities and programs. Directs and implements recreation and community organized sports, recreation and leisure programs of interest to various age groups and assures access to appropriate public facilities and equipment for sports and leisure activities. Department Ope_rations: Directs and implements changes to departmem services and funding levels, operating policies, standards, procedures and rules. Monitors budget and service contract compliance control systems. Establishes work methods, selects operating' systems, equipment and procedures. Prepares reports on department activity and operations. Program Budgeting: Describes and quantifies program activity, trends and resources; establishes objectives; justifies and presents funding requirements for department programs' short and long range resource allocation levels for personnel, se~wices and supplies, capital equipment and facilities acquisition, maintenance and repair for the department as a whole and for special departmental projects. Department Organization: Establishes the internal organizational structure of the department: assigns duties to positions, arranges for classification of positions, and obtains budget authority for funding positions. Serves as appointing authority for all employees of the department. Supervises and/or directs the supervision, selection, training, evaluation; discipline and discharge of department personnel. TITLE: Classification Specifications DIRECTOR, PARKS AND RECREATION NON-ESSENTIAL JOB DUTIES May, 1994 :': No. 4107 General City. Management: Responds to inquiries from officials, staff, outside agencies and the public. Participates in policy development considerations such as setting general budget priorities, contract negotiation strategies, capital improvement programs, etc. Participates in the activities of civic, community, and parks and recreation organizations. Performs other assigned work which is con.~i~ent with the responfibilifies assigned to the classification and necessary to the operations of the department and/or the City. REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS Knowledge of: Principles, practices, methods and technical support functions of park and recreation services; Current professional standards applicable to open space, parks and recreation services; Fundamental intent and basic provisions of municipal, state and federal financing mechanisms for open space, parks and recreation services; Techniques used for gathering, evaluating and summarizing parks and recreation depatmxent service information in preparing budgets; Management, personnel and ethical practices as they amply to parks and recreation department operations. Essential Abilitie~ Able to: Apply professional parks and recreation principles to specific service program operations; Interpret and apply the intent and specific provisions of laws and regulatory provisions to particular conditions and determine a course of action; Evaluate, plan and establish a proper sequence of action for multiple functional units and personnel to accomplish goals; Provide verbal and written directives, information and advice to a wide variety of people and officials; Persuasively and ethically communicate ideas and assert a point of view in complex or controversial situations; Exhibit and instill in subordinates a high public service priority in contacts with the public and others encountered in the work; Develop and implement open space, parks, facilities and recreation operating methods which provide a high degree of environmental and human safety. 2 Classification Specifications May, [994 TITLE: · ' DIRECTOR, PARKS AND RECREATION No. 4107 REQUIRED LICENSES AND CERTIFICATIONS A valid Washin~on State driver's license is required and must be obtained prior to date of appointment or another date set by the City. Onali .lying Training and Experience Combined training and experience which demonstrates that a person has obtained the required knowledge and is able to perform the work required (with reasonable accommodation, if necessary).. In the parks and recreation profession, a person with the following combined training and experience would typically q~mlif'y to compete in a selection process: Graduation from an accredited college or university with a baccalaureate degree in parks and recreation or a closely related field and seven (7) years of full-time paid experience in parks and recreation work; at least two of which involved preparing service program funding justifications and, at least three of which involved supervisory responsibility. LEGAL AND REGULATORY CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYlvl~NT FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT: The position qualifies for exemption from the Fair Labor Standards Act minimum wage and overtime provisions under the Act's Administrative and Professional Employees exemptions. REPRESENTATION: The position is excluded from the non-uniformed bargaining unit pursuant to Washington Public Employment Relations Commission Decision No. 1346 - PECB dated the I9th day of January, 1982 under the second sentence reading, in relevant parr: "Exclud/ng...Department Heads, and their Assistants, Supervisors...". CIVIL SERVICE: The classification, as a Department Head, is excluded from the Civil Service pursuant to City Charter Section 39. APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL AUTHORITY: The position is filled by the Mayor with confirmation by the City Council. Removal is at the will of the Mayor in conformance with procedures established by the City. SPECIFICATIONS APPROVAL: Mayor: Date: 3 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL I. SUBJECT: Budget Adjustment & FOR AGENDA OF: August l& 1999 Staffing Authorization Changes ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & utilities ORIGINATOR: P. Lucas, Admin Analyst . dr"'-,, DATE SUBMITTED: July20, 1999 2. CLEARANCES: (C.--at on ~ jf~) ~- 3. ExIImITS: Director PW&U C" Y" ~-~. ~;~, · (1)Adopted Staffing for PW/U City Treasurer · ~ ' L ~ ~-~ . ~ · (2) Proposed Staffing for PW/U Operations Committee ~~~~~__ · (3)Adopted Staffing for Engineering Fiscal & Budget Comm. .~_~,,,c~-~ L-'P~-~-~f/~--..., ~ ~ * (4) Proposed Staffing for Engineerme · (5) Budget Adjustment 99- ENDORSEMENT PRESIDENT FOR SUBMrlTAL: APPROVED BY COUNCIL MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The request before the Council is to authorize two staffing changes, one in Public Works & Utilities and one in Engineering. Thew are as follows: .Public Works & Utilities: Accounting Assistants currently authorized are 4 AA Seniors. 3 AA-IFs and I AA-I tbr a total 0/'8 (SE Exhibit (1). The requested change~ deletes the .&A-I and increases the AA-Irs to 4 for a total remaining of 8 (See Exhibit (2). The purpose of this request is to more appropriately reflect current requirements and allow' for a ~eater amount of flexibilir~ in ~oss- training and assi~munent ofdmies. Engdneering: Engineering Technician IVs currently authorized are two (See Exhibit (3). Requested change increases this level to 3 (See Exhibit (4). This additional position will be in direct support of the CSO Reduction Pr%m-am implementation required bx Consent Decree. Funding is available for this position through grants and loans from the Department of Ecology'. No increase in utility rates will result from this change. 8. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve Budget Adjustment 99- ~ to revise Authorized Staffing for Accounting Assistants ~Sthin the Public Works & Utilities Department and Engineering Technician IV's in the Engineering Division. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: 6(. 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Staffing within the Uf~-ty Billing Office of the Public Works & Utilities Department will remain as is current .ly authorized with inability to assign more responsib'~lity to the Accounting Assistant I requiring the Accounting Assistant II's to divide a greater amount of tasks between them. Current Engineering Technician IV levels will not fully support the CSO Reduction Program 6. IMPACT ON STAFFENG. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: City. Treasurer has advised that no increase in budget will result from either of these changes (See Exhibit (5)). The slight increase from approval of the Accounting Assistant II position has no impact due to several authorized positions within the City current .ty not filled. Grant money is funding the Engineering Technician IV poskion for the remainder of this year and thro ~ugh the year 2000. No rate increase will result from either of these requests. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: AUTHORITED STAFFING 1997 1998 1999 2000! POSITION Director, Public Works and Utilities Project Manager Utility Operations Manager Water Resources Manager Wastewater Manager Forestry Manager Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager Administrative Analyst Utility Accounts Supervisor Utility Billing Specialist Accounting Assistant Senior Accounting Assistant II Accounting Assistant 1 Office Assistant Senior Office Assistant II Operator Lead Operator Senior Operator WaStewater Treatment Plant Operations Supv. Wastewater Treatment Plant Maint. Supv. Wastewater Treatment Plant ODerator Wastewater Treatment Plant Maint.Tec~nic~an Computerized Main. Management Sys.Tech. F__iectronics Technician Journey Level Electrician Maintenance Electrician Maintenance Coordinator Water Operations Supervisor Water Distribution Supervisor Service Specialist Supervisor Facilities/Inventory Supervisor Service Specialist Lead Service Specialist Senior Service Specialist LaDoratory Technician Water Resources Assistant Environmental Technician Biosolids Technician Laborer TOTAL STAFFING ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1 t 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 I ! 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 4 4 3 1 1 1 4 4 4 2 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 I 2 I 1 1 1 I 1 4 5 5 4 3 3 0 1 1 1 I 0 0 I t 1 0 I 1 1 1 1 I 2 2 1 2 2 3 1 1 = 5 5 9 10 10.25 12 13 13 1 I 1 I 1 I 2 2 2 1 0 0 81 82 83.25 1 1 1 ! 4 3 3 2 2 Oo This staff provides Water, Wastewater and Stormwater utility services. Their costs are allocated based on anticipated workload. EXHIBIT (1) 112 ~ ~970122_1 .au} AUTHORIZED STAFFING POSITION Dir~-~cor, Public Works & Utilities Projec= Manager Utility Operations Mana~jer Water Resources Manacjer Formstry Manager Wastewater Trea~-~nt Plant Manacger ~ nistrativ~ Analyst Utility A~unts Supervisor Utility Billing Specialis= Accountin~ Assistant Senior Accounting Assistant II A=coun~n~ Assistant I Office Assistant Senior Office Assistant II Operator Senior Operator Wastewa~_r Trea~nt Plan= .Operations S .upervisor Wastewater Trea~nt Plan= ~4ntenance Supervisor Was~ewater Treatment Plant _~ator Was~ewater Treatment Plant Ma~n=enance Technlc~an C~?uterized ~4ntenance Manag~-~nt Sys~m~ Techn/Clan Elec=ronics Tec/~nician Jou=ney Level Elecr_rician ~ intenance Elec~r±cian b~ 4 ntenanc~ Coordinator Water Operations Supervisor Water Disr_ribution S .upervisor Servmce spec~aiisU Supervzsor Facilities/Inventory Supervisor Sel-zice speC!a!ist L~_ad Se~-v~ce Sp~cialist sen~or Service special±st Laboratory Technician Water Resources Assistant Env±rom~n=al Techni clan Biosolids Technician Laborer TOTAL STAFFING 1997 1998 1999 2000 ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET I ! I ! I 1 I 1 I ! 1 1 I 1 I ! 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 ! ! 1 1 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 0 0 4 4 4 4 2 3 3 3 1 I I ! 2 2 2 2 1 ! 2 2 ! I i ! 4 5 5 5 4 3 3 3 0 i 1 ! i ! 1 0 0 i 1 i i 0 0 i ! ! 1 I i ! i 2 2 I i 2 2 3 i i ! i 5 5 5 5 9 i0 10.25 10 12 13 13 13 1 i I ! 2 2 2 2 I 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 This staff provides Water, Wastewater and Stormwater Utility Services. costs are allocated based on anticipated workload. Their EXHIBIT (2) STAFFING AUTHORIZATION POSITION City Engineer Senior Engineer Project Manager Project Administrator Civil Engineer I11 Civil Engineer II Civil Engineer I Engineering Technician IV Engineering Technician Engineering Technician 11 TOTAL STAFFING 1997 1998 1999 2000 ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 19.00 20.00 22.00 ~ Exhibit (3) STAFFING AUTHORIZATION POSITION 1997 ACTUAL 1998 BUDGET 1999 BUDGET 2000 BUDGET City Engineer Senior Engineer Project Manager Project Administrator Civil Engineer III Civil Engineer II Civil Engineer I Engineering Technician IV Engineering Technician III Engineering Technician II TOTAL STAFFING 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 6.00 3.00 19.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 6.00 3.00 20.00 1 00 2 00 2 00 1 00 i 00 3 00 1.00 -3.00,- 6.00 3.00 23.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 6.00 3.00 23.00 Exhibit CITY OF BREMERTON - BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST Requesting Department: PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES Adjustment Number: 99-9 Approval Authority Required: C]Treasurer SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description Delete: Accounting Asst I Position --]Mayor F Amount Fiscal & Budget USE OF FUNDS: Description Add: Accounting Asst II Position Engineering Tech IV Position ~Council Amount NARRATIVE: This adjustment will reclassify one position in the Customer Service / Utility Billing section from Accounting Asst. I to Accounting Asst. Iland add one Engineering Tech. IV position in the Engineering section. Both changes will be funded from current appropriations. f Department/Head Sig~ Date: Director Signature Date Treasurer Comments: Recommended [--] Not Recommended Treasurer's Signature"- Date Mayor Comments: r----] Recommended Not Recommended [-----] Approved ~--] Denied Mayor's Signature Date Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Approved ~ Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: SR 304 TRANSPORTATION PROJECT ASBESTOS REMOVAL NO. 4 CONTRACT BID AWARD FOR AGENDA OF: August 18. 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & [:fil,~ ~ ORIGINATOR: R. Witt. City Eng.~0ttO~7~, DATE SUBMITTED: August 10. 1999 2. CLEARAN~Eyq~.KComment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS: ~'(~~~:> t 1. Location Map ,~ovbf P ilities 2. Bid Tabulation t..~- '"V./~ , , ,//l( ../_'.: . - City Attorney City T r e~,xur_I~tL~.,~-- ~ p ttrahas~n ~S ,u~, e.~is o r ~ , -Cour~c, bk-?i.s~cal_~& Budget C.~kjmittee '"' Council Operations Committee ENDORSEMENT [~-,'INFORMATION [] .&PPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL: MAYOR -':.,,:'--, . '--~" ~'--- COL,'NCIL PRESIDENT 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Bids ;vere opened for the SR 304 Transportation Improvement Project. Asbestos Removal No. 4 contract on .August ~.. 1999. This is the fourth phase of the removal and disposal of asbestos in structures located within Transportation Improvement Project. This contract vdll remove and dispose of asbestos from eight separate parceis occupying public right of way. 3 bids for this project were received. Walker Specialty Construction. Inc. was the lowest responsive bidder with a bid of $49.157.42. The engineer's estimate for this project was $94.07) 16. The action before the City Council is approval oi-a contract with Walker Specialty Construction. inc. for the SRS0-~ Transportation Improvement Project - Asbestos Removal No. 4 contract. 5. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council approve award of the bid of S49.157.42 with Walker Specialty Construction. Inc. for the SR Transportation Improvement Project - Asbestos Removal No. 4 contract and authorize the Mayor to execute the same. PULLED [] TABLED [] COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED [1 DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [] (OVER) 10C 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: ffq'""' 17 ~ 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 3. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION - Continuation 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Funding by the State and Federal agencies used for the design of this project will have to be returned. The project will not be built and existing traffic capacity safety issues urill remain. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES: Staffing: 100 staff hours for construction administration, inspection. Budget: This project is included in the 1999 budget as part of the 1999 'Arterial Street fund and sufficient funds exists to do this work with the additional funding the City will receive from other funding sources. The City will be receiving funding from the Federal Highway Administration and the State Transportation Improvement Board. Facilities/Equipment: No impact. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: £3ar'O~lcl ..LN:]NqAO~clNI NO I_LV.L~IOdSNV~-L ~0(2~S , ,,~:%~} I ,," --x'~"/ \ r ' ° / //'<" ~'"-~i'~ f--il I LLL_//~-~__=~:-,.L:, ~ ! m ~ mm mm ~ mm m CITY OF BREMERTON BID TABULATION BID TITLE: ,~ DATE OPENED: ~ - q - ~'~ TIME OPENED: OPENED BY l ~"~~ RECORDED BY BIDDER BOND REC'D ITEM 1 ITEM 2 ITEM 3 ITEM 4 ITEM 5 NET BID TAX TOTAL AGEN~DA BILL BREMERTON CITY COL~-CIL i. SUBJECT: Purchase thr~ (3) wasrewamr pump asFembiies and thr~ {3) variable frequency drives ibr pumps for Pump Station CW-2. , 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on Director. Public WorksFUfilities Purchasing Supervisor ENDORSEMENT )6 FOR AGENDA OF: Au_o2st 1 8. i 9C9 ORIGLNATENG DEPT: Pubhc Works and U~iiues ORIGINATOR: John Poppe. Wasrewwrer Manager DATE SUBMITTED: Au=mast !6. !999 3. EXRIllrrs (1) Summary of Bid Proposals Ciw Attorney ~ (2~ Statement of Sole Source PresenraUc: Ciw Treasurer ,/7 ;~r'~ Coullcii Budffet & Fi.tl2IlCe Col2rlml~.~ ~*~o13. from North Coast Eiecmc. OperafionsCommittee /Z~ f ~(NOTE THAT BID A~OUNTS ON aONDAY, AUGUST / I~0 TION APPROVED BY COUNCIL P ID~--NT FOR SUBMITTAL: COUNCm PRESDENT SUMMARY STATE1VIENT .~ND REOUIREMZENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Tne Der~arrmenr of Pubtic Works and Uriiities seeks- approval for the purchase oftkree (3 :, ~urn~ ~sembiies and · mree 135 variable ffeauency (mx, es for tine u?~ade of Pump Station CW-2. ,',_ O~rl~uea on ~affe ~X'O RECOM3/IENDATION: Council approve me so~e source om-an~e -';" ~ ar. ame ~ :nr,.~ ~3 > Allen Bradlev -v~ ' ' -~- ......... ~ ....--- '~ --- Coast Eiecrric at a tomi cost of533.~aS.5,3 ~d au-&onze the Mayor ~oll,.,e~ ant procedures. 7. RESPONSIBLE-~-"~' :' '~ 'l?: l ,- ENTORCENLENT 0FFiCI3i' EXPIIL~TION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PU'LLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE TA_BLED I0. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED 11. DATE: AGENDA BILL NO: q q --i'~ 3 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS (Continued): 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT (Continued) Anderson CSO Reduction project to be completed this year. Bids were called and opened for the three pump assemblies August 16, 1999 per City policies and procedures. A total of c9,, bids were received (see Exhibit and staff recommends award to _ ~,~,~ i-~ ,-~ , the low responsive bidder, in the amount of $ ~q/a 14'; ('~including sales tax. -j City Council has previously authorized sole source purchase of Allen Bradlev variable frequency drives to be consistent with existing standardized installations for pump station upgrades. North Coast Electric is the supplier of Allen Bradley equipment and the Department seeks approval for the sole source purchase of three (3) variable frequency drives in the mount of $33,998.60 (See Exhibit 3.). Staff recommends approval. 6. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Prevent compliance with the Puget Soundkeeper Alliance Agreemem. Increase liability of City should CSO water be discharge to Puget Sound. Possible violation of area water quality standards. o IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS. FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: STAFFING - Maintenance requirements wStl remain the same for the ne~ two vears and increase with age. BUDGET - Financing will come from the Anderson Cove CSO reduction plan. EQUIPMENT - 8. RESEARCH SOURCES AGENDABL :58 EXHIBIT "3" , , EL ECTRIC==¢= COMPANY August 3, 1999 To: CITY OF BREMERTON At'tn: PAT RE: '75 HP DRIVES QUOTATION 3-75HP 480V, OPEN TYPE, VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVES CATALOG # 1336F-B075-AN-EN OPTIONS: CM-COMMON MODE CHOKE L6-120V CONTROL INTERFACE HASI- HUMAN INTERFACE GMSI-COMMUNICATION OPTION 1202C10 HIM CABLE 1336RFB150D EMC FILTER 13213R100B LINE REACTOR YOUR COST EACH $ 7020.00 YOUR cost 'EACH $ 675.00 YOUR COST EACH $110.00 YOUR COST EACH $130.00 YOUR COST E. ACH $ 200.00 YOUR COST =~ACH $ 37.00 YOUR COST EACH $1857.00 YOUR COST 'z_ACH $ 4.45.00 I HAVE INCLUDED SPECIFICATIONS ON DRIVE AND OPTIONS. PLEASE CALL IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. SINCERELY JEFF WRIGHT 268 Ka~ Penman Bouieve,~, 8remerton, \Nasnlr~on 9~-~jlrTe~eonone 360-47g-542E, Fax; 380~7~-8473. CITY OF BREMERTON I~D TABULATION DATE OPENED: ~- lr--~c~ TIME OPENED: RECORDED BY BIDDER ~ ITEM 1 ITEM 2 ITEM 3 ITEM 4 ITEM 5 NET BID TAX TOTAL ~M~Y L,. TOTAL BID COMMENTS ~~~ t ' ..... ~~~c[ ~ ,5[tBSo.~7 ........ I III I1' .... I I I I II 1. SUBJECT: Ordinance No.--'z%~' ~ Rulemaking Procedures AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CiTY COUNCil FOR AGENDA OF: Augusn ~I, !999 ORIGINATING DEPT: Legal ORIGINATOR: Glenna Malanca~ City Autorney DATE SUBMITTED: July 29, 1999 2. CLEARANCES: .? (Comment on back if necessary) .... ' 'Glen~a2'Malan~a, City Attorney 3. EXHIBITS: Council Study Sessions -~iscal & Budget C~}rman Operations Committee Chairman ENDORSEMENT iNFORMATiON MAYOR _:~-,- _ .':..:-'-. '.--.- APPROVED BY COUNCi= PRESIDENT POR a~: ....... : COUNCIL PRESIDENT 4. SUMM~RX STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: An Ordinance reeeating the Ruiemaking Procedures. This criinance wc"- - re~ea~d due ~s, the ]ack c,f need for .... ~'.~ _ ~ ~ _~ _ ~c ...... for ru!emak!nc. -h_~ t~ = housekeeping measure ~o elimina~= an outdated ~rllnance, which ~ec~rlLzes current practices. Chapter 2.~0 would be ~eD~ed_ ~_ Ln its enzire~v. 8. RECOMMENDATION: Record Mo~ion: Ho~ion to auerove__ ~he erouosed ers~n=nc=," - - reueailnc. . Chapter on ~°: reading; Pass Or,~nance No...2 ' ~. on 2~ _~=-~~=~_..~ in les enuireEv. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAl: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED [] TABLED [] APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [] DATE: COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: Il OVER ~ 80 2. CT.m~NCE CO~S: 5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIi~W~NT OR OT~R RESOURCES: None. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE repealing Ordinance No. Bremerton Municipal Code. 3960 which created Chapter 2.80 of the THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: RULEMAKING PROCEDURES SECTION 1. Repeal. Ordinance No. 3960 creating the hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take passage and publication. APPROVED by the City Council on the first reading this ~ day of PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ day of Rulemaking effect ten Procedures is (10) days from ,1999. ,1999. MIKE SHEPHERD Council President APPROVED this ~ day of ,1999. ATTEST: LYNN S. HORTON Mayor KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk Chapter 2.80 RULEMAKING PROCEDURES Sections: 2.80.010 2.80.020 2.80.030 2.80.040 2.80.050 2.80.060 2.80.070 2.80.080 2.80.090 DEFINYrlONS. PROCEDURAL RULES. RULES EVIPLEMENTEN G 0 RDINA~NCES OR RESOLUTIONS. AGENCY RULEMAKLNG AUTHORITY. AGENCY PROMIJLGATION OF RULES. PETITION FOR RULEMAKING. EMERGENCY ACTION. DECLARATORY AUTFIORITY. DECLARATORY JUDGMENT. 2.80.010 DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this chapter: (1) "Agency." means the City. of Eremerton or any of its subckivisions, including, but not limited to, any City board, commission, committee, officer or department, but exclusive of the City Council and its committees, when acting in accordance with or pursuant to authorization by ordinance or resolution to make rules. (2) "Rule" means any agency, order or regu. iation of future effect, including amendment or r~.-'?-al of a prior rule, which has been formally adopted in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, which substantially affects the interests of the public, which applies generally rather than to specific parties, and which: (A) Implements or makes specific any city council ordinance or resolution wkich has provided standards or guidelines that define in less than complete specificity what is to be done and which clearly indicates that it is the agency, which is to accomplish it; or (B) 'Governs the' agency's organization or procedure in accordance with the scope of administrative authority to act granted by city. charter, resolution and ordinance." Such term does not include internal management directives which result in agency action affecting the agency's own officers or its employees or other agencies with the city government, but which do not substantially affect the rights or liabilities of the public; intra-agency or inter-agency memoranda; executive orders of the mayor, agency contracts; or interpretations of an ordinance or resolution embodied either in a binding declaratory, ruling pursuant to Section 2.80.090 of this chapter or in an appealable administrative decision. Any agency procedure, policy, regulation, or standard, which by its effect, fits the definition of a rule but which has not been formally adopted in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, shall be deemed "informal" and shall be void and without effect; provided, that any agency procedure, policy, regulation or standard in existence at the date of enactment of this chapter, whether oral or w-rirten in form, shall be valid for the duration of any applicable limitation period as hereinm~er provided. (Ord. 3960 ~ i, 1985). 2.80.020 PROCEDURAL RULES. (a) Subject to the limitations othcrv,-ise imposed by statute, ordinance, and City' Charier, each civ' agent' shall issue written proc<ural rules des~g its organization within the framework~0?ishe~b~'.:~he city council, staling both the general .... and resolution or ordinance-%'pecific course and method of those of its operations v'bAch si=~canfly affect the public, and the methods whereby the public may obtain in.formation and make submissions .a~d requests. These rules shall be su.m?lemented "~r replaced as necessary by additional procedural rules in the future. Co) Those specific existing procedures whose use is a consequence of less than specific ordinances or resolutions which govern interactions between the city and the public, even though such procedures "implement" the ordinances or resolutions from which they derive. shall comply with the pro~4sions of the limitations period established in this section and shall be deemed "procedural rules" after formal rulemaking. (c) Where the te.xl of any particular 2-47 %3 orciinance or resolution is explicit enough to have made the development of agency procedures unnecessan.', rulemaking by the agen%' wi~ regard to such ordinance is not required. (d) In order to foreclose the possibility of even the appearance of arbitrary action by an agency, acting in the absence of proce~m'al rules which have been formally adopted, no member of the public shall be required to comply with any agency, procedure in existence at the date of ena~ur~em of this chapter unless such procedure has been reduced to writing in the form of a rule and adopted as proposed or in amended form by the agency, within one hundred eigh~ calendar days of the date that the city courmil grants the agency rulemaking authority in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.80.040 of tltis ctmpter, or of the date of enactment of tttis clmptex itself if the agency already has such mlemaking authority by ordinance, provided, that the mayor may extend this one-hundred-eighty calendar-day requirement an additional ninety days upon the demonstrated need of the responsible department. .-May agency, procedural requirement which does not comply with this chapter shall be deemed "irfformal" and hence be tmerfforceable. (Ord. 3960 §2. 1985). 2.80.030 RULES E'vlPLE MENTENG ORDINANCES OR RESOLUTIONS. (a) Each agency, of the city. shall issue wrmen rules detailing its me.od of implementing those ordinances or resoluuons which it has been given the authority, to admimster. The purpose for adopting such rules of implementation is to foreclose either (10 the possibility, of an agency's modification of the specific intent of the ciD' council in passing le~station, or (2) even the appearance of abuse of cLiscretionao.' power by an agency.' in its actions in the absence of v,Titten rules. O) Such rules may be concerned ~ith: (1) An>: qualifications or standards for the issuance, continued' validity, or renewal of a license that if violated, subjects the xSolator to a penalty or administrative sanction, such as the suspension or-revocation of such license; (2) Any qualification or requirement relating to the enjoyment of a benefit or a privilege conferred by law that. if violated, subjects the violator to a penalty or administrative sanction such as the suspension or termination of such benefit or privilege; or (3) Any requirement or standards relating to obligations of conduct or the discharge of duties imposed by law that, if violated, subject the violator to a penalty or administrative sanction such as abatement or assessment for COSTS. (c) Where the text of any particular ordinanc~ is explicit enough to preclude the exercise of agency discretion in implementing that ordinance, rulemaking by the agency s~"ith regard to such ordinance is not required. (d) The head of each city agency shall examine the operation of Ns or her agency and · ose ordinances and resolutions both which substantially affect the interests of the public and which the agency has been Wen the responsibility, for implementing, and he or she shall reduce to writing any existing agency policies, re=mxlations, or standards designed and used to implement any such ordinance or resolution. ~'Tne agency, head shall also develop supplemental policies, regulations or standards it' necessary, to allow for a comprehensive scheme for uhe implementation of existing ordinances and resolutions by the agency.' that might otherw-ise be [ack/rig. (e) Where, however, an agency is clearly required to ac[rmnister the provdsions of a particular or~/nance or resolution but the provisions othervAse appear out-dated, internally inconsistent, ambiguous, or burdensomely detailed upon the review by the responsible agen%' head mandated by tl-tis section, the agency shall not be r~'xtuired at that time to issue rules of implementation based on such purportedly defective existing provisions. The agency manager si'tall instead prepare proposed ordinance or resolution amendments for submission to the city council. The schedule for preparation and submissions of such amendments shall be developed by each agencT head and shall reflect the magTfitude of the job, budgetary constraints, and other agent7 priorities, in accordance w-it.h the plan set forth by the mayor. Upon final action by the ciLy council adopting, or 2-48 refusing to adopt, such proposed amendments, the agency shall commence and complete rulemaking consistent with the requirements of this chapter and within one hundred eighty, calendar days of the date of such action by the council. Prior to the time that the council takes such final action, pursuant to Section 2.80.060 of this chapter, the agency can be obligated to initiate rulernaking to adopt as a rule any procedure, policy, regulation or standard whose actual or threatened application interferes with or impairs the legal rights or privileges of a member of the public. A procedure, policy, regulation or standard which attempts to implement a defective ordinance or resolution is unenforceable and cannot be adopted as a rule. (0 Except where otherwise provided herein, all existing agency policies, regulations, or standards shall be adopted as proposed or in amended form as rules of implementation by the agency, within one hundred eighty calendar days either of the in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.80.040 of this chapter, or of the date of enactment of this chapter if the agency, already h~ such rulemaking authority by ordinance. Each rule adopted shall include language which specifically cites to the ordinance or resolution which the rule is intended to administratively implement, and a brief statement of the purpose that the adoption of the rule is intended to serve. (g) Any agency policy., regulation or srmadard of implementation which substantially affects the interests of the public but which does not comply with this chapter shall be d~med "informal" and hence be unenforceable. (Ord. 3960 ~3, 1985). 2.80.040 AGENCY RIJLEMAKING AUTt~ORITY. Where an agency, is not specifically authorized to itself adopt rules to carry out the purposes of a particular ordinance or resolution in ex.istence on the date of the enactment of this chapter, though such ordinance or resolution does clearly require the agency, to administer its provisions, the agen%' shall submit to the city. council a list of such ordinances and resolutions within ninety calendar days' of the date of enactment of this chapter. The council shall amend each such ordinance and resolution so as to include a new section which reacts as follows: RULEMAKING - The [agency], as an agency in the City, according to the definition in Section ~- (a) of the Municipal Code, shall have the power and duty, from time to time, to adopt, publish and enforce rules not inconsistent with law for the purpose of carrying out the provisions hereof, and it shall be unlawful to violate, or fail to comply with any such rule. Each city agency., upon such amendment action by the city council, shall be empowered to promulgate rules in conformity with the requirements of this chapter. All future laws enacted by the council shall include language providing for agency rulemaking when necessary to allow administration of such laws, and each agency so empowered shall adopt those rules necessa~ to regularize its procedure and the implementation of municipal laws. (OrcL 3960 ~4, 1985). 2.80.050 AGENCY PROMULGATION OF RULES. Upon the reduction to writing of those agen%' procedures, policies, regulations, and standards in exixtence at the date of ena~.m~ent of this chapter in the form of proposed rules, and prior to the adoption, amtmdrnent or r~eal of any rule in the future the agency, shall ~ve public notice of its intended rulemaking action by: (1) First-class mailing or delive~ to Lhe address specffied by any person who has made wr/rten requext therefor, which shall be filed with the agency, and renewed annually, and posfiag of copies of notice in Bremerton City Hall. A publication of notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the c/tv shall be required only w/th regard to the initial promulgation of agency. procedures, policies, r%malations, and standards as rules as required in Sections 2.80.020 and 2.80.030 of th.is chapter. Notice shall include: (a) A reference to the authority. under which such rule(s) Can be proposed; Co) An accurate description of the substance of the proposed rule(s) or of the subjects and issues involved; (c) A statement indicating the availability of the xmtten text of the proposed 2-49 rule(s) at thc office of the city. clerk for public inspection and copying upon payment or' reproduction costs; and (d) A statement indicating the manner in which interested persons may present data. views and arguments in ~vritten form to the agency, in regard to the proposed rules. Though the agency, may find that a public hearing and oral presentations on the proposed rule(s) is unnecessary, or impracticable, if the agency decides to hold a hearing and allow testimony, it shall publicly post and cause to be published notice of the proposals in the manner and form hereinabove prescribed at least fourteen calendar days prior to the scheduled hearing, except that included with such repeated notice shall be a statement of the time and place of the hearing. (2) Circulation of the entire text to other agencies in the city for review and comment. Any comment shall be submitted in writing to the agenp' proposing the rule(s), which shall be responsible for preparing a concise statement of the principal reasons for and against the adoption of the rule(s) as proposed, incom, orating therein its reasons for overruling the considerations urged against adoption of the rule(s) as proposed. Such statement shall be transmitted to the relevant commenting agency prior to adoption of the rule(s). The agent' proposing to issue a rule shall consider fully all written and oral submissions respecting the rule. Not less than fourteen calendar days after public notice of the intended agency rulemaking action is first given, the agency, may act to adopt any proposed rule(s) or amend or repeal any e.,dsfing rule(s). The agency, need not hold a public hearing and allow oral presentations of data, ',dews and arguments with respect to the intended agency rulemaking action if it determines that such a proceeding is unnecessarz,.' or impracticable. The adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule by an agency, need not be based upon or supported by an evidenfiary record. A certified copy of an agency rule shall be filed and indexed as a public record with the cit3' clerk as a part of the 'Bremerton Administrative Code within six working days of the date of their adoption and shall be made available for inspection and copying upon payment of reproduction costs ~vhen city administrative offices are open for normal business. The effective date of any agenq' rule shall be on the date of its filing. (Ord. 3960 1985). 2.80.060 PETITION FOR RULEMAKING. (a) Any interested person may petition an agency requesting the adoption, amen~nent or repeal of any rule. Each agency shall prescribe, by rule, the form for such petitions and the procedure for their submission, consideration and disposition. (b) A petition for repeal of a rule will be denied unless it is demonstrated with specifici .ty that the challenged rule is defective for one or more of the following reasons: (1) The rule violates constitutional provisions: (2) The rule exceeds the authority of the agency, granted by City. Charter, resolution or ordinance; or (3) The rule ~vas not adopted in compliance with those rulemaking procedures required by this chapter and any other ordinance. (c) A challenged rule will not be d~med invalid solely because it was adopted without compliance with applicable rutemak/ng procedures after a period of one year from t_he date the rule was filed ~ith the ci.ty clerk, ff the agency, at-tempted to comply with those procedures and its failure to do so did not substantially prejudice the interests of the parties. (d) Within thirty calendar days after the submission of a petition, the agenc?' shall either deny such petition in writing (stating its reasons for the denial) or initiate rulemaking proceed/rigs concermng the subject of such petition in accordance with Section 2.80.050; except, that a petitioner may oblige the agency to inflate ru/emaking to adopt as a rule any procedure, policy., regulation, or standard whose actual or threatened application interferes with or impairs the legal rights or privileges of the public. (Ord. 3960 §6, 1985). 2.80.070 EMERGENCY ACTION. (a) Where an agency, finds that 2-50 immediate adoption, amendment or suspension of a rule is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safe .ty or weffare and the observance of the requirements of notice and opportunity to present data, views, and arguments prior to the proposed action would be contrary to the public interest, the agency may dispense with such requirements or give any abbreviated notice or heating that it finds practicable before unflermlcing such rulemaking action as is necessary.. The adoption, amendment or suspension of a rule under emergency circumstances is elIecfive upon flung with the city clerk and shall be accompanied by a statement of the facts upon which the findings of an emergency and necessity are based. Co) The adoption amendment or suspension of a rule under this section shall be effective for a period of not more than six'fy calendar days unless the rulemaking requirements set forth in Section 2.80.060 have been complied with within this time period, or unless there has b~n a more limiting statement placed within the rule itself. A rule temporarily suspended shall regain effectiveness u~n expiration of the sixty-day period unless the rule is repealed pursuant to Section 2.80.050. This emergency section does not relieve any agency.' from compliance w/th any law requiring that the adoption, amendment or repeal of a rule be approved by the ci.ty council before it becomes effective, nor shall any action be taken under this section xvhich affects any pending case before a judge or appeal of an agency, decision before a hearing examiner. (Ord. 3960 §7, 1985). 2.80.080 DECLARATORY AUTHORITY. (a) On petition of any interested person, the chief administrative officer or director of any agency may issue a declaratory ruling with respect to the applicabiliD' to an.,,' person, property or state of facts of any rules, policies, regulations, standards, procedures, resolutions or ordinances enforceable by the agency. Such petition shall be considered and granted or denied in accordance with the agency's promulgated procedural rules for submission, consideration, and disposition of such petitions. A declaratoD' ruling is binding between the agency and the petitioner on the state of facts alleged, unless it is altered or set aside by a court. (b) Prior to agency, action to formally adopt as a rule or dispense with by default of action any unwritten procedure, policy, regulation or standard in compliance with the provisions of this chapter, any individual, partnership, corporations, association, or public or private organiTation of any character whose rights or liabilities are or may be significantly affected by the agency's application of such procedure, policy, regulation or standard to the affected party, its property, or to any state of-facts may require by filing an agency, form that the chief administrative officer or director of the agency: (1) Specify in a declaratory. ruling which procedure, policy, regulation or standard of the agency is deemed applicable to the circumstances forming the basis for the inquiry; and (2) Reduce such procedure, policy., regulation or standard to writing for the purpose of public inspection. (Ord. 3960 §8, 1985). 2.80.090 DECLARATORY JUDGMENT. The validity, of any agency rule may be determined upon petition for a declaratory jud~ent thereon addressed to the K.irsap Superior Court when it appears that the nde. or its threatened application, interferes with or impairs or immediately threatens to interfere with or /mpa.ir, the legal rights or privileges of the pet/tioner. The agency, shall be made a part?' to the proceeding. The court shall declare the challenged rule invalid only If it finds that it either violates constitutional provisions or exceeds the authori .ty granted the agency, by Cit,' Charter. ordinance or resolution or xvas adopted without compliance with those rulemaking procedures required by this chapter and any other applicable ordinance. The court shall not declare a rule invalid solely because it was adopted without compliance ~with applicable rulemaking procedures after a period of one year of the date the rule was filed with the City. Clerk, if the agency, attempted to comply with those procedures and its failure to do so did not substantially prejudice the interests of the parties. 2-51 ,~udicial review of the contested rule shall be limited to an examination of the rule under review, the ordinance provisions authorizing the rule, and copies of all documents necessa~' to demonstrate compliance with applicable rulemaking procedures. The declaratory judgment may be rendered whether or not the petitioner has first requested the agency to pass upon the validity of the rule in question. (Ord. 3960 §9, 1985). 2-52 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Ordinance Number "¢./d ~'' 'Z relating to Vacation ofPubhc R_ights-of-Way (BMC 11.20 and 21.02.850) 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back~n~ Director. Public Works/Utilities City Attorney ~..~,~ Director, Economic 8,: Comm. Dev. /r~ Ciw Clerk ~ He~rd at Ciw Council Study Session offJ'u-l.~ 1-4, / 1999. ENT)ORSEMENT .>( i~LRMATION__ MAYOR~ y~. FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATEx~G DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: Au=oust M. 1999 PW&U Engineering Div. Randy Witt, Ciff En=o/neerA<'~ Au=oust 2. 1999 3. EXttlBITS 1. Ordinance 4~'~:'7Vacafion of Public Rights-of-Way and irs summary.. 2. Summary of major features of the Vacation Ordinance. 3. RCW Chapter 35.79 on Street Vacations. 4. Existing BMC Chapter 11.20 on Street Vacations .APPROVED BY COUNCIL p~RI~/~D~N:F COUNCIL PRESDENT 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AxND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Ciw staff has prepared a new ordinance on the vacation of public rights-of-way. The ordinance streamlines and simplifies the vacation procedure, and brings it in conformity with State Law. The new ordinance reveals existing BMC Chapter 11.20, Street and Alley Vacation Procedure, in its entirerv replacing it with a new CEar>ter 11.20, Vacation of Public Rights-of-Way. and removes rights-of-way vacations from the Type El Ciw Comncil Decisions in BMC 21.02.850. A Summary Ordinance for publication has been prepared. Staff recowd'nends passage of the ordinance. 8. RECOMMENDATION: A. Motion to approve the attached Ordinance and its summary related to vacation of public n~qts-o£-,.v%.. ur~on first reading. ~ B. Motion to pass Ordinance-., ~ ~ , and its summary, related to vacation of public n?~ts-of-way, u~on second reading. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICLAL: ENTORCEMENT OFFICLAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: Cirv Enmneer N,'A PL'LLED TABLED C OULNCIL DIRECTIVE 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: 11. 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: City. staff will continue to use the existing Street and Alley Vacation Ordinance. process and deficiencies created by that process will continue. The confusion in the existing 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: No change. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES 99229 VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY SUMMARY OF MAJOR FEATURES The new street vacation ordinance replaces the existing ordinance (BMC11.20). are the major features of that ordinance: The followino_ · Identifies what constitutes "sufficiency of signature" on petitions to vacate a r/g2nt-of-way. The sig-nature of every property, owner of a property is necessary to bind that property for the purposes of requesting a vacation by the petition method. · A clear definition of a City initiated vacation. For an objection to a City initiated vacation. each property owner adjacent to the proposed vacation can independently object ("one person - one vote", this is different than the sufficiency of signature requirement above). · The County Treasurer's records are the basis of property ownership. · Guidance for the City Council to use at the conclusion of the heating as to whether or not a vacation should be ganted. · Ability for the City Council to g-rant the vacation as ori~nally proposed, deny the vacation. or adjust the vacation. · Allows the City to retain easements for public utilities in the vacated area. · Provides for compensation for three classes ofr/ghts-of-way. · Class t where the Ciw hold fee simr~ie title would be compensated at 100% of the appraised value. · Class II where the City has a rig2qt-of-way interest in an area that is improved would be compensated in an amount not to exceed 50 % of the appraised value of said property. · Class III where the City holds a rig. hr-of-way interest in an area that is unimproved and where no public funds have been expended would not require compensation in excess of the fees xvith the associated vacation. · The value of the compensation can be determined using either an appraisal or through the land values in the County Assessor's records. The City. mav waive compensation for other government agencies. · Right-of-way vacations are removed from the Type III City Council decisions (BMC 21.02.850) process, as this ordinance establishes the hearing process for this activity. · An Administrative City Policy has been established to clearly define what departments are responsible for what activities associated with a street vacation. RW/ab ROW, Vacation, Summary. ORDINANCE NO. "~!,.;' 5" ~L~ AN ORDINANCE repealing Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 11.20 Street and Alley Vacation Procedure in its entirety and replacing it with a new chapter entitled Vacation of Rights-of-Way and amending Chapter 21.02.850 Type III City Council Decisions. Whereas, Vacation of Public Rights-of-Way is established by Chapter 35.79 RCW, and; Whereas, the Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 11.20, specifies the process whereby right-of-way is vacated in the City of Bremerton in accordance with Chapter 35.79 RCW, and; Whereas, the existing Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 11.20, requires revisior~ to provide conformity with State Laws and clarification of the City process; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Repeal and Replace. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 11.20 Street. and Alley Vacation Procedure is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced with the following: Sections: 11.20.010 11.2O.02O 11.20.030 11.20.040 11.20.050 11.20.060 Chapter 11.20 VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Purpose. Territorial application. Construction. Definitions. Establishing sufficiency of signatures on petitions. Owners responsibility to notify other property interests. VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page 1 11.20.070 11.20.080 11.20.090 11.20.100 11.20.110 11.20.120 11.20.130 11.20.140 11.20.150 Petition for vacation by abutting property owners. City initiated vacation. Limitations on vacations which abut bodies of water. Fixing time for headng. Notice of hearing. Hearing. Recording of vacation ordinance. Compensation. Fees. 11.20.010 Purpose. It is the purpose of this chapter to implement the requirements for the vacation of public rights-of-way in accordance with Chapter 35.79, RCW. 11.20.020 Territorial application. This chapter and the procedures adopted hereunder shall be in effect throughout the City of Bremerton. 11.20.030 Intent. A. This chapter is enacted to protect and preserve the public health, safety and welfare. Its provisions shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of these purposes. B. It is expressly the purpose of this chapter and any procedures adopted hereunder to provide for and promote the health, safety and welfare of the general public, and not to create or otherwise establish or designate any particular class or group of persons who will or should be especially protected or benefited by the terms of this chapter or any procedures adopted hereunder. C. It is the specific intent of this chapter and any policies adopted hereunder to place the obligation of complying with the requirements of this chapter upon the applicanT, anc no provision is intended to impose any duty upon the City of Bremerton, or any of its officers, employees or agents. Nothing contained in this chapter or any procedures adopted hereunder is intended to be or shall be construed to create or form the basis for liability on the part of the City of Bremerton, or its officers, employees or agents, for any injury or damage resulting from the failure of the applicant to comply with the provisions hereof, or by reason or in consequence of any act or omission in connection with the implementation or enforcement of this chapter or any procedures adopted hereunder by the City of Bremerton, its officers, employees or agents. VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page 2 11.20.040 Definitions. "City" means the City of Bremerton, Washington. "Department" means the Public Works and Utilities Department or other Department designated by the Mayor. "Director" means the Director of Public Works and Utilities or his/her designated representative. "Engineering Division" means the Engineering Division of the Department. "Front footage" means the amount of property that abuts a right-of-way to be vacated as measured in lineal footage. "Front footage basis" means the ratio of the front footage of one or more properties on a right-of-way to be vacated to the total front footage of the right-of-way to be vacated. "Owner" means one who has an interest in real estate or private property as listed in the records of the County Treasurer. "Property" means real estate including any lot, tract or parcel or other subdivision of land. "Right-of-way" means all public streets and property granted or reserved for, or dedicated to, public use for street and alley purposes, together with public proper~y granted or reserved for, or dedicated to, public use for walkways, sidewalks. bikeways, parking, and horse trails, whether improved or unimproved, including the air rights, sub-surface rights and easements related thereto. 11.20.050 Establishing sufficiency of signatures on petitions. A. Sufficiency of Signature. For the purpose of determining the sufficiency cf signature(s) of owner(s) on the petition, or consent to vacate the following rules shall govern: 1. The signature of every owner of a property as determined by the records of the County Treasurer are necessary to bind that property. 2. In the case of ownership by a corporation, the signature of any officer authorized by the bylaws or resolution of the board of directors shall be sufficient when evidenced by an excerpt of the said bylaws or said resolution, certified by the secretary of said corporation, granting such authority. VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page 3 o signature of the duly qualified administrator or executor or guardian shall In the case of property owned by the estate of a decedent or incompetent, the be equivalent to the signature of the owner of the property. B. The City will rely upon the records of the County Treasurer to determine the owner(s) of a property. 11.20.060 Owner's responsibility to notify other property interests. It is the responsibility of the owner listed in the County Treasurer's Records to noti~ other persons or entities who have interest in the property who are not listed with the County Treasurer's Office of the proposed vacation. This may include, but not be limited to a mortgagor or contract vendor for purchase of the property. 11.20.070 Petition for vacation by abutting property owners. A. General. The owners of an interest in any property abutting upon any street or alley who may desire to vacate the street or alley, or any part thereof, may petition the City Council to make vacation. The petition application shall be flied with the Engineering Division. If the petition is signed by the owners of more than two-thirds of the property on a front footage basis abutting upon the part of such street or alley sought to vacated, the council, shall by resolution, fix a time when the petition will be heard. B. Petition application. To initiate a vacation by petition, the applicant must provide the following: 1. The petition signed by owners of more than two-thirds of the property, on a front footage basis, abutting upon the part of such street or alley sought to be vacated. 2. A legal description of the area sought to be vacated. 3. A scale drawing of the part of the street or alley sought to be vacated. The drawing shall show the right-of-way lines, location of any existing surface features such as curbs and gutters, catch basins or power lines, and the locations of existing underground features such as water lines or gas lines. 4. A letter from each utility company that describes any existing or future facilities in the area sought to be vacated and whether any easements are required to be provided prior to a vacation. 5. Payment of the application fee. VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page 4 6. Any other information that may be required by the Director or as specified by this chapter or the policies adopted hereunder, including but not limited to a title report, a survey of the area sought to be vacated by a surveyor registered in Washington, or other information to clarify issues that may arise because of the proposed vacation. C. Application reviewed. Upon receipt of the application to vacate a portion of the right- of-way, the City will review the accuracy and completeness of the application. The review will include, but not be limited to evaluating; the petition signatures, the legal description, the drawing and the utility letters. If the application is incomplete, the City shall notify the applicant of the-errors or omissions and request the information necessary to complete the application. The information must be provided within sixty (60) days, unless otherwise extended by the City, or the application shall be considered terminated. D. Staff report. When the application review is complete the City will prepare a draft staff report on the proposed right-of-way vacation that provides information and a recommendation on issues that the council must make a determination on in the hearing, the amount of compensation to be paid to the City, and any easements that must be retained. E. Applicant notification for hearing. The City will notify the applicant that the application is considered complete and provide a copy of the draft staff report. Should the applicant elect to proceed, the compensation for the area sought to be vacated shall be paid to the City prior to establishing a hearing date. 11.20.080 City-initiated vacation. A. The City Council may initiate a vacation by adopting a resolution. The same resolution may fix the vacation hearing time. B. Objections. Where the vacation proceeding is initiated by resolution of the council without a petition of the abutting property owners, if 50 percent of the abutting property owners file written objection to the proposed vacation with the City Clerk prior to the time of the hearing, the City Council shall be prohibited from proceeding with the vacation. VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page 5~, C. Fees waived. In the event that the City Council initiates a right-of-way vacation, fees shall not be required unless the council directs otherwise. D. Compensation waived. In the event that the City Council initiates a right-of-way vacation, compensation shall not be required unless the City Council directs otherwise. 11.20.090 Limitations on vacations which abut bodies of water. The City shall not vacate a street or alley, or any portion of a street or alley which abuts a body of salt or fresh water without first complying with the requirements for the vacation of such as set forth in Chapter 35.79.035, RCW as presently enacted or subsequently amended. 11.20.100 Fix time for hearing, Upon meeting all requirements of the application for a petition to vacate or passage of a resolution for City-initiated vacation by the City Council, the City Council shall by resolution fix a time when the hearing on the proposed vacation will be heard. The hearing shall not be more than sixty (60) days or less than twenty (20) days after the date of passage of such resolution. 11.20.110 Notice of hearing. Upon passage of the resolution fixing the time for a public hearing, the City Clerk snail cause a written notice of the pendency of the petition to be posted, at least twenty (20) calendar days prior to the date set for hearing, in three public places in the City and a like notice to be posted in a conspicuous place on that portion of the street or alley sought to be vacated. Copies of such notice shall be mailed, at least 15 calendar days prior to the date of hearing, to each owner of property abutting the right-of-way proposed to be vacated, including the petitioners at a local address if a resident of the city, otherwise to the last address showing on the records of the County Auditor. Said notice shall contain a statement in that the City Council has set a hearing on a proposal to vacate the portion described in the notice together with a statement of the time and place fixed for the hearing of the petition and inviting interested persons to appear and be heard for or against the granting thereof or to submit written comment prior to that date. 11.20.120 Hearing. VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page A. Hearing. At the time appointed for the hearing of the vacation petition or resolution, or at such time as the same may be adjourned to by the City Council, the matter shall be considered and persons desiring to speak for or against the vacation thereof shall be heard. Following such headng, the City Council shall determine: 1. Whether the street, alley or portion thereof is no longer required for public use; and vacation of the described portion will better serve the public good; and 2. Whether the vacation is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan; and 3. Whether the continued use of the proposed vacation as a public way is not of such public benefit as not to justify the cost of maintenance; and 4. Whether the substitution of a new and ~different thoroughfare would be more useful to the public; and 5. Whether conditions may so change in the future as to provide a greater public use or need than presently exists; and 6. Whether objections to the proposed vacation are made by owners of private property (exclusive of petitioners) abutting the same. B. Public comments on vacations. The City Council shall consider public comments for or against the vacation in their deliberations on the vacation. C. Granting vacations. At the conclusion of the hearing and based upon the information in the staff report and the public comment, the City Council shall take one of the following actions: 1. Vacate the street or alley or any portion thereof as described in the originai vacation resolution. 2. Deny the request for the vacation. 3. Adjust the area described in the original vacation resolution, provided it is within the originally proposed area to be vacated. D. In addition to the actions listed in C above, the City Council may: 1. Impose other conditions on limitations as it deems necessary to preserve any desired public use. 2. Retain an easement or the right to exercise and grant easements on the vacated land for the construction, repair and maintenance of public utilities and services. 11.20.130 Recording of vacation ordinance. VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page 7 The City Clerk shall cause the recording of a vacation ordinance granted by City Council after all conditions set by the City Council have been satisfactorily met. 11.20~ 140 'Compensation. A. Classifications of rights-of-way for purpose of compensation. For purposes of this chapter, all rights-of-way within the city primarily used or reserved for use as public ways, including streets and alleys, are declared to be within one of the following classes: 1. Class 2. Class easement or Rights-of-way in which the City holds fee simple title; Rights-of-way in which the interest of the City is limited to a public right of use for particular purposes which has substantial public improvements in any portion of the right-of-way; 3. Class II1: Rights-of-way in which the interest of the City is limited to a public easement or right of use for particular purposes which are generally unimproved and for which no public funds have been expended in the acquisition or providing improvements. B. Amount of compensation. The amount of compensation required to be paid to the City, as a condition precedent to the vacation of a public way shall be determineC according to the following criteria: 1. Class I rights-of-way shall be considered a sale of a capital asset and shall be compensated for at 100 percent of its appraised value. 2. Class II rights-of-way shall be compensated for in the amount not to exceed 50 percent of the appraised value of said property. 3. Class III rights-of-way shall not require compensation in excess of fees associated with vacation. C. Determination of value for compensation. The compensation for the vacated property shall be determined by one of the following methods at the discretion of the applicant; 1. The average property value in the County Assessor's records of the abutting properties weighted on a front footage basis. VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page 8~ 2. The applicant can provide an appraisal of the property. The appraiser must be a certified appraiser agreeable to the City. If an appraisal is performed it must be used for the determination of comper)sation. D. Property in lieu of payment. In lieu of payment for monetary compensation, the petitioners may grant or dedicate to the City for street or other purposes, real property useful for that purpose where the property to be acquired by such exchange has an appraisal value at least equal to the amount of cash compensation that would otherwise be required. The City shall not be obligated to accept such an exchange and the decision of the Director on the acceptability of the alternate property offered shall be final. E. Waiving compensation - other governmental agencies. Where vacation or transfer of a public way is applied for by or on behalf of another governmental agency or jurisdiction, the City Council may waive any compensation required by this chapter and may also waive filing fees, if the City. Council deems such a waiver to be to the public's interest and advantage. A transfer or vacation of property in which compensation has been waived under this section shall be accompanied by a covenant providing that the City shall be compensated for the fair market value of the interest conveyed or vacatec at the time of any future sate or lease of the subject property by said other governmental agency. F. Compensation returned. If the City Council denies the petition for vacation, the compensation deposited with the City, wilt be returned to the applicant, without interest. 11.20.150 Fees. A non-refundable fee for acceptinG and processing right-of-way vacation applications and any separate direct charges shail be set forth in a fee schedule adopted by the City Council. Fees and charges pursuant to this section may be increased or decreased by the City Council on the Mayor's recommendations in accordance with the changes in costs incurred by the City. Section 2. Amend. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 21.02.850 Type III City Council Decisions is hereby amended as foltows: VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page 21.02.850 Type III City Council Decisions. la) Actions: The following actions may be aPproved, approved with conditions, denied, or remanded by the City Council following an open record pre-deciSi'on ipu'blic hearing, unless noted otherwise. Public notice is required for Type ill actions. Recommendations will be provided by the Planning Commission following a public meeting. Staff may conduct additional neighborhood meetings when required or when otherwise warranted by the Director for public information or data gathering purposes. An asterisk (*) denotes actions that are exempt from the 120-day permit processing requirement. (1) (2) (3) ¢4) (87) (4-~9) Section 3. passage and Preliminary Subdivision Plat. Final Subdivision Plat. Vacation of existing subdivision. Surplus or sale of other public property. * Planned Unit Development (PUD). Major amendment to a previously approved Type II1 decision. Binding Site Plan. Non-administrative Special Use Permit. Rezone for specific properties or small area. Development Agreement. Effective date. This ordinance shall become effective ten publication as provided. days after APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of ,1999. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of ,1999. MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page 10 APPROVED this day of ,1999. ATTEST: LYNN HORTON, Mayor KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Page SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE relating to Vacation of Public Rights-of-Way and repealing Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 11.20 Street and Alley Vacation Procedure in its entirety and replacing it with a new chapter entitled Vacation of Rights-of-Way and amending Chapter 21.02.850 Type III City Council Decisions. Section 1. Repeal and Replace. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 11.20 Street and Alley Vacation Procedure is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced with the following: Chapter 11.20 VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY Chapter 11.20, Vacation of Pubfic Rights-of-Way, containing the following sections in its entirety: Purpose, Territorial application, Construction, Definitions, Establishing sufficiency of signatures on petitions, Owners responsibility to notify other property interests, Petition for vacation by abutting property owners, City initiated vacation, Limitations on vacations which abut bodies of water, Fixing time for hearing, Notice of hearing, Hearing, Recording of vacation ordinance, Compensation, and Fees. Section 2. Amend. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 21.02.850, Type !1t City Council Decisions is amended to delete the vacation of the street right-of- way from those actions that require a Type III City Council decision. Section 3. Effective date. This ordinance shall become effective ten days after passage and publication as provided. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of , 1999, and PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of ,1999. The full text of this ordinance is available in the office of the City Clerk, 239 Fourth Street, Bremerton, Washington 98337. SUMMARY OF VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAYS Page ! Chapter 11.20 STREET AND AI,I,EY VACATION PROCEDURE 11.20.010 11.20.020 11.20.0~ 11.20.040 11.20.050 11.20.060 I1.20.070 PETITION - DESIGNATED. PETITION - EXAMINATION, FEE REYERRAL E[EARING BY PLANNING COM2MIISSION RECOMIV~NDATIONS. ~G BY COUNCIL - RESOLUTION AND PROCESSING COSTS AUT~O~ITATION BY ORDINANC'~. DgNIAL - RETURN OF ! 1.20.010 PETITION - DESIGNATED. Any. owners ha~ing an interes~ in ~ real estate abutting .upon any su-eet or alI~- who ma,,' de~m-e to vacate the street or all<~, or an?' part thereof, shall petition the ~ ~tmc4J to m~ke vacation iii the manner prr~'ided in th~s chapter. (Ord. 233~. ~1, 1959). 11.20.020 PETITION - EXAMLNATION, FEE AN-i) REFERRAL The petition ~halI be presented to the mr; en_~n~r for exnmirmtion prior to the ~yment of LEe filing f~. The pentioners simll then present the petition to the city u-ea.vo, rer, and ~' the treasurer a filing f~ as provided for by. resoiufion of the city. council. The ci~ treasurer, .upon receipt of mt:h filing f~, qhall endol'~ tlpon the petition a receipt of poym. ent, and, in addition thereto, furnish to the petitioner a sepamm written receipt showing the payment The petition ~hnll then be presented to the clerk who will in tuna refer ~ petition to the planning commission for examination and recornmendat/on. (Ord. 3688 §9, 1982; Ord. 3597 §7, 1980; Ord. 2334 §2, 1959). 11.20.030 I~ARING BY PI.~'~.-NING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS. kFne ptanmng commission may, if it see~ fit, hold a prehrninnry public hearing thereon at such time, place, and upon such nodm as t_he commission may determine. The pefit/oners and all other persons interested in the vacation shall have an opl~rmnity to be heard at the hearing. The planning common after such hem'Lug ehall return the petition to the city. council with its written recommendations. (Ord. 2334 §3, 1959).. 11.20.040 ltT. ARING BY COUNCIL - RESOLUTION AND NOTICE. Upon receipt of the pet/t/on and recommendation, the council will then set a when the petition shall be heard and sbmll ~ the oily attorney to draft a resolution, in which the lime the petition sl-mll be heard shall be deterrninecL which $imll be not more than days nor less than twenty days after r_he date of adoption of the .n:solution, and the ciO' clerk s~ ~ve t~'euty days' notice of the pendent:' of petition by. wrinen notice posted in ~ of most publ/c ptac~ in the ~ry. and a like noti~ m a conspicuous place on the street or alley sou~t to be vacated, i'he notice s,hatl contain a statement that a petition has been filed to vacate the stree~ or all~ descri'c~ in the nod~, toge~er with a statement of the me and pia~ fixed for the hearSng the,,~,~£ (Ord. 2334 ~4, 1959). 11.20.050 PROCESSD4G COSTS FILING FEE. If the oz,-ts of prying ~e ~nficu for va~fion is ~ter thnn ~e f~, ~en ~e ~U s~ ~d ~d ~ive ~m ~e ~fifio~, ~fc~ vam~g ~e ~ ~e ~emn~ ~n ~ i~olv~ ~d ~e fi~g f~. (~d. 2334 }5, 1959). 11.20.060 AUTHORIZATION BY ORDINANCE. At the time appointed for the hearing of the petition, the petition shall be heard and if thc council determines to grant the petition or any 1t-!2 utilities and servic=s. (Ord. 2334 .%6, 1959). 11.20.070 DENIAL - RETURN OF FII.ING FEE. In the event thor the c/ty cotmal at the h~aring on the pelition ~b.~ll deny the _va~__~Jon of the s~reet or alley, the city may. if it _,!~_-,'ns it to the best intez~ of the city, return the illinE f~ to the petitioners. (Ord. 2334. ~7, 1959). 11-13 Document Page 1 of 8 Revised Code of Washinqton TITLE 35 RCW CITIES AND TOWNS CHAPTER 35.79 RCW STREETS--VACATION Sections 35.79.010 ~,CHAPTER~ n,35.79~ n, RCW~ STREETS--VACATION Petition by owners--Fixing time for hearing. 35.79.020 Notice of hearing--Objections prior to hearing. 35.79.030 Hearing--Ordinance of vacation. 35.79.035 Limitations on vacations of streets abutting bodies of water--Procedure. 35.79.040 Title to vacated street or alley. 35.79.050 Vested rights not affected. RCW 35.79.010 Petition by owners--Fixing time for hearing. 4 Applicable Cases The owners of an interest in any real estate abutting upon any street or alley who may desire to vacate the street or alley, or any part thereof, may petition the legislative authority, to make vacation, giving a description of the property to be vacated, or the legislative authority, may itself initiate by resolution such vacation procedure. The petition or resolmion shall be filed with the ciw or town clerk, and. if the petition is signed by the owners of more than two-thirds of the property abutting upon the part of such street or alley sought to be vacated, legislative authority by resolution shall fix a time when the petition will be heard and determined by such authority or a committee thereof,, which time shall not be more than sixty days nor less than twentx- days after the date of the passage of such resolution. [i965 c 7 § 35.79.010. Prior: 1957 c 156 § 2; 1901 c 84 § t, part: P_RS § 9297, part.] RCW 35.79.020 Notice of hearing--Objections prior to hearing. Upon the passage of the resolution the city or town clerk shall give twenty days' notice of the pendency of the petition by a written notice posted in three of the most public places in the city or town and a i}ke notice in a conspicuous place on the street or alley sought to be vacated. The said notice shall contain a statement that a petition has been filed to vacate the street or alley described in the notice, together with a statement of the time and place fixed for the hearing of the petition. In ali. cases where the proceeding is initiated by resolution of the cit'¢ or town coundl or simitar legislative authority without a petition having been signed by the owners of more than two-thirds of the property abutting upon the part of the street or alley sought to be vacated, in addition to the notice hereinabove required, there shall be given by mail at least fifteen days before the date fixed for the hearing, a similar notice to the owners or reputed owners of all lots, tracts or parcels of land or other property abutting upon any street or alley or any part thereof sought to be vacated, as_shovcn-on the-rolls-o.~unt~3r_easure~, directed to the address thereon shown: PROVIDED, That if fifty percent of the abutting_prQpe_rty owners file written objection to the proposed vacation with the clerk, prior to the time of hearing, the city shall be prohibited from proceeding with the resolution. [1965 c 7 § 35.79.020. Prior: 1957 c 156 § 3; 1901 c 84 § 1, part; RRS § 9297, part.] http ://www.mrsc.org/cgi-bin/om_cgi.exe?clientlD=20963016&infobase=rcw.nfo86/4/99=35.79 Document Page~ ~ of 8 RCW 35.79.030 Hearing--Ordinance of vacation. 6 Applicable Cases The hearing on such petition may be held before the legislative authority, or before a committee thereof upon the date fixed by resolution or at the time said hearing may be adjourned to. If the hearing is before such a committee the same shall, following the hearing, report its recommendation on the petition to the legislative authority which may adopt or reject the recommendation. If such hearing be held before such a committee it shall not be necessary to hold a hearing on the petition before such legislative authority. If the legislative authority determines to grant said petition or any part thereof, such city or town shall be authorized and have authority by ordinance to vacate such street, or alley, or any part thereof, and the ordinance may provide that it shall not become effective until the owners of property, abutting upon the street or alley, or part thereof so vacated, shall compensate such city or town in an amount which does not exceed one-half the appraised value of the area so vacated, except in the event the subject property or portions thereof were acquired at public expense, compensation may be required in an amount equal to the full appraised value of the vacation: PROVIDED, That such ordinance may provide that the city. retain an easement or the right to exercise and pant easements in respect to the vacated land for the construction, repair, and maintenance of public utilities and services. A certified copy of such ordinance shall be recorded by the clerk of the legislative authority and in the office of the auditor of the county in which the vacated land is located. [1987 c 228 § 1; 1985 c 254§ 1; 1969c28§4. Prior: 1967ex. s. c129§ 1;1967c 123 § 1; 1965c7~ 35.79.030; prior: 1957 c 156 § 4:t949 c 14 § 1; 1901 c 84 § 2; Rem. Supp. 1949 ~ 9298.] RCW 35.79.035 Limitations on vacations of streets abutting bodies of water--Procedure. t Applicable Cases (1) A city or town shall not vacate a street or alley if any portion of the street or alley abuts a body of fresh or salt water unless: (ia) The vacation is sought to enable the city or town to acquire the property for port purposes, beach or water access purposes, boat moorage or launching sites. park, public view, recreation, or educational purposes, or other public uses; (b) The city or town, by resolution of its legislative authority, declares that the street or alley is not presently being used as a street or alley and that the street or alley is not suitable for any of the following purposes: Port. beach or water access. boat moorage, launching sites, park, public view, recreation, or education; or (c) The vacation is sought to enable a city or town to implement a plan, adopted by resolution or ordinance, that provides comparable or improved public access to the same shoreline area to which the streets or alleys sought to be vacated abut, had the properties included in the plan not been vacated. (2) Before adopting a resolution vacating a street or alley under subsection (1)(b) of this section, the city or town shall: (a) Compile an inventory of all rights of way within the city or town that abut the same body of water that is abutted by the street or alley sought to be vacated; (b) Conduct a study to determine if the street or alley to be vacated is suitable for use by the city or town for any of the following purposes: Port, boat moorage, http ://www.mrsc.org/cgi-bin/om_cgi.exe?clientlD=20963016&infobase--rcw.nfo~6/4/99:35.79 Document _. _ Page 3 of 8 launching sites, beach or water access, park, public view', recreation, or education; (c) Hold a public hearing on the proposed vacation in the manner required by this chapter, where in addition to the normal requirements for publishing notice, notice of the public hearing is posted conspicuously on the street or alley soug2~t to be vacated, which posted notice indicaIes.that the area is public access, it is proposed to be vacated, and that anyone objecting to the proposed vacation should attend the public hearing or send a letter to a particular official indicating his or her objection; and (d) Make a fmding that the street or alley sougaht to be vacated is not suitable for any of the purposes listed under (b) of this subsection, and that the vacation is in the public interest. (3) No vacation shall be effective until the fair market value has been paid for the street or alley that is vacated. Monevs received from the vacation may be used by the city or town only for acquiring atiditional beach or water access, a~quiring additional public view sites to a body of water, or acquiring additional moorage or launching sites. [1987 c 228 § 2.] RCW 35.79.040 Title to vacated street or alley. 7 Applicable Cases If any street or alley in any city., or town is vacated by the city or town council. the property within the limits so vacated shall belong to the abutting property owners, one-half to each. [1965 c 7 ~ 35.79.040. Prior: 1901 c 84 § 3; RRS ~ 9299.] RCW 35.79.050 Vested rights not affected. : Ar~r>iicable Cases No vested rights shall be affected bv the provisions of this chapter. [1965 c 7 ~ 35.79.050. Prior: 1901 c 84 § 4: P_RS ~ 9300.] CI-L-kPTER 35.80 RCW UNFIT DWELLINGS. BUILDINGS, AND STRUCTURES Sections 35.80.010 Declaration of purpose. 35.80.020 Definitions. 35.80.030 Permissible ordinances--Appeal. 35.80.040 Discrimination prohibited. RCW 35.80.010 Declaration of purpose. It is hereby found that there exist, in the various municipalities and counties or' the state, dwellings which are unfit for human habitation, and buildings, structures. and premises or portions thereof which are unfit for other uses due to dilapidation. disrepair, structural defects, defects increasing the hazards of fire, accidents, or other calamities, inadequate ventilation and uncleanliness, inadequate light or sanitary facilities, inadequate drainage, overcrowding, or due to other conditions which are inimical to the health and welfare of the residents of such municipalities and counties. It is further found and declared that the powers conferred by this chapter are for public uses and purposes for which public money may be expended, and that the necessity of the public interest for the enactment of this law is hereby declared to be a matter of local legislative determination. [1989 c 133 § 1; 1969 ex.s. c 127 § 1; 1967c111 § 1;1965c7§35.80.010. Prior: 1959c82§ 1.] http ://www.mrsc.org/cgi-bin/om_cgi.exe?clientlD=20963016&infobase--rcw.nfo86/4/99=35.79 AGENDA BILL BREM[ERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Ordinance No. Setting fees for Vacation ofl>abtic Ri_~dnts-of-Way. FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: Director, Public Works/Utilities J'/'T~ ..... City Attorney Ci~' Treasurer He~d at the City, Council study sessiort/c~'Yuiy~l~, 1999. / DATE SUBMITTED: Au=mast ,PI, i999 PW&U En,mneenn~ Div. Randy..Witt, Ciu En=-q_nee~ August 2. 1999 o EXI-IIBITS 1. Ordinance No. ' ~., ~,' Setting Fees for Vacation of Public RigAats-of-Way. ENDORSEM3ENT~__~ ~__~P~TION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT,~ ,-? ,- _ / _~FgR~STt~rflFdlTTAL :i ,/' MAYOR ~ ~:]. COUNCIL PRESDENT ,/,..,~.~/,~,- _-- ~ ~ / 4. SU1VIMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION': City staffpresemed to the City Council a new' ordinance on the vacation of public rights-of-way. This companion ordinance establishes a fee structure for processing the applications for vacation under the new ordinance, tt sets an application fee of $517.00, which is the existing fee. It allows for automatic annual adjustments based upon the Seattle Area Consumer Price Zndex. Staff recommends passage of the ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: A. Motion to approve the attached Ordinance setting fees for vacation of public rights-of-way, ut~on firs: reading. B. Motion to pass Ordinance ~, ~' '- setting fees for the vacation of public rights-of-way, uoon second reading. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICL&L: ENTORCEMENT OFFICL&L: EXPI2>,ATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: Ckv Treasurer Ciw Enmneer PULLED TABLED COUNCIL D1RECT~ 10. NOTICE OFACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED 11. AGENDA BILL NO: ~6/., [00 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Application fees for Vacation of Public Rights-of-Way will not be able to be collected in accordance with the new Vacation Ordinance. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS, FACII,ITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOL'RCES: None. 7. RE SE,adICH SOURCES 99241 ORDINANCE NO. ~ ~ AN ORDINANCE setting fees and charges for application and processing requests to vacate the public right-of-way, and establishment of annual adjustments. Whereas, Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 11.20, requires that a fee schedule be adopted by the City Council for fees and changes associated with the vacation of public right-of-way. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Establishment. PURPOSE. This ordinance establishes fees and charges for the vacation of the public right-of-way. This ordinance further establishes automatic annual adjustments of the fees and charges for public right-of-way vacations. I. RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION. Each application submitted for a Public Right-of-Way Vacation shall be charged a non- refundable fee of $ 517.00. II. ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT. The fees set forth in the ordinance shall be adjusted on February 1st of each year based upon the Seattle Area Consumer Price Index, for all permits for the year ended December of the preceding year unless otherwise adjusted by the City Council. The fee shall be rounded down to the nearest dollar. FEES AND CHARGES TO VACATE THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY Page 1 Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective ten passage and publication. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of ., 1999. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of ,1999. days after MiKE SHEPHERD, Council President APPROVED this day of ,1999. LYNN HORTON, Mayor ATTEST: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk FEES AND CHARGES TO VACATE THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY Page 2 AGENDA BILL Plan Amendment CPA 98-0001 BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Comprehensive FOR AGENDA OF: A~a ORIGINATING DEPT.: DCED ORIGINATOR: Jon Holan DATE SUBMITTED: April 20, 1999 2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on b~c~k,i~, necessary) Comm. D~ev~~ 1. City Clerk~~~~~.~'~~ 2. Ci~ A~o~ey:- _ ,~ ~ 3. Fiscal and Buu~~ 4. Operations:~~ 5. 6. ENDORSEMENT/I~ INFORMATION 3. EXHIBITS: Resolution # Memo dated 4/28/99; Proposed Amendments Memo dated 9/15/98; DNS dated 9/2/98; Planning Commission Resolution 98-02; 7. Appeal of DNS by Suquamish Tribe APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL: COUNCIL PRESIDENT L~-~_.~--¥ ~- ~ ' .~-~-~-~ 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: City Council is requested to conduct a public hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 98-0001 which includes amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning maps and text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council make the findings that the proposed amendment: - Is consistent with the GMA and not result in conflicts between the plan and regulations: - That any change in development will not create significant adverse impacts on existing land uses, businesses or residents; - Can be accommodated by all applicable public services and facilities including transportation; Help implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and The proposal has been sent to Kitsap County for review and comment. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Jon Holan PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10, NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMENDED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: ~ 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: See attachments. 5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: The amendments would be denied, create further difficulties in the ultimate development of lands and create potential inconsistencies in the Comprehensive Plan. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BIfDGETS, FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: The proposed amendment would encourage further private development which would result in economic benefits to the City of Bremerton. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2702 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, regarding the adoption of Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 98-0001 WHEREAS, the State of Washington required that the City of Bremerton prepare a Comprehensive Plan consistent with the requirements of WAC 365-195, The Growth Management Act (GMA); and Wl:I-EREAS, the City adopted a Comprehensive Plan in April 1995 after completing environmental review consistent with the requirements of the WAC 197-11 the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), holding noticed public hearings, and taking commem from the public, other jurisdictions and agencies; and WIt-EREAS, following an appeal and related corrections, the Comprehensive Plan was readopted by ordinance No. 4545 on February 21, 1996; and WHEREAS, the GMA requires that Comprehensive Plans be amended no more than once per year, excepting those amendments which are necessary to implement the plan, or to address an emergency; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan contains Element K - Implementation, Consistency and Concurrency, which provides procedures and review criteria associated with amending the plan; and WHEREAS, Element K requires that the all amendment proposals be considered concurrently (in a package) by the Planning Commission and the City Council so that their cumulative effects can be ascertained; and WHEREAS, throughout the year, applications for Plan Amendments have been collected and placed on a docket for processing together after April 1 consistent with the schedule contained within Element K.; and WltEREAS, six (6) applications for revisions to the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan's Land Use and/or the Official Zoning Map were received on or before the deadline for receipt of applications; and WHEREAS, the City has proposed amendments to the Land Use, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City-initiated amendments have been included in the docket, and will be reviewed concurrent with the other applications for amendment; and WI!tEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70A. 106(3), the proposed amendment has been reviewed by the State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development 60 days before final action on the proposed amendment; and WItEREAS, environmental review consistent with the requirements of SEPA (WAC 197-1 1) was. ~initiated by the City, and resulted in the issuance of a Determination of Non-significance (DNS).onSeptember 2nd, 1998; and WltEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the docket in workshop session on May 19th and August 25th 1998; and Wl:IIV~REAS, the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on September 15th, 1998 for the purpose of receiving and considering testimony concerning the proposed docket; and Wll2EREAS, the meeting was properly noticed and open to the public; and Wlt'EREAS, the Suquamish Tribe filed an appeal on the Determination of Nonsignificance and has subsequently withdrawn its appeal; and WltEREAS, the City Council held a Public Hearing on August 18, 1999, for the purpose of receiving and considering testimony concerning the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and appeal; and WItEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council considered each application in order to evaluate consistency with the approval criteria contained in Element K; NOW Tlt-EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Ci~ Council of the City of Bremerton finds the Determination of Nonsignificance adequate and that the proposed amendment: 1. Is consistent with the GMA and not result in conflicts between the plan and regulations; 2. Will not create significant adverse impacts on existing sensitive land uses, businesses or residents; 3. Can be accommodated by all applicable public services and facilities including transportation; 4. Help implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and 5. Has been sent to State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development and Kitsap County for review and comment. BE IT FURTItER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Bremerton adopts Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 98-0001 with attendant amendments to the Official Zoning Map of the City of Bremerton as shown in Exhibit A. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this , 1999. day of ATTEST: MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President KATHI,EEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk Date: August 12, 1999 To: City Council From: Jon Holan, Planning Manager Subject: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 98-001 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 98-001 was originally scheduled for the City Council public hearing on April 28. At that time, the City received comments from Kitsap County Department of Commtmity Development and the Suquamish Tribe. Both agencies were concerned with proposed wording addressing the Port Blakely component of the amendment. To address their issues, staff revised the proposed changes to that portion of the amendment entitled "Proposed Text Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan" and has prepared additional wording to the Determination of Nonsignificance ~NS) (see attached). Other than these changes, the proposed amendment remains unchanged fxom that considered by the City Council in April. For a mnmm_r-y of the entire amendment, please review the April 28 memo to the City Council from me. Kitsap County Kitsap County was concerned that the proposed amendment indicated that the City would seek annexation of the area which is currently designated as a "Joint Planning Area" on the County's Comprehensive Plan. State law requires that an unincorporated area can only be available for annexation when it has been desi_maated an "Urban Growth .Area" by the County' s plan. Once a sub- area plan is adopted by the City and the County for Port Blakely, the area would be redesignated as a UGA and be eligible for annexation. The sub-area planning process for Port Blakely is currentN underway. As a result of the County's issue, the portion of the proposed amendment entitled, "Proposed Text Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan" was revised to address the County's concerns. The Countw has reviewed the revised text and concurs with the proposed amendment (see Freeland letter dated May 27, 1999). Suquamish Tribe The Suquamish Tribe had filed an appeal on the Determination ofNonsignificance (DNS) due to a concern that the proposed amendment was the first step in developing the property and as a result, an environmental impact statement should be prepared for the project. Staff's position was that the current amendment only designates the site for potential consideration of industrial development and not result in any physical change in the site. Further, staffbelieves that additional procedural steps would be required before any development could occur, and as a resuk, the DNS was appropriate for the amendment. After several discussions with the Tribe's legal counsel, the attached document was agreed upon to be included as part of the DNS. The Tribe's concurrence with the document and their withdrawal of their appeal is expressed in Mr. Scott Wheat's letter of July 28, 1999. Basis for DNS Determination The 1998 Ccmt:n'eheusix~ Plan ~ents have been determined not to result in a significant adverse impact on the environment. The basis for thi~ determination is as follows: Puget Western PmpetW: This portion of the amendment is to esmbli.qh a land use desi~ation on the subject site. The "Low Density Residential" is consistent with local and state policies. All needed urban services are either available or planned to be provided in the near future. Although the site has been identified as having severe geologic ba?ards, the~ site constmiI~ would be addressed though the Critical Land Ordinance requirements. Further, the low den~ty residential desi~onation is the lowest intensity land use desi~ation for the City with the exception of "Parks" or "Open Space" which is normally applied to publicly owned property. North end of Shorewood Drive: This proposed change in the comprehensive plan designation is to correct a previous error of designating private residential property, as a park. The proposed "Low Density Residential" designation is similar to adjacent private lands and is intended to reflect the current use of the property and not to change the current use or density, of the area~ Austin Drive Surplus Property: This amendment is the result of the surplus of land by the City between ~ DIiv~ ~ State Rollte 3. The sit~ is i~_l __a:Li~y ~ ~ is within an ~ ~ di~l'llp~ by major roadway improvements. The commercial designation would provide a buffer between l-~jfl~tial and ~I1 elementary school to the east of the site ar~4 State Route 3 to the west. Further, the relatively small site could provide convenience commercial activities which could serve the residential area and reduce needed automotive trips. Bremerton School District Property: The property is adjacent and east of Wheaton Way and would not pose any substantial impacts since the area is virtually developed and compliance with various City requirements would address other issues such as grading, erosion control, etc. The proposed to commercial would be compatible with the area since it is land fronting on Wheaton Way. and would provide a buffer between this busy street and the school facilities located east of the site. HMI Gravel Pit Area: The proposed amendment is to resolve inconsistencies between the zoning and comprehensive plan designations and to recognize the intended commercial use of the property.. The site has already been disrupted as a gravel pit_ Development of future commercial uses would provide an oppommit3' to address various potential environmental impacts by compl.ving with City. standards. Port Blakelv Tree Fame: This amendment includes designating the site as a joint planning area for business park to be consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan and to establish the City's policy, for the site in the event of any further action. The amendment also include text amendments to address joint planning area considerations and economic development desires of the commumty. No development applications for the site can be considered by the City until four additional steps, which may require additional SEPA review, are completed including: Completion of a joint City/County sub-area planning process involving the Suquamish Tribe and other stakeholders. This process will establish development standards for the area to address such issues as circulation and traffic, stormwazer runnoff, drainage and erosion control, phasing and other factors; b. Amendment of the City and County Comprehensive Plans to incorporate the sub-area plan; c. The area is designated by the County as an Urban Growth Area; and d. The area is annexed into the City of Bremerton. Because these additional processes must be addressed before the City can consider any land use approvals for the development of the site and because these processes will establish the standards for development and the nature of that development is speculative at this lime. JON HOLAN, Planning Manager j 'jL-.-'W- l'~'_~ I _=: 2'D SL',OUA~! ~ 9H LEGAL ~.~9~ _. Area Code (360) 598-3311 ;~x 598,.t)295 THE SUQUAMISH TRIBE P.O. Box 498 Suquam!s.h, Washington 98392 July 28, [999 Mr. John Holan Planning Manager Department of Economic and Community Development 266 Fourth Street Bremerton, WA 98337 RE: Amendments to Language Explaining the Rationale Behind Issuance of a "DNS" for thc 1998 Amendments to Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan Which Pertain to Port Blakely Tree Farms Dear Mr. Holan: I have reviewed the draft amendments regarding the above-mentioned property which were attached to your July 28, !999 correspondence. Assuming this language is approved by the City Council during the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, the Tribe will withdraw its SEPA appeal, Please noti£? me o.f' the ~5;z~e and time which this matter will be hem-d by thc City Council, that I may attend to ensure that these amendments are approved. Do not hesitate to contact m.e if you have any questions. Respect:'uHy Scott Wheat Suquarrush Tribal Attorney TOTAL May 27. 1999 City of Bremerton Department of Economic and Community, Development ATTN: Jon Holan, Planning Manager 286 4th Street Bremerton. WA 98337 KITSAP COI.mlTY DEPARTMENT OF COMlt~JNITY DEVELOPMENT 614 DIVISI'ON STREET MS-36, PORT ORCHARD WASHINGTON 98366-4682 BRUCE FREEI.ANI~, DIRECTOR (360) 337-7181 FAX (360) 337-4925 HOME PAGE -www.wa.gov/kitsap ~ .~, _ ~ Mr. Holan; This letter is in regards to the proposed City' of Br¢merton Comprehensive Plm~ an~endrnents I received from you via facsimile dated May 18, 1999. Please consider this letter as Kitsap County's testimony regarding this issue. I am pleased to see that the reference to Urban Joint Planning Areas has been removed from Element E, Item #3, policy (6); Element K, D.: and Element K. 4., Goal #1(C) together with policy (6). As you are aware, Urban Joint Planning Areas are not designated Urban Grow-th Areas and as such should not be tied to annexation issues. I am also encouraged to see the proposed amendments referencing the ongoing sub-area planning processes. Thank vou in advance for taking these comments into consideration in your decision making process. SincereAaa-% ~ // Bruce Freeland. Director CC: Kitsap Count-,' Board of Commissioners Sue Tanner BAINBRIDGE IS. 842-2061 TOLL FREE FROM: OLALLA 851-4147 Date: April 28, 1999 To: City Council From: Jon Holan, Planning Manager Subject: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 98-0001 State law limits each jurisdiction to amend its general plan to one time per year. Staff'is requesting the City Council to conduct a public heating on the proposed amendments for 1998. To allow some flexibility, local jurisdictions typically include several "components" to each amendment. The attachment entitled "1998 Comprehensive Plan Amendments" summarizes the amendments and provides the analysis for each component which includes: HMI Gravel Pit Area: Proposal to change the land use map designation from "Medium Density Residential" (MDR) to "General and Highway Commercial" (C-G) and to change the official zoning map designation from "Residential, low-density" (SF-3) to "General Business" (GB). The gravel pit area is generally south of West Hills Honda and Heartland Toyota (land use map); Lots 1-9, Block 7, Ole Hanson's Navy Yard Addition (Zoning Map); Bremerton School District: Proposal to change the Land Use Plan map designation from "Mixed UseJPLrD" (MU) to "General and Highway Commercial" (C-G) and to change the zoning designation from "Parks & Schools" (PS) to "General Business" (GB). The location is 1300 E 30th Street adjacent to Bremerton Junior High; Puget Western - Gorst: City of Bremerton proposes to change the land use plan map designation from "City Utility-Owned Lands" (CL) to "Low Density Residential" (LDR). The site is a 20 acre parcel on the south side of State Route 3 and west of Gorsr: Austin Drive Surplus Property_: City of Bremerton proposes to change the land use designation from "Medium Density Residential" (MDR) and "School" (S) to "General and Hi.way Commercial" (CG) and rezone the property from "Residential - Medium Densib"' (N[F) and "Parks & Schools" (PS) to "General Business" (GB). The site is located between Austin Drive and State Route 3 near Jackson Park; North End of Shorewood Drive: City of Bremerton proposes to change the land use designation fi-om "Parks and Open Space" (P) to "Low Density Residential" (LDR) and to amend the zoning map from "Parks & Schools" (PS) to "Residential - Low Density" (SF3). The site is four (4) lots at the north end of Shorewood Drive; and Port Blakely: Port Blakely Communities proposes to change the land use map from "Urban Joint Planning Area/Light Industrial" to "Light Industrial/Business Park" to support future annexation of this site to the City. The 440 acre site is located west of Kitsap Lake adjacent to the City. Land Use and Transportation Elements: City of Bremerton proposes to update the element to accommodate new Kitsap County. Comprehensive Plan Urban Growth Areas and Urban Joint Planning Areas adjacent to Bremerton; ~ Capital Facilities Element: City of Bremerton proposes to update this element to include a Capital Facilities Program for years 1999-2001 and other minor revisions; A Determination of Nonsignificance has been prepared for the proposed amendment. The Suquamish Tribe has filed an appeal on the decision. Generally, the Tribe's concern was that the Port Blakely proposal would result in the annexation and development of the land. The initial proposed amendment to the Land Use and Transportation Elements would have promoted that policy direction for the site which is in a joint planning area and not within an Urban Growth Area. Since state law only allows cities to annex lands within a UGA, staff has revised the amendments to recognize the joint planning area and encourage a sub-area planning process which is currently underway. Staff believes that with this revision, the concerns of the Tribe will be addressed and that they would rescind their appeal. We are currently working with the Tribe's legal council on this matter and will inform the Council as to its status on April 28. If the matter is not resolved, staff will request a continuance until the matter can be resolved. STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY, TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 906 Columbia St. SW · PO Box 48300 · Olympia, Washington 98504-8300 · (360) 753-2200 December 10, 1998 The Honorable Lynn Horton, Mayor City of Bremerton 239 Fourth Street Bremerton, Washington 98310 Re:' 1998 draft comprehensive plan amendments Dear Mayor Horton: Thank you for sending us your 1998 draft comprehensive plan amendments. We recognize the substantial time and investment that these amendments represent. We commend you for your good work on the following: You have completed your stormwater management plan. This is an especially important accomplishment given the proposed listings of salmonoid species under the Endangered Species Act. Most of the proposed amendments appear to be consistent with your comprehensive plan and the Growth Management Act (GMA). However, we have the following concerns and recommendations for a few of the amendments: Amendment A: Puget Western - Gorst. We understand that this a correction of the land use designation for property in the Gorst area. Our concern lies with the availability of sewer to serve this area. In the past, both Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) and Ecology have expressed concerns to Kitsap County with designation of the Gorst area as an Urban Growth Area (UGA) without addressing water quality problems associated with failing septic systems in the Capital Facilities Element. Our main concern with the UGA designation was the possibility that the County would allow new development without first resolving the existing water quality problems. However, we noted in our comment letter on the County's 1998 adopted comprehensive plan~ that, as the Gorst UGA had been included in the Bremerton Urban Joint Planning Area, the County would be working with the City on further interjurisdictional planning to address issues relating to land use, services and capital facilities. See attached June 24, 1998 letter from CTED. The Honorable Lynn Horton December 10, 1998 Page 2 It is our understanding that the County is in the process of forming a sewer local improvement district (LID) for the Gors~ commercial area with flows to go to Bremerton or the Port Orchard system, depending upon final engineering and SEPA determinations. The County has applied for state funds to assist in this project. However, we also understand that the LID would be limited to the existing commercial area, would not include the adjacent residential area, and is scheduled to be transported by force main to the Bremerton treatment plant. Given the urban nature of this area, we assume, and the City appears to be planning for, eventual sewer service to the residential uses. However, it does not appear that sewer service has been confirmed. The amendment to the Capital Facilities Program on page 44 indicates that discussions with the Port District and Sewer District/15 have occurred, but they have not entered into a formal contract. From the plan, it appears that the City proposes to deal with the current lack of sewer by allowing development at lower densities and by encouraging property owners to maximize development potential when sewer becomes available. However, we understand from conversations with City staff that the City's development standards require sewer before development can occur. If the City does decide to allow development prior to the availability of sewer in this area, we recommend a phased development approach in order to meet the goals of the GMA to encourage urban development in urban areas and to reduce sprawl. If adequate urban services such as sewer are currently not available, then the plan should provide for development in such a way that infill at higher densities can occur when services are available. The County adopted this approach in the Urban Joint Planning Areas by providing for a lower density of one dwelling unit to ten acres pending resolution of urban designations and provision of services. The County's zoning code designates residential areas in the Joint Planning Area as urban reserve and includes a requirement that an applicant provide a "pre-plan" for later subdivision at urban densities. This will ensure that later infill is not precluded when sewer becomes available. Although a density of one dwelling unit per ten acres, pending availability of sewer, is probably not appropriate for this area, the City should consider provisions for "pre-planning" to allow infill at higher minimum densities when sewer becomes available. Such "pre-plans" would include provisions for access to all lots, including identifying rights-of-way or easements for future roads or streets, drainage facilities and utilities. All building envelopes at the proposed and future density would be identified on.the pre-plan based on setbacks at the time of application. We can provide other examples of "pre-planning" or "shadow platting" upon request. The amendment to Land Use Element C, Goal #1, C states "Approve those annexation requests that are for lands within the designated UGA, or within an Urban Joint Planning Area, as identified on the Kitsap County Comprehensive The Honorable Lynn Horton December 10, 1998 Page 3 Plan Land Use Map .... " The City should be careful to note that it cannot annex land unless it is in a (UGA) per RCW 35.13.005. Unless and until the.Urban Joint Planning Area in the County's comprehensive plan is amended tO ~eflect the UGA designation, the City should be careful about annexation. The City should also consider this with respect to the amendment to Land Use Element E to include policy (6), which says "Ensure that modifications to the designated UGA or annexation requests are based on the demonstrated need for the additional land and proposed uses, and/or are consistent with th~Urban Joint Planning Areas identified in the Kitsap County Comprehensive Plan." We expressed a similar concern to the County in our letter on the draft comprehensive plan2. Policy U(3A-14 in the draft plan provided for "automatic" recognition of an Urban Joint Planning Area as a UGA upon adoption of a joint plan and interlocal agreement. In our letter on the draft plan, we expressed concern with this language because the County cannot designate or amend a UGA without an adopted amendment to its comprehensive plan. We noted in our June 24 letter that this policy has been satisfactorily revised in the adopted plan in response to our concern. The County's plan provides in UGA-13 (g) on page 26 that: Resolution of the issues specific to each joint planning area, as reflected in an adopted inter-local agreement, shall be considered a condition precedent to full inclusion of the Urban Joint Planning Area in the County's designated UGA. The County and each City will amend its respective Comprehensive Plan as necessary to incorporate the provisions of the joint plan. Amendment F: Port Blakely Tree Farms. We understand that this area has been the subject of ongoing discussions between Kitsap County and the City of Bremerton. However, it is not clear from the City's proposed amendments that an interlocal agreement has been executed with the County and that the County has adopted or is in the process of adopting an amendment to its plan to designate Port Blakely as a UGA. Per our comment above, this amendment appears to be premature. The City cannot consider adoption of this amendment unless and until an interlocal agreement has been executed and the County has amended its UGA. We recognize that the County has designated the Port Blakely property west of Bremerton as Urban Industrial Reserve, because the property is in a single ownership and the County has identified a shortage of industrial lands. Also, the City of Bremerton has assured the County it can serve the site with adequate capital facilities. However, it is not clear in these amendments how the City will provide sewer and road access to the Port Blakely property. See attached CTED comment letter of March 26, 1998. The Honorable Lynn Horton December 10, 1998 Page 4 If the City wishes to acknowledge now that it is anticipating amending the UGA and. annexing this area, it may want to designate it a Joint Urban Planning Area in:i~ bomprehensive plan consistent with the County's plan. Then, when the interlocal agreement is signed and the County has amended its comprehensive plan, we recommend that the issues of sewer and road access, be addressed in conjunction with the City's amendment of its UGA. Finally, while designation of appropriate land for industrial use is-essential to economic development in the County, the designation of the Port Blakely property raised some issues with respect to protection of salmon in the Chico Creek Basin. The Chico Creek system is considered the most important salmon- producing stream in Kitsap County. Although there are no stocks being considered for potential listing under the Endangered Species Act in the Chico Creek watershed, degradation of habitat can be an important factor in the decline of salmonid species. The discussion of this amendment includes no reference to the importance of analyzing and addressing the environmental impacts with respect to the watershed. If the City decides to allow industrial development to go forward on this site, we expect you to coordinate closely with the County, the Suquamish Tribe, and the Department of Fish and Wildlife to ensure that impacts to salmon habitat are avoided or mitigated appropriately. Consistent with our April 3, 1995, June 6, 1995 and August 8, 1997 letters, we continue to recommend that you make the following revisions to your plan: We understand that the County has allocated 19,152 in projected population growth within the unincorporated UGA by the year 2012 in its 1996 comprehensive plan. We recognize that the City has been working on this issue with the County. Upon a finding of compliance by the Central Puget Sound Growth Hearings Board of the County's.comprehensive plan, we would expect the City to conduct another land capacity analysis to show how it will accommodate the additional population allocation from the County within its planned UGA boundaries. Finally, we encourage you to review your residential land use designations ancJ zoning provisions. In reading through these amendments, we notice that the comprehensive plan allows densities of tess than four dwelling units per acre in some areas of the City. CTED recommends cities and towns provide for average minimum urban densities of four dwelling units per acre in order to allow for the efficient provision of urban services. Densities of less than four dwelling units per acre are only appropriate where the existence of sensitive environmental conditions or critical areas would preclude higher densities. We recommend that you consider providing in your plan for minimum densities in order to encourage infill and to achieve urban densities within the UGA. The County took our advice on this issue and has provided for minimum densities of five dwelling units per acre throughout the UGA. The Honorable Lynn HortOh December 10, 1998 Page 5 We would encourage all of the cities in Kitsap County to revisit their land use designations and zoning ordinances and to.consider amendments more consistent with what the County has adopted, Congratulations to you, your planning commission, staff, and involved citizens for the progress these proposed amendments to your plan embody. If you have any questions or concerns about our comments or any other growth management issues, please call me at (360) 664-2364. -- We extend our continued support to the City of Bremerton in achieving the goals of growth management. Sincerely, Heather Ballash Senior Planner Growth Management Program HB:Iw Enclosures CC: The Honorable Chris Endresen, Kitsap Board of Commissioners Bruce Freeland, Planning Director, Kitsap Department of Community Development Phillip Berry, Planning Director, Bremerton Department of Community Development Scott Boettcher, Department of Ecology STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY, TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 906 Columbia St. SW · PO Box 48300 · Olympia, Washington 98504-8300 o f360) 753-2200 December 17, 1998 The Honorable Lynn Horton, Mayor City of Bremerton 239 Fourth Street Bremerton, Washington 98310 DEC 2 1 i988 BREMERTON BUILDING DEP4RTMENT Dear Mayor Horton: Per a conversation with Jon Holan, I am amending the comments in my letter of December 10, 1998 on your draft comprehensive plan amendments. Jon had some concerns with the clarity of the bulleted comment regarding Amendment F on pages 3 and 4 of my comment letter. Please substitute the following for the four paragraphs that begin with the bullet on page 3 of my December 10 letter: Amendment F: Port Blakeiy Tree Farms. We understand that this area has been the subject of ongoing discussions between Kitsap County and the City of Bremerton. However, it is not clear from the City's proposed amendments that an interlocal agreement has been executed with the County and that the County has adopted or is in the process of adopting an amendment to its plan to designate Port Blakely as a UGA. Per our comment above, this amendment appears to be premature. The City cannot consider adoption of any amendment to its UGA boundaries unless and until an interiocai agreement has been executed and the County has amended its UGA. We recognize that the County has designated the Port Blakely property west of Bremerton as Urban Industrial Reserve, because the property is in a single ownership and the County has identified ashortage of industrial lands. Also, the City of Bremerton has assured the County it can serve the site with adequate capital facilities. However, it is not clear in these amendments how the City will provide sewer and road access to the Port Blakely property. We understand that the City wishes to begin planning for this area in anticipation of a possible amendment to its UGA. One option the City may wish to consider is designation of the area as a Joint Urban Planning Area in its comprehensive plan. This would be consistent with the County's plan. Then, when the interlocal agreement is signed and the County has amended its The Honorable Lynn Horton December 17, 1998 Page 2 comprehensive plan, we recommend that the issues of sewer and road access be addressed in the capital facilities element in conjunction with the City's amendment of its UGA. Finally, while designation of appropriate land for industrial use is essential to economic development in the County, the designation of the Port Blakely property raised some issues with respect to protection of salmon in the Chico Creek Basin. The Chico Creek system is considered the most important salmon- producing stream in Kitsap County. Although there are no stocks being considered for potential listing under the Endangered Species Act in the Chico Creek watershed, degradation of habitat can be an important factor in the decline of ~almon.~ ,p~i~, Th'~ discussion of this amendment includes no reference to the importance of analyzing and addressing the environmental impacts with respect to the watershed. If the City decides to allow industrial development to go forward on this site, we expect you to coordinate closely with the County, the Suquamish Tribe, and the Department of Fish and Wildlife to ensure that impacts to salmon habitat are avoided or mitigated appropriately. We hope this provides further clarification of our comments. If you have any questions or concerns about our comments or any other growth management issues, please call me at (360) 664-2364. Sincerely,~, Heather Ballash Senior Planner Growth Management Program HB:Iw The Honorable Chris Endresen, Kitsap Board of Commissioners Bruce Freeland, Planning Director, Kitsap Department of Community Development Phillip Berry, Planning Director, Bremerton Department of Community Development Scott Boettcher, Department of Ecology Date: April 28, 1999 To: City Council From: Jon Itolan, Planning Manager Subject: Summary of Revisions to the Capital Facilities Element It was requested that a summary, of the revisions to the Capital Facilities Element be provided to the City Council. The changes are as follows: Page 27: .additional wording Page 30: Additional wording Page 31: Additional wording parking; Pages 33 - 39: Pages 37, Page 44: Page 45: Page 46: Page 48: Page 49: Paae 50: Page 58: Page 60: Pages 60 - Paae 66: Page 67: Page 68: Page 69: Page 71' Page 72: Pages 73 - Page 76: Page 77: Page 84: describing the City and Municipal Parking Garage; on the City's role t° provide parking structures; on the description of the Sinclair Landing project, particularly Revised park acreage; 41' Change in description of Gold Mountain Golf Complex; Revised wording concerning Port District's pursuit for sewer service; Additional wording on the CSO project; Additional wording to clarify, wastewater flow levels; Additional wording to clarify im*ormation on wasrewater facility improvements and ability to serve the proposed Port Blaketv industrial area; Revised wording to update Ci~' wastewater pro?ams; Revised Sanitary. Sewer Service Area ro include Pt. Blakety industrial property: Delete reference to a drar2 Stormwater Management Plan and additional wording ro clarify, implementation of CSOs; Additional wording To allow the use of different manuals to evaluate water qua. iiD' impacts by development and changes in the CSO reduction plan; 61' Delete "draft" from Stormwater Plan; Update water service area and water ri~Znts im'ormation; Additional wording on Corrosion control facility and floridation and clarifyfi'ng wording on capacity; Table WA-1 revised Table WA-1 revised Revised wording on to indicate that pump station 3 is available for emergency use: to delete and add water supply facilities; existing water demand and level of service standard; Revised wording on future water demand; 75: Revised wording on water quality, water storage, water distribution svstem and plans of other providers; Revised Water Service Area map to include Pt. Blakely property; Delete minor wording related to Bremerton School District; and Addition of Burwell Hill Climb to list of infrastructure projects. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 478-5243. 1998 Comprehensive Plan ..... CONTENTS ..... Introduction Summary of Plan Amendments General Locations Criteria for Approval Impacts on Goals & Policies Staff Reports: 1 2 4 5 6 A. Puget Western -- Gorst 7 B. North End of Shorewood Drive 11 C. Austin Drive Surplus Property 15 D. Bremerton School District 21 E. HMI - Gravel Pit Area 28 F. Port Blakely Tree Farms 32 G. Land Use Element Revisions Attached H. Transportation Element Revisions Attached I. Capital Facility Element Revisions Attached Please note that the applications associated with proposed revisions to the Transportation (item H) and Implementation (Item J) Elements of the Comprehensive Plan have been withdrawn by the City. These amendments will be addressed during the 1998 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process. The Transportation Element revisions identified above are for the Port Blakely Tree Farm map amendment. OF A2 ENDME S INTRODUCTION A. Adoption & Amendment: Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan was amended to comply with the requirements of the Growth Management Act (GMA) and adopted in April 1995. Following an appeal and related corrections, the Plan was re-adopted by Ordinance tt4545 on Februa%, Il. 1996. Amendments may be made to the Comprehensive Plan only once each year. There are exceptions to that rule for (I) amendments related to annexations, (2) emergencies, and (.3) adoption of subarea plans. Bremerton has amended its Plan each year since adoption. in accordance with a scheciule contained in the Plan itself. B. Plan Amendment Scheduie: Throughout the year, appiications for Plan Amendments are collected and piacsd on a docket for processing together after April 1. Our amendment schedule calls for processing of the appiications during April, Planning Commission and agency :evic'.v May and June, City Council hearings in July, and adoption in August. C. Plan Amendment Process: Plan amendments may be initiated by property owners, organizations, Cit': s:a!'f. :lie Mayor, the Planning Commission, or the City Council. Requests are submittec on the City's application form and processed as a '~package". The Plarming Commission is the focal point for citizen involvement. Following a series of study sessions and public hearings, the Commission recommends City Council action on each requested amendment. During local processing, the amendments are also distributed to local and state agencies for a mandatory 60-day review. Finally, the City Council conducts the final public hearing(s) and makes its decision on each proposed amendment. The approved changes are adopted by ordinance and are often accompanied by related rezones to maintain consistency between the City's Plan and Zoning maps. 1998 Plan Amendments -- page 1 SU3'D-qARY OF PLAN ENDMENTS The 1998 docket of Comprehensive Plan Amendment requests includes: Au Puget Western -- Gorst: (File: CPA98-0010) In 1989, Bremerton and Puget Western were involved in a property exchange. Puget Western acquired a 20-acre parcel of surplus City property west of Gorst. When the land was acquired, it's Comprehensive Plan designation was changed to a low-density residential category. However, the change was postponed while a rotated annexation was being processed and the residential designation was never officially applied to the City's Plan map. The City is now amending its Plan to make that correction. The new Plan designation is proposed to be "LDR (Low Density Residential)". North end of Shorewood Drive: (File: CPA98-0011) Four privately-owned lots at the north end of Shorewood Drive were lost in the conversion from Assessor's maps to County GIS maps. The lots are on the north side of a section line and were apparently overlooked when the GIS maps were prepared. We have used GIS maps as base maps for our Plan and Zoning maps, and we need to accommodate these residential lots with their proper designation and zone. The City's Comprehensive Ptan designation should be changed :'rom "P" (NAD Park) to "LDR (Low Density Residential)". A related :ozone will be processed simultaneously to correct the zoning from "PS" to "SF-3" Co Austin Drive Surplus Property: (File: CPA98-0012) The City intends to dispose of a piece of surplus property that lies between .4. usun Drive and SR-3 in the vicinity of'Jackson Park Elementary School. The property had been shown on most maps as part of the SR-3 and Austin Drive rights-of-way rather than a separate parcel, It appears to be within the Plan designations "HDR (High Density Residentia[)" and "S (Schoo[)" and aiso zoned for school and multiple-unit residential. A Plan Amendment will determine the i~ighes~ ant: bcs: use of'this property. It has been suggested that the property be given 3 designation that will provide some value and development potentiai, witho~:t creating undesirable visual, traffic or other impacts on its surroundings. A feinted Rezone will be processed simultaneously. Do Bremcrtun Schuul District: (File: CPA95-0003) The School District wants to separate its school/recreational properties from potential commercial opportunities along Wheaton Way, north of Sheridan Road. An amendment to the Land Use Plan for East Bremerton will show this concept as a master plan on which zoning will be based to allow conversion to commercial. The plan will also show the northern extension of Old Wheaton Way --- a continuation of thc toner:pt adopted in thc [larrison District Plan. 1998 Plan Amendments --- page 2 E. ~ Gravel Pit Area: (File: CPASS-O001) 'j ~ There has been ~vlty ~ ~ ~vel pit ~ sou~ of ~ d~e~ps for p~ few y~ bu~ ~ou~ a fo~ developmen~ pm~. Wi~u~ · pro~ or a ~ood map, ~e City's Comp~v~ PI~ Map ~ m~ ~e old r~iden~ d~i~on. ~c appli~ now ~ ~w d~elopm~t p~ for ~s l~d ~d it's ~e to b~ng ~e Ci~'s Compare PI~ ~d ~ ~ up to date so ~i~ ~ ~ ob~ined for furze d~wlopm~ Port Biakely Tree Farms: 0:'fie: CPA98-0013) Thc proposal is a non-pmjec~ action w amend the Ci~ of Bmrr~non Comprehen~ve Plan to include approxima~ly 440 aav.,s of property located Indusuial Reserve in the Kit.sap County t;omprenenslve i'~an tmay l~s) arians proposed to be designated I.i~h~ hdusuial / Business pazk in the City of Bren'w. norn The Comprehensive Plan Amendment is anec, e, ssa~ pre-requisit~ for futu~ preparation of a masm' plan developn~nt (such as a PUD proposal) which would describe in greater demll potential development plans and rr, easm~ for compliance with applicable local, state, and federal regulations and development standards. G. LandUse Element: (File: CPA98-0006) The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan sets the pace for everything else. It reflects the 20-year vision of the City in its policies, land use patterns, residential densities, and other provisions, and it guides the development of the Housing, Transportation, Capital Facilities and Utilities elements. It needs to be periodically updated, especially now that Kitsap County has just adopted a new Comprehensive Plan that affects Bmmerton more than ever before. For the first time, we have Urban Growth Areas assigned to Bremerton, and we are adjacent ko "Urban Joint Planning Areas". Our Plan must be adjusted to accommodate these new designations and added respo~ibilities. H. Transportation Element: (File: CPA98-0007) This element needs to be updated to address streets and other transportation issues related to the addition of Urban Growth Areas, to review our own Levels of Service (LOS), and to determine whether or not adjustments are necessary to meet concurrency requirements or to be consistent with other elements of the Plan.. I. Implementation Element: (File: CPA95-0008) The "Urban Growth Policies" section should be updated to describe the process o£ designating and amending the City's UGAs and procedures related to the new "Urban .loint Planning Areas" program. Coraider setting priorities based on the City's annexation target areas, and on our limited planning staff and budget constraints. Review the City's Annexation Policies and r~vise as necessary. CapitalFacilities Element: (File: CPA98-0009) The City's water and sewer service are~ need to be adjusted, and/or we must identify service commitments of other providers, to ensure services to the City's Urban Growth Arem. The Parks and Recreation section, School section, ; Wastewater section, and others also need to be updated. And we need to add the City's goals and objectives pertaining to the DNR property north of Riddell Road and include the financing plan in the Parks & Recreation section of this element (if available). Finally, we need to ensure that the 500 a~r~ Port Blaldey property is adequately accommodated in thi~ element, particularly in the areas of water, sewer and stormwater. 1998 Phn Amendments ~ page GENE LOCATIONS of Site Specific .Plan Amendments A. Puget Western - Gorst B. North End of Shorewood Drive C. Austin Drive Surplus Property D. Bremerton School District t. HMI - Gravel Pit Ar~a Port Blalmly Tree Farms , : 1998 Plan Amendments -- page 4 CPdTERL FOR APPROVAL Each requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment must meet all of the following criteria to be eligible for City Council approval. These criteria will be addressed specifically in the description of each proposed amendment. I. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of the Growth Management Act and will not result in Plan or regulation conflicts; and 2. The proposal will change the development or use potential of a site or area without creating significant adverse impacts on existing sensitive land uses, businesses, or residents; and 3. The proposed amendment can be accommodated by all applicable public services and facilities, including transportation; and 4. The proposal will help implement the goals and policies of the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan; and 5. If the proposal could have substantive impacts beyond the City limits, it has been sent to Kitsap County for review and comment. [NOTE: All proposed amendments are sent to affected or interested jurisdictions and state agencies for a 60-day review.] 1998 Plan Amendments -- page 5 L3'4- IMPACTS ON GOALS & POLICIES l~.lcmcnt "C" (P .[~. in& Goals) of thc Bremcrton Comprchansive Plan ]is~ the state planning goals and Local ~upponing goaL~mThc following matrix provides an indicalion ofkow thc goats may be affcctr, d by each of the plan a~endments. Tti~ to the portion of this report that describes the particular amendment for additional information. Plan Amendments * State Planning Goals A' B C D E F G H ~ J Urban G.rowth Reduce Spra~vl Transpo.rtation Econom'i¢ Development Property Rights Impact Assessment Symbols: .... No significant impact. /* Minimal positive impacts. 4~ Significant positive impacts. NOTE: Projcct~ with known adverse impacts are not being considered. *Amendments: A Puget Western -- Gorst B North End oFShorcwood Drive C Austin Drive Surplus Property D Bremcrton School District HMI -- Gravel Pit Area F Port Blakely Tree Farms G Land Use Element Revisions H Transportation Element Revisions I Implementation Element Revisions J Capital Facilities Element Revisions 1998 Plan Amendments -- page 6 Staff Report: A. PUGET WESTERN --- GORST Fiie: CPA98-0010 Applicant: City of Bremerton DCD 286 Fourth Street, Bremerton WA 98337 Contact: Ron W. Hough, Planning Manager Phone: 360-478-5275 Location: A 20-acre lot on the south side of SR-3, west of Gorst. -Location Map: -- GORST Sinclair lnlct SR-3 t t t t t Unincorporated I998 Plan Amendments -- page ?