The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/25/98 AGENDABREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 239 4TH STREET BREMERTON, WA 98337 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRUARY 25, 1998 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION: 5:00 - 5:30 P.M. A. General Council Business B. Study Session "Attorney Michael A. Duchemin Representing LEOFF I Retirees - Medicare Payments" 5. 6. 7. CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M. A. Pledge Of Allegiance B. 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 - February 11, 1998 #AB98-031 B. 1997 Excess Vacation Leave; Request For Carry Over For Dean Denis #AB98-032 CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT PUBLIC RECOGNITION -- (Comments Limited to 3 Minutes) NEW BUSINESS A. Cooperative Purchasing Agreement - City of Seattle B. Cooperative Purchasing Agreement-Kitsap County #AB98-033 #AB98-034 (CONTINUED NEXT PAGE) Letter of Intent To Annex The Area Described As The Sheridan Heights Annexation #AB98-035 PUBLIC HEARING: 6:00 P.M. OR LATER A. Resolution #2643, Preliminary Plat For 5 Lot Subdivision In Single Family Zone, Applicant: Jerry Vergeer; Location: Northwest Corner of Sheridan Road & Ricky Road #AB98-036 5 / !. SUBJECT':- AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY 11, 1998 FOR AGENDA OF: FEBRUARY 25, 1998 ORIGINATING DEPT: City council ORIGINATOR: oavzd b'arr, President DATE SUBMITTED: 2=18-98 2. ~~L~: (comment on back if necessary) ENDORS F24E~NT INFORMATION MAYOR __ kPPROVEDcouNCiL PRE$IDENTB~"COUNCIL ~S~SUBM!TTkL: 4. $~Y STATEMENT AND REOUIR~MENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: 8. R~COMMENDATION: 9..~ESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEI~ENT OFFICIAL: .EXPI~ATiON DATE: REVIEW DATE: PU~J.ED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED .DISAP.~ROVED ~.DATE: AMENDED 11. AGENDA BII,T, NO: ~ ~- O3'i :. ~LEA3U~CE CO~tMENTS:. 5...,'~.w~_ACT ON NON-PASSAGE: .STAFFING. BUDGe"TS. FACILITIES, EOUIPMENT QR OT~ RESOURCES: UNAPPROVED DRAFT TAPE #1524 CITY COUCIL MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 11, 1998 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, February 11, 1998, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President David Farr presiding. Council members present were Jim Reed, Carlos Montgomery, Carol Arends, Mike Shepherd, Lon Overson, John Law, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Also present were Assistant City Attorney Glenna Malanca and Deputy City Clerk Paula Johnston. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Farr and invocation given by retired Minister and Missionary Ray Streutker. President Farr made the following announcements: (1) The Council held a Study Session prior to the Council meeting to discuss general Council business. (2) The Council held a 10-minute Executive Session during the pre-Council Study Session to discuss "Personnel". (3) The Council held a Study Session following the Executive Session to Discuss an issue relating to a neighborhood swimming pool. (4) The Executive Session on "Personnel" will be continued immediately following the City Council meeting. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting - January 28, 1998 #AB98-018 #0045 MISICIU(McConnelllMontgomery) 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 #0064 MISICIU(MontgomerylArends) On February 11, 1998, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 216772 through 216962 in the amount of $497,878.44. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Reed stated he was approached by several constituents, who do business In the Auto Center Way area, about the stormwater problem in that area. At the February 2, 1998 Council Study Session, he learned the Public Works and TAPE Cfi 524 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUCIL MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 11, 1998 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, February 11, 1998, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President David Farr presiding. Council members present were Jim Reed, Carlos Montgomery, Carol Arends, Mike Shepherd, Lon Overson, John Law, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Also present were Assistant City Attorney Gienna Malanca and Deputy City Clerk Paula Johnston. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Farr and invocation given by retired Minister and Missionary Ray Streutker. President Farr made the following announcements: (1) The Council held a Study Session prior to the Council meeting to discuss general Council business. (2) The Council held a 10-minute Executive Session during the pre-Council Study Session to discuss "Personnel". (3) The Council held a Study Session following the Executive Session to Discuss an issue relating to a neighborhood swimming pool. (4) The Executive Session on "Personnel" will be continued immediately following the City Council meeting. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting - January 28, 1998 CfAB98-018 #0045 MISlCIU(McConnelllMontgomery) 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 #0064 MISIClU(MontgomerylArends) On February 11, 1998, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 216772 through 216962 in the amount of $497,878.44. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Reed stated he was approached by several constituents, who do business In the Auto Center Way area, about the stormwater problem in that area. At the February 2, 1998 Council Study Session, he learned the Public Works and TAPE #1524 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 11, 1998 Page 2 of 9 utilities Department is addressing that problem. He looked forward to seeing that project started. Mr. Mont.qomery reported he attended the most recent meeting of the Bremerton School District where he learned that Bremerton student Brian Falstrom exhibited an extraordinary math ability at a very early age and has been attending Bremerton High School. He completed all the math available at the High School and is presently t. aking math courses at Olympic College and was recently tested placing him 2"° in the nation in Community Level math. At that same meeting, statistics were provided as to why school levy elections are so expensive. In order to raise $265.97 per student for every one-dollar tax per $1,000, the property owner is taxed $3.10 per $1,000. In Seattle, to raise $1,055.46 per $1,000 tax, property owners are only taxed $1.85 per $1,000. The main difference between those costs is valuation. He encouraged the public to write their legislators to tell them they are not satisfied with the current levy system. He did not believe reducing voting percentage from 60% down to 50% was the way to go. Mrs. Arends reported the sewer project in the Farragut and Charleston area is still ongoing; however weather permitting it should be completed soon. She thanked everyone for their patience with this project. Mr. Shepherd reported on February 4-5 he and Council members Carol Arends and Wayne Olsen, attended the Association of Washington Cities Legislative Conference in Olympia. During that event, he had an opportunity to meet with Senators Bob Oke and Betti Sheldon and Representatives Karen Schmidt, Paul Zellinsky and Peggy Lantz and discussed various issues, including funding transportation issues. He was fascinated with the process of making laws in Olympia. Several of his constituents and some from District ~6 contacted him about their concerns of the redistricting of the Bremerton School District, which affects the Crownhill Elementary School. A public information meeting was held on that issue on February 2 and a public hearing will be held February 19. He encouraged interested parties to contact the Bremerton School District in order give input on that issue. He announced his E-mail address is mikeshepherdsoundcom, net. Mr. Law welcomed a new Manette area business Clover Installations at 1113 Scott Avenue, which was opened Gerard Fitzpatrick. This business handles installation of satellite dishes, telephone and communication systems, and state- of-the-art fiber optic systems. He announced the next District #3 Neighborhood Meeting will be held February 17, 1998, 7:00 P.M., at the Senior Center. The program for that meeting will include an update by the State Engineer on the Design Team, who will design the new Manette Bridge, and Parks and TAPE #1524 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 11, 1998 Page 3 of 9 Recreation Director Jim Spencer will discuss the potential for a City park at E 17th Street and Ironside. Mr. McConnell stated tonight City Council members were on time to start the Council meeting; however, due to equipment failure broadcasting at 5:30 P.M., was delayed. He invited the resident of District #2 to join him in attending District #3's Neighborhood Meeting on February 17, 1998. He emphasized the issue of the new Manette Bridge affects all residents on the eastside. Mr. Olsen reminded everyone the next District #1 Neighborhood Meeting will be held February 19, 1998, 7:00 P.M., at the Sheridan Park Recreation Center, with Mayor Horton giving an update on the "state of the City". He emphasized all citizens are invited to attend that meeting. Mr. Farr noted in response to Mr. McConnell's comment, there is an Agenda item addressing the purchase of new TV broadcasting equipment for the City Council Chambers. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Lynn Horton congratulated the Senior Badminton Champions in their annual SeniodCity staff tournament. Police Chief Du Fresne and Judy Johnson, Department of Community Development, are credited with keeping the City staff team from being "skunked". PUBLIC RECOGNITION Roy Mclnnis, Bremerton resident, stated he was very aware of the stormwater problem in the Auto Center Way area for over 15 years and he was pleased to hear that the City would be addressing that problem in the not too distant future. Susan Brown, Bremerton resident, referenced a recent newspaper article in THE SUN in which Mr. Farr was quoted as saying "Public Recognition is nice to hear, but it is really not the main focus of the City Council". She asked Mr. Farr if that was an accurate quote? President Farr stated he was not sure if it was an exact quote, but fairly accurate. Mrs. Brown stated when she first started attending City Council meetings on October 22, 1997, she asked how to make changes in the law. The response she received, at that time, was attacking her for her motives. Three months later, after attending every City Council meetings during the Public Recognition portion, she finally received a response that should have been given out at the October 22, 1997, meeting. She received a letter stating the way to change laws is to submit recommended changes and time will be scheduled for the City Council to make a review. She has reviewed videotapes of those prior Council meetings for possible defense of herself against possible legal action by the City Attorney to monitor her statements during those meetings. Through that review, she observed how Council TAPE #1524 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 11, 1998 Page 4 of 9 members were responding as she was making her comments, i.e., uncomfortable, evasive, and talking with each other. Whenever she hears the terminology "City business" referring to the Agenda New Business items and Ordinances, she gets uncomfortable about the identity of the City. The City is made up of 38,000 people, not the bureaucracy in the buildings. City business is everything you do here and the Public Recognition portion is an essential part for the public to express their views on what is going on within the City. Over the past three months she has observed other people's frustration and being dismissed without getting information they requested. She did observe one person's problem being resolved at the time input was given. Mr. Montqomery stated Council meetings exist for the purpose of doing Council's business. There is a need to adhere to clearly defined rules and procedures. Rules and procedures don't prelude citizen input, courtesy, or sensitivity to public concerns and viewpoints. They respect all of these elements and the necessity to conduct business in an orderly, disciplined and productive manner. Two weeks ago he recommended that certain items be placed at the end of the meeting in order to take care of official City business first. Mr. McConnell stated it was his understanding that Council members would not respond to questions during Public Recognition and would be responded to by the City Council President. President Farr stated the rule isn't that Council members couldn't respond, but the normal mode is to provide responses at a later time. Mr. Law stated when a Council member replies to comments by an individual, it does not reflect the entire Council's opinion. President Fan' stated that was correct. Mr. Shepherd stated the discussion of communicating between elected officials, the public is vital and dynamic, and Council is working on this issue. He encouraged the public to E-mail and write letters to their Legislative representatives, attend Council District Neighborhood Meetings, and Council Study Sessions. As a new Council member, he has discovered there is some part of government going on every night of the week as well as during the daytime. 8A - BID AWARD RECOMMENDATION FOR VIDEO PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT~ #AB98 - 018 Requests for bids were prepared, advertised, distributed, and received in accordance with accepted Call for Bid procedures for Video Production Equipment. The equipment will be used to upgrade City Council video production capability. Much of the current equipment was "used" when acquired by the City when Council meetings began telecasting and is obsolete. Some of the equipment is no longer in production, and can no longer be repaired. Process was begun in July 1997, that involved fieldtrips to Tacoma City Council Chambers and Pierce County Council Chambers to review their equipment. Two bids were received. Professional Video & Tape, Inc. submitted the Iow bid for the equipment and installation, in the amount of $55,864.38, including tax and installation. TAPE #1524 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 11, 1998 Page 5 of 9 Kathleen McCluske¥, Director of Administrative Services, stated this was a timely item after failure of one of the cameras this evening and she suspected more failures could be expected, if action isn't taken to purchase much needed replacement equipment. The current equipment is 10 or more years old. During a recent Council Study Session Bob Neal answered questions regarding the differences in pricing between vendors, the quality of the equipment, which is a mid-quality not top of the line, and its placement within the Council Chambers. A 60-da¥ window for equipment installation has been included. Roy Mclnnis, Bremerton resident, stated he was present when the current equipment was installed and City Council meetings were broadcast for the first time. He asked if the equipment in the Bid proposals would be new or would some of it be used? Elizabeth Buell, Bremerton resident, stated what happened this evening with equipment failure was a real example why the equipment needs to be replaced. Mrs. McCluske¥ stated in response to Mr. Mclnnis' question, all of the equipment will be new and vendor will install it. Mr. McConnell stated he agreed with Mrs. Buell regarding the good example why this new equipment is needed. It will not only allow Council meetings to get started on time, but will provide more clarity in the telecasting process. #0781 MISICIU (Montgomery/Olsen) Motion to accept the bid for video production equipment and installation from Professional Video & Tape, Inc., as to specifications and Iow bid received in the amount of $55,864.38. 9A - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 4619 AMENDING CITY OF BREMERTON SHORELINE MASTER PLAN (DOCK/PIERS), #AB98- 020 The provisions of Ordinance No. 4619, adopted upon second reading on December 30, 1997, duplicate the provisions of Chapter Five of the Shoreline Master Plan, specifically Regulation No. 10 at Water Access and Moorage, which regulation mandates that piers and docks are to be prohibited where navigation may be significantly impaired at entrances to bays, channels, or coves. It is the City Attorney Office's opinion that this provision in the Shoreline Master Plan applies to the channel between Oyster and Ostrich Bays. The City Attorney's Office has determine~l that procedural deficiencies in the consideration process of this ordinance render its enforceability questionable. The proposed ordinance would repeal Ordinance No. 4619. TAPE #1524 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 11, 1998 Page 6 of 9 Glenna Malanca, Acting City Attorney, stated Judy Johnson of the Department of Community Development prepared a chart relating to the various procedural deficiencies of which the City Attorney's Office is concerned. Judy Johnson, Department of Community Development, stated the previous process was reviewed and found both the Master Shoreline Program and SEPA process had procedural errors. In the Master Shoreline Program process there are 12 primary requirements of which the City had six with some degree of non- compliance. One was complying with SEPA regulations not notifying the Department of Ecology and Department of Community and Economic Development (Olympia) 60-days prior to the ordinance, nor solicit comment from the Department of Ecology. Those are just three examples of requirements the City did not do in a proper Master Shoreline Program amendment process. On the SEPA process there were 11 specific requirements, four of which were not complied with completely, one being that the City Council approved the proposal before the DNS became final. After consulting with the City Attorney, it was decided the best approach would be to repeal Ordinance #4619. Ms. Malanca pointed out there is a provision that is enforceable and at some point it would be good to go through the amending process again; however, in the interim it was her position that the Shoreline Master Plan Article 10 is enforceable. President Farr stated it was his understanding that there would be no need to ask the Appearance of Fairness/Conflict of Interest question on this issue. Ms. Malanca stated that was correct, this is a legislative process. Mayor Lynn Horton stated she held a lengthy conversation with Alice Shisel from the Department of Ecology and it was her opinion that the City had not complied totally with City policies and procedures dealing with this issue. Therefore, Ms. Shisel felt if the issue had gone to the Department of Ecology, it would have been sent back to the City. Based on that information, it is the Administration's intent if Ordinance #4619 is repealed, to begin the process anew per the Shoreline Master Plan and Department of Ecology's requirements. Following that action, it would then be brought back to the City Council in the same direction as it was to the City Council that was seated in 1997. In that way, it will be codified in the Shoreline Master Plan rather than simply relying on Administrative Policy. Elizabeth Buell, Bremerton resident, stated she was confused about what is being proposed and questioned if she understood correctly that process will start all over again? President Farr stated it has been brought to the City's attention that the prior action taken has been evaluated by the legal staff and found not to be appropriate. Action before Council is to reconsider that action. Mrs. Buell stated her objection to Mr. Reed being seated on this issue. TAPE #1524 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 11, 1998 Page 7 of 9 Paul Schier, Madrona Point Drive resident, stated he was opposed to repealing Ordinance #4619 for the following reasons: (1)two attorneys have given different opinions on this issue. (2) It doesn't hurt to have a redundant rule. (3) If Ordinance #4619 is repealed, the old rule, under the "Void For Vagueness" scrutiny would not hold up. Of the three applications for docks, there were six SEPA processes with DNS saying it was ok to have a dock under the old rule, now there is one SEPA process that under the new City Attorney says docks are prohibited, which he believes has been obvious all along. The new rule under Ordinance #4619 understands that no docks/piers would be allowed in the portion in the channel. The real problem with the vague Shorelines Master Plan is the fact that "navigation" is not defined. With that situation, the Director of Community Development could make up a rule on navigation or someone may say the Department of Ecology rules on what is navigation. He emphasized Council needs to follow SEPA to repeal Ordinance #-4619 so that people are allowed to appeal that process. Roy Mclnnis, Bremerton resident, asked if he understood correctly there was something in Ordinance #4619 that was not right and needed to be repealed. He also wanted to know if the ordinance was not repealed and an issue came up could the City be sued? If that was the case, then he urged Council to take whatever action necessary to remedy that possibility. Mayor Horton restated her earlier comments as a point of clarification. She emphasized it isn't a case of the ordinance itself being flawed, but the process the City went through bringing the ordinance to Council was flawed. In the interim, the City's current Shoreline Master Plan probably would not withstand a serious appeal and that is the reason why this issue will be brought back to Council at a later date. She reminded Council and the public that a moratorium is currently in place and does not expire until April 1998. In the event a new process has not been completed at that time, she would most likely ask the City Council to approve an extension of the moratorium so that the process can be finalized. Mr. Law noted Council did have some concern when the ordinance was approved and he specifically asked for advice and was told twice by legal counsel that such action was legal even though there was an appeal in process. It appears they were poorly advised even though they asked questions. Mr. McConnell thanked Mayor Horton for repeating her earlier comments and as a result changed his position on this issue. He had assumed the moratorium went away at the time Ordinance #4619 was passed. He agreed that there was some ambiguity in the City's current Shoreline Master Plan, particularly the section that states "piers and docks are prohibited where navigation may be significantly impaired at entrances to bays, channels or coves". He interpreted TAPE #1524 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 11, 1998 Page 8 of 9 the subject channel to be an entrance into Oyster Bay, but if one goes by the black and white verbiage, docks and piers could only be restricted at the entrance (each end). He asked that a "significant impairment to navigation" be defined. Mayor Horton stated the Army Corps of Engineers would be asked to help answer that question. Mr. Overson stated he was interested in knowing why Ordinance #-4619 was left in place until a replacement is provided. He believed Mr. Shier's comments were valid and concurred in his advice to keep Ordinance #-4619 as is. Mayor Horton stated it was her understanding, based on information from the Department of Ecology, that because the City did not comply with the process to the fullest extent it would not withstand an appeal. Additionally, she did not believe it was codified until it is approved through the Department of Ecology. Mr. Shepherd pointed out there is time involved with continuing the process for an ordinance that would later be rejected by the Department of Ecology. He sees that kind of action as a clear case of good money after bad. Mayor Horton explained if Council does not repeal this ordinance, time has been wasted in moving forward to correct the process. Mr. Reed stated Mayor Horton made it clear that the Administration would readdress the issue based on a ban of piers and docks in the channel. He pointed out this issue only affects a relatively equal number of landowners in Council Districts #8 and #9. He asked Mayor Horton to justify to the public a pier ban on property use rights or use privileges without attempting any type of mitigation to the safety issue preceding such action. There are safety problems that exist without any docks and piers whatsoever. He agreed with Ms. Malanca that the Shoreline Master Plan states if someone creates a hazard to navigation, a pier would not be approved. That would limit docks and piers in that area severely and limit them in length to quite a degree. He believed if the City proposed a No-Wake Zone in the Channel no one would lose their rights of property use and solve the existing safety problem. Mayor Horton stated people are not necessarily guaranteed what they think is the highest and best usage of their property. Secondly, she believed there are issues beyond simply the safety and speed issue. She expects there will be objections by some of the Tribal jurisdictions when they are consulted addressing disturbing the ecological conditions. Mr. Reed stated then you have to apply that thinking to the entire City and County. President Farr asked that the focus of discussion be brought back to the issue of whether or not to repeal Ordinance #4619. Mr. Reed agreed with President Fare however, the Administration has made it clear that they will move forward with further action. He wants to see options put on the tabled prior to just a flat ban of piers and docks. Mayor Horton stated the Administration will be talking with the Corps of Engineers, regional Tribes, Department of Ecology and will bright forward a much broader picture than previously presented. TAPE #1524 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 11, 1998 Page 9 of 9 Mrs. Arends stated it was her understanding that the item on the Agenda was to repeal Ordinance #4619 or leave it as is. However, it was been brought to Council's attention that it is flawed and needs to be repealed. Any other concerns on a new issue that may be brought up would be more properly addressed at another time. Mr. Montgomery stated he has been involved with this issue from the very beginning and most of the area affect is located in District #8, and he had been in contact with parties on both sides of the issue. He was the one who pushed the previous City Attorney to push this issue through as quickly as possible. If there is any blame to be made on getting bad advice, it should be directed toward him. His interpretation of the Plan was doing it right; however, he read it differently than the Department of Community Development. #1704 MISlCIU(ShepherdlLaw) Motion to approve Ordinance on first reading, repealing Ordinance No. 4619 amending the City of Bremerton Shoreline Master Program restricting docks and piers in the channel between Oyster Bay and Ostrich Bay. President Fart thanked the TV camera crew for their services: Bruce Stier, Robert Neal, Eva Williamson, Leslie Bush, and Gretchen Elliott. With no further business meeting adjourned at 6:35 P.M. PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk DAVID FARR, City Council President City of Bremerton P J/DF/me cc: Normal Distribution FileNault AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: 1997 EXCESS VACATION LEAVE; REQUEST FOR CARRY-OVER FOR DEAN DENIS FOR AGENDA OF: 02-25-98 ORIGINATING DEPT: POLICE ORIGINATOR: CHIEF DuFRESNE DATE SUBMITTED: 02-17-98 (comment on back if necessary) MAYOR APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRE~DSNT~ORASUBMITTAL: COUNCIL PRESIDENT SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Sergeant Dean Denis has been on Disability Leave since April 1997 and unable to schedule or use his vacation hours. It is reqested that he be allowed to carry over 225.22 hours of excess vacation leave from 1997. RECOMMENDATION: City Council approve this carry-over request for 225.22 hours of excess vacation leave for Sergeant Dean Denis. o ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL 1. SUBJECT: Cooperative Purchasing Agreement: City of Seattle ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:Adm. Srvc. FOR AGENDA OF: 2- - ..~ ~-- ~ ORIGINATOR: Gil Johnson (_~J_ DATE SUBMITTED: 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back if necessary) Administrativ~?j~s. -'~-~ City AttorneyV/'?L~7 ~rc.~/~~-~.., Council Fiscal &'~'-' Bu~-(~ge~~~ ENDORSEMENT ~' INFORMATION MAYOR-~.- 3. EXHIBITS Agreement APPROVED BY ~OUNCI~.~PR~SIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ~,~,~~ ' 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: R.C.W. 39.34 permits local governments to cooperate with other government agencies in the procurement of goods and services to maximize use of purchasing dollars. The City of Bremerton has used Intergovernmental Agreements with a number of agencies for the acquisition of equipment and materials wherein the use of the agreement provides advantageous pricing and accessability. This agreement will provide access to City of Seattle contracts, that if bid independently by the City, would not provide the same cost savings that are available from some City of Seattle contracts. The City of Bremerton also conditions its bids to permit use by other entities. This Agreement is for an indefinite term and is an optional use agreement. 8. RECOMMENDATION: That the Cooperative Purchasing Agreement with the City of Seattle be approved. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: G. Johnson ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: G. Johnson EXPIRATION DATE: Indefinite REVIEW DATE: 01/01/99 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: AMENDED Il. AGENDA BILL NO: ~' /¥ 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: City will continue to independently bid and contract without access to Seattle contracts. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: FEB 13 '~8 08:13AM £IT" ~- SEA PURCH City of Seattle' Norman B. Rice, Mayar Executive Services Department Dwight D. Dively, Director COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AG[~F.,MI~T P, 2/2 In accordance with RCW Chapter 39.34 and to other provhlom ofthe law, The City of Seattle ("City") and The City ofBremerton ("Breraerton") hereby agree to a cooperative governmental purchasing agreement for various supplies, materials, equipment services, using the City's competitively awarded contracts. The following terms and conditions apply: The City, in contracting for the purchase of supplies, material% equipment and services for the City, agrees, at its discretion, to extend ~id contrac~ to Bremerton to the extent permitted by law, and agreed upon by the parties and the vendor(s). 2. The City shall be respons%le for compliance with any additional or varying laws and regulations governing purchases by or on behalf of the City. 3. Any purchases by the City shall be effected by a purchase order ~om the City and directed to the vendor(s). 4. The City shall not accept respons~ility for the performance of any vendor contracted for by the City as a result ofthls Agreement. 5. Breanerton shall not be responsible for the payment of any item(s) contracted for by the City as a result of this Agreement. 6. This Agreement shall continue in force until canceled in writing by either party. Accepted for The City of Seattle Accepted for The City of Bremerton Purchasing lVl,~ager Date: "&/l~/q.~'", Nallle Title Date: Contracting Services Division, 700 Third Avenue, Room 910, Seattle, WA 98104-1808 Tel. (206) 684-0444, TDD: (206) 233-7810, FAX: (206)233-5155, hitp://www, ci.seattle.wo.us An equal-employment opportunily, affirmative action employer. Accommodc~ons for people with disabilities provided on request. BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL 1. SUBJECT: Cooperative Purchasing Agreement: Kitsap County ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: Adm. Srvc. FOR AGENDA OF: .Z -~_ ~ ~ ORIGINATOR: Gil Johnson r,~ DATE SUBMITTED: 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back if 3. EXHIBITS: necessary~,A , .. Administrative Services ~ "-7/ Agreement City Attorney .C._.ouncil Fiscal .& Budgetf-¢7~'~',:~?,~ ENDORSEMENT ./~ IN,~_~OR~ MAYOR ~ ' · APPROVED BY,,C,~,OUNCIL, P.,RF_..,~IDENT FOR SUBMITTAL: COUNCIL PRESIDENT 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: RCW 39.34. permits local governments to cooperate with other government agencies in the procurement of goods and services to maximize use of purchasing dollars. The City of Bremerton has used Intergovernmental agreements with a number of agencies for the acquisition of equipment and materials wherein the use of the agreements provides advantageous pricing and accessability. This agreement will provide access to Kitsap County contracts that, if bid separately by the City, would not provide the same cost savings as are available from some county contracts. The City of Bremerton also conditions its bids to permit use by other entities. The previous Agreement with Kitsap County has expired. This Agreement is for an indefinite term and is an optional use agreement. 8. RECOMMENDATION: That the Cooperative Purchasing Agreement with Kitsap County be approved. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: G. Johnson ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: G. Johnson EXPIRATION DATE: Indefinite REVIEW DATE: 01/01/99 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: APPROVED DISAPPROVED~ DATE: 11. AGENDA BI AMENDED /7 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: City will not have access to goods and ~e~ices ¢ontract~ available through Kit~ap County. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AGREEMENT This interlocal agreement is entered into pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW and other provisions of law, between Kitsap County Purchasing Office, hereinafter called "Kitsap County" and the following named public entities or political subdivision of the State of Washington: City of Bremerton, herein called the "Public Entity", hereby agree to cooperative governmental purchasing upon the following terms and conditions: 1) Kitsap County, in contracting for the purchase of goods and services for itself agrees to seek the same or similar terms for the Public Entity, where appropriate in Kitsap County's sole discretion, to the extent permitted by law. (2) The method of financing or payment of purchases pursuant to this agreement shall be through budgeted funds or other available funds of the public entity. Any services or goods procured by the Public Entity under these contracts shall remain the exclusive property of or under control of said Public Entity. (3) Whenever Kitsap County has included in contracts with any vendor the authority for the purchase of goods and\or services by a Public Entity, the public entity may purchase on the same terms and conditions as Kitsap County. Such purchase may be effected by a direct contract between the public entity and the vendor. Kitsap County accepts no responsibility for the performance or suitability of any good or service to be provided by the vendor; and Kitsap County accepts no responsibility for the payment of the purchase price by the public entity. (4) This agreement shall remain in force until canceled by either party in writing. (5) (6) (7) Each party reserves the right to contract independently for the acquisition of goods or services or disposal of any property without notice to the other party and shall not bind or otherwise obligate the other party to participate in the activity. Kitsap County and the public entity each reserve the right to exclude the other from any particular purchasing contract, with or without notice. Each party shall be liable and responsible for the consequences of any negligent or wrongful act on the part of itself and its employees. Neither party assumes responsibility to the other party for the consequences of any act or omission of any person, firm or corporation not a party to this agreement. The Public Entity agrees to defend, indemnify aand hold harmless the County, its' officers, agents or employees from any claims, costs and/or demands arising out of the Public Entities negligence in the performance of this Agreement, to the extent of Public Entities negligence. Kitsap County will contract for the purchase of goods and services according to the laws and regulations governing purchases by and on behalf of Kitsap County. The Public Entity accepts responsibility for compliance with and any additional or varying laws and regulations governing 'purchases by or on behalf the Public Entity in question. DATED this Day of 1998. LYNN S. HORTON, Mayor CHRIS ENDRESEN, Chair City Clerk CHARLOTTE GARRIDO,Commissioner City Attorney PHIL BEST, Commissioner ATTEST: HOLLY ANDERSON CLERK OF THE BOARD AGENDA BU~L BREMERTON crFY COUNCIL 1. Subject: Letter of Intent to annex the area described a~ the Sheridan Heights Annexation For, AaE DA OF: ORIGINATING ORIGINATOR:~- DATE SUBMITTED: ~12/98 2. Clearances: ~t on back i~/ece~sary) 3. ExhibiU: Co~ Cr~mmi~_~-: F&B 2-17-98 APPROVED BY COUNCIL P mEN roa COUNCIL PRES: Coun~CommilI~: Operations 2~18-98 m Do smam T omv noN 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT & REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: An official Letter of Intent to Commence Annexation Proceedings has been received from an unincorporated area described as the Sheridan Heights Area. The Letter represents si~,,mres collected from at least ten-percent of the area described. It is requested that the City Council determine: 1.) Whether the City Council will agree to accept a future 75% Petition to annex; 2.) Whether the City Council will require the adoption ora comprehensive plan and zoning for. the proposed area under RCW 35.13.177 and 35.13.178 or apply the land use designation for newly annexed lands as set forth in the Bremerton Municipal Code 21.02.260; and 3.) Whether the City Council will require the assumption of a proportional share of existing city indebtedness by the area to be annexed. 8. RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends the City Council: 1) Agree to accept the area if sigrfific~nt signatures are collected and submitted as a 75% petition to annex; 2.) Require a Comprehensive Plan and zoning for the proposed area; 3.) Require the area to assume a proportional share of existing City indebtedness. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCE~ OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: pUI.I.~D TABLED APPROVED 10. NOTICE OF ACTION: DISAPPROVED AMENDED__ COUNCtL DIRECTIVE: DATE: a Notie~ of lutmt to comnence ~. Proceedings for the ._m~'nmAN ANN'KXATION whir. h b ~ ~,~we,~t oftl~ ~ty ~ near Sheridan Road.' ~ s.s~ssed ~ ot'propmy ~ t~ siSnmu~ is S~ ~,0~0,C~0.The signatures constitute more than the r~luir~d lOS~'~, which would be ~ SIGNED AND S~ this ' 19 d~y of FEBRUARY .1998. r, Avmuma/ ccrus Y, city C~k, City of Br~m'a~a SEAL February 10, 1998 The Honorable Mayor and Bremerton City Council The City of Bremerton 239 Fourth Street Bremerton WA 98337 Dear Legislators: Let this letter serve as an official Letter of Intent to Commence Annexation Proceedings from the undersigned for the area legally described on the attached Exhibit "A", into the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Bremerton. The undersigned does represent ownership of not less than ten percent (10%) in value, according to Kitsap County's estimate of the assessed valuation for general taxation purposes. It is requested that the City Council of the City of Bremerton set a date not later than sixty (60) days after the filing of this request for a meeting with the undersigned to determine: 1. Whether the City Council will accept a 75% petition for annexation; and 2. Whether the City Council will require adoption of a comprehensive plan and zoning for the proposed area under RCW 35.13.177 and 35.13.178 or application of land use designation for newly annexed property set forth in Bremerton Municipal Code 21.02.260; and 3. Whether the City Coundl will require the assumption of a proportional share of existing City indebtedness by the area to be annexed. This Notice and any other Notices containing identical text material and additional signatures are intended by the undersigned to be presented and considered as one Notice of Intent. rr~ oF W~UG~ON '~ ss Petionefs list attached and considered as one Notice of Intent.. eouuv~ oF Krrs~ a The Alcove and foregoing ie Hereby Cerl~fled t~ I~ ~ true ind correct copy of: EXHIBIT A Rev. FEBRUARY 1998 THAT PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHW~T 1/4 OF SEC. 2, T. 24 N., R. 1 E.; ,~LL OF GOVERNMENT LOTS 3 AND 4, SEC. 3, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M., KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; ALL OF GOVERIqMENT LOT 9, SEC. 10, T. 24 N., R. 1 E.,W.M., K1TSAP COUNTY, WA., AND THAT PORTION OF GOVERNIvlI~hIT LOTS 1 AND 2, AND THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTI-UArEST QUARTER OF SEC. 11, T. 24 N., P,. 1 E., W.M., KITSAP COUNTY, WA. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE NW CORNER OF THE SW 1/4, SEC. 2, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M. IN KITSAP COUNTY, WA., AND THE T.P.O.B.. THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF TI-IE PLAT OF HOLLY TERRACE WEST RECORDED IN VOL. 25, PG. 100 OF PLATS OF K1TSAP COUNTY, WA., THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE SW CORNER OF THE PLAT OF PINEWOOD 2ND ADDITION RECORDED IN VOL. 14, PG. 34 OF PLATS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH tINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE NW CORNER OF THE PLAT OF CIERRA COURT RECORDED IN VOL. 28, PG. 173 OF PLATS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WA., THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY I2/qE OF SYLVAN WAY; THENCE CONTINUING SOLrFH 30 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF NW 1/4, SW 1/4, OF SAID SECTION; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF NW 1/4, SW 1/4, TO THE NE CORNER OF SW 1/4, SW 1/4; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE O SW 1/4, SW 1/4, TO THE NE CORNER OF GOV'T LOT 1, SEC. 1 I, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M., IN KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION TO THE NV/CORNER OF THE PLAT OF SHERIDAN HILLS ESTATES RECORDED IN VOL. 23, PG. 15 OF PLATS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID PLAT AND ITS SOLrFHER.LY EXTENTION A DISTANCE OF 666 FEET; THENCE EAST PARALLEL WITH SAID PLAT TO THE EAST MARGIN OF SAID GOV'T LOT 1; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST MARGIN OF SAID GOV'T LOT 1 TO A POINT 25 FEET SOUTH OF THE SW CORNER OF THE PLAT SIERRA TERRACE ADDITION AS RECORDED IN VOL. $, PG. 45 OF PLATS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; THENCE EAST PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PLAT A DISTANCE OF 136.60 FEET; THENCE SOUTH PAI~I J.~. TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID GOV'T LOT 1, A DISTANCE OF 300 FEET; THENCE WEST 463.90 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 1 °D09'50" E ~ 45.35 FEET; THENCE S 60°D57'30'' W- 308.99 FEET TO THE GOV'T MEANDER LINE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE GOVERNMENT MEANDER LINE TO THE CENTERIJNE OF SEC. 3, T. 24 N. R. 1 E., W.M., IN KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; THENCE EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION TO THE T.P.O.B.. City o£Bmm~ton 239 Fourth Smut Bremerton WA 98337 ANN E X No reference number. Grsmtor:. Grantee: Legal Description: Assessor's Tsx Parcel ID#: A T I O N A G R E E M t! N T ~z, 7:,', --.'- ,,,.,:,, "'-' . ,.~10 ~. .~t' ~r'.~'-. Ci~/o£Bremeno~ 239 Four& SI~ Bremenon WA THIS AGI~I=-~'-MENT between the undersigned Owners of real property within Kitsap County, Washington, and located within the Annexation area described as: and is depleted in Exh~'oit "A" and attached hereto and adopted by reference herein (hereinat~ "Annexation Area") and the City of Bremerton (hereinafter "Citf) in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, the parties do hereby promi-_~ and agree as follows: 1. Annexation. Owner, by si~oning below, grants to the City a/Jmited Powe~ of Attoe'n~ to hw2u~ ti~ A~n~me~ as Owner's conseat to the mmem~on of property within the ~on Ares owner by the Owner on the date o£,hh Asreem~ is executed, as part of any Notice of Intent or Petition for annexation presented to the City of Bremertoa. The annexation petition supported by this Power may include a proportional assumption of City indebtedness by the area to be annexed. The petition shall require the concurrent adoption ofland uses designated in any urban fringe comprehensive plan approved for the ~on area pursuant to RCW 35.13.177, or if none has been adopted, the land uses for annexed property as set forth in the Bremerton Zoning Code as amended. This Power of Attorney is revocable up to the Bremerton City Council's acceptance of a seventy-five percent petition for annexation supported by this limited power. ~ This agreement shall take effect upon execution by both Indemnity. The city agrees to defend owners in any suit or appeal arising out of or contesting any annexation utilizing the power granted in this agreement, and the city will indemnify and hold owners harmless from any judgements, costs or expenses awarded in such action. Dated: Authorized signer: Dated: Print name & address: STATE OF WASHINGTON) · COUNTY OF KITSAP) CITY OF BREMERTON: Dated: Lynn S. Horton, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: STATE OF WASHINGTON) · S~. COUNTY OF KITSAP ) On this day personally appeared before me, Mayor Lynn S.. Horton, Bremerton City Mayor, and Kathleen L. McCluskey, Bremerton City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Bremerton, the city that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said city, for the uses and purposea therein mentioned, and on oath siated that they were authorized to execute said instrument. GIVE under my hand an official seal this day of ,1997. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, Residing at Appointment Exp. EXI-iIBrr A R~v. FEBRUARY 1998 THAT PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SEC. 2, T. 24 N., lq. 1 E.; P, TJ. OF GOVERNMENT LOTS 3 AND 4, SEC. 3, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M., KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; ALL OF GOVERNMENT LOT 9, SEC. 10, T. 24 N., 1~ 1 E.,W.M., KITSAP COUNTY, WA., AND THAT PORTION OF GOVEKNMENT LOTS 1 AND 2, AND THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTEK OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SEC. 11, T. 24 N., P~ 1 E., W.M., KITSAP COUNTY, WA. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE NW CORNER OF THE SW 1/4, SEC. 2, T. 24 N., P~ 1 E., W.M. IN KITSAP COUNTY, WA., AND THE T.P.O.B.. THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF TI~ PLAT OF HOLLY TERRACE WEST RECORDED IN VOL. 25, PG. 100 OF PLATS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WA., THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE SW CORNER OF THE PLAT OF PINEWOOD 2ND ADDITION RECORDED IN VOL. 14, PG. 34 OF PLATS OF KITSAP COUNTY~ WA.; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE NW CORNER OF THE PLAT OF CIERRA COURT RECORDED IN VOL. 28, PG. 173 OF PLATS OF KITS,AP COUNTY, WA., THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID PLAT TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SYLVAN WAY; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 30 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF NV7 1/4, SW 1/4, OF SAID SECTION; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF NV/1/4, SW 1/4, TO THE NE CORNER OF SW 1/4, SW 1/4; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE O SW 1/4, SW 1/4, TO THE NE CORNER OF GOV'T LOT 1, SEC. 11, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M., IN KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION TO THE NW CORNER OF THE PLAT OF SHERIDAN HILLS ESTATES RECORDED IN VOL. 23, PG. 15 OF PLATS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID PLAT AND ITS SOUTHERLY EXTENTION A DISTANCE OF 666 FEET; THENCE EAST PARALLEL WITH SAID PLAT TO THE EAST MARGIN OF SAID GOV'T LOT 1; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST MARGIN OF SAID GOV'T LOT 1 TO A POINT 25 FEET SOUTH OF THE SW COKNEK OF THE PLAT SIERRA TERRACE ADDITION AS RECORDED IN VOL. 8, PG. 45 OF PLATS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; THENCE EAST PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PLAT A DISTANCE OF 136.60 FEET; THENCE SOUTH PARAT .T.~.T. TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID GOV'T LOT 1, A DISTANCE OF 300 FEET; THENCE WEST 463.90 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 1 °D09'50" E ~ 45.35 FEET; THENCE S 60°D57'30'' W- 308.99 FEET TO THE GOV'T MEANDER LINE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE GOVERNMENT MEANDER LINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF SEC. 3, T. 24 N. 1~ 1 E., W.M., IN KITSAP COUNTY, WA.; THENCE EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION TO THE T.P.O.B.. AGREEMENTS Uerls SESSORS TAX PARCE DOCMENT # L.AST NAME EXHIBIT 022401-3-006-2003 ..... 910212009:~ MEISNER G ' 022401-3-021-2004 9104290096 ROBINSON B 022401-3-006-2003 7907090011 E 022401-3-006-2001 8109110058 D 022401-3-008-2001 9512040107 SCHULTZ KK 022401-3-016-2001 1059843 WEBER OO 022401-~!-0~8.2005 780~I{3~11g?~1QI~61~iiR LL 112401-2-029-2007 9512040071 LEYDE PP 4728 000 010 0004 9512040038 DAVID S 4706-000-003-0006 1079712 TICE NN 4715-000-003-0005 7907090012 DAVlDSON J 4728-000-002-0001 9202110034 MARTIN M 4728-000-003-0000 9202110033 MARTIN N 4728-000-00~0009 9202110032 MARTIN O 4728-000-005-0008 9207150064 HOFMAN HH 4728-000-006-0007 9202110035 MARTIN = 4728-000-007-0006 9202110036 MARTIN Q 4726-000-006-0005 9202110037 MARTIN R 4728-000-009-0004 9204060075 SWIFT L 4728-000-011-0000 9202110046 SWIFT T 4728-000-012-0009 9202110026 MILLER U 4728-00(~012-0009 9408090133 MILLER V 4728-000-013-0008 9202110039 MARTIN W 4728-000-014-0007 9292110040 MARTIN X 4728-000-01 5-0006 9202110027 MARTIN Y 4728-000-016-0005 1086408 KLUTH ~11 4728-000-018-0003 9202110028 YEKEL ~Xa 4728-000-019-0002 9202110031 LOWANS ~A 4728-000-020-0009 9202110041 MARTIN BB 4728-000-021-0008 9202110042 MARTIN CC 4728-000-022-0007 9202110029 MARTIN DD 4728-000-023-0006 9202110043! YEKEL EE 4728-000-024-0005 9202110044 MARTIN FF 4728-000-025-0004 9202110045 MARTIN GG 8004-004-000-0001 1028975 BRANCH MM 8004-004-001-0000 1028975 HART MM 8004-004-002-0009 1028975 VlERKEL MM 8004-004-003-0008 1028975 VANGLER MM 8004-005-000-0008 1028975 BRANCH MM 8004-005-001-0007 1028975 'BAGLIO MM 8004-005-002-0006 1028975 STONE MM 8004-005-003-0005 1028975 MCCARTY MM 8041-001-101-0000 8105260050 lC 8041-001-102-0009 8105260050 C 8041-001-103-0008 8105260050 C 8041-001-104-0007 8105260050 C 8041-001-201-0009 8105260050 C 8041-001-202-0008 8105260050 C 8041-001-203-0007 8105260050 C 8041-001-204-0006 8105260050 C Page 1 AGREEMENTS 8041-002-101-0008 8105260050 C 8041-002-102-0007 8105260050 C 8041-002-103-0006 8105260050 C 8041-002-104-0005 8105260050 C 804 1-002-201.0007 8105260050 C 8041.002-202.0006 8105260050~ C 8041-002-203-0005 8105260050 C 8041-002-204-0004 8105260050 C 8041 ..003-101-0006 8105260050 C 8041.003-102-0006 81052600501 C 8041-003-103-0004 8105260050] C 8041-003-104-0003 8105260050 C 8041-003-201-0005 8105260050 C 8041-003-202-0004 8105260050 C 8041-003-203-0003 8105260050 C 804 1.003-204-0002 8105260050 C 804 1-004-101.0004 8105260050 C 8041-004-102.0003 8105260050 C 8041-004-103-0002 8105260050 C 8041-004-104-0001 8105260050 C 8041-004-201-0003 8105260050 C 8041-004-202-0002 8105260050 C 8041-004-203-0001 8105260050 C 8041-004-204-0000 8105260050 C 804 1-005-101-0001 8105260050 C 8041-005-102-0000 8105260050 C 804 1-005-103-0009 810,~260050 C 8041-005-104-0008 8105260050 C 8041-005-201.0000 8105260050 C 8041-005-202-0009 8105260050 C 8041-005-203-0008 8105260050 C 8041-005-204-0007 8105260050 C 8041-006-101-0009 8105260050 C 8041-006-201-0008 8105260050 C 8041-006-202-0007 8105260050 C 8041-007-101.0007 8105260050 C 8041-007-102-0006 8105260050 C 8041-007-103-0005 8105260050 C 8041-007-104-0004 8105260050 C 804 1-007-201-0006 8105260050 C 8041-007-202-0005 8105260050 C 8041-007-203-0004 8105260050 C 8041-007-204-0003 8105260050 C 8041-008-101-0005 8105260050 C 8041-008-102-0004 8105260050 c 8041-008-103-0003 8105260050 !C 8041-008-104-0002 8105260050 !C ~041-008-201.0004 8105260050 C 18041-008-202.0003 8105260050 ; C 8041.008-203-0002 8105260050 ~C 8041-008-204-0001 8105260050 !C Page 2 AGREEMENTS 8041-O09-101-0003 8105260050 C 8041-009-102-0002 8105260050 C 8041-009-201-0002 8105260050 C 804 1-009-202-0001 8105260050 C 8041-010-101-0001 8105260050 C 8041-01 0-102-0000 8105260050 C 8041 -O1 0-201-0000 8105260050 C 8041-01 0-202-0009 8105260050 C 8041.011-101-0009 8105260050 C 8041-011-102-0008 8105260050 C 8041-011 -103-0007 8105260050 C 8041-01 !-104-0006 8105260050 C 804 1-011-201-0008 8105260050 C 804 1-011-202-0007 8105260050 C 8041-011-203-0006 8105260050 C 8041-011-204-0005 8105260050 C 804 1-012-101-0007 8105260050! C 8041-012-102-0006 8105260050 C 8041-012-103-0005 8105260050 C 8041-012-104-0004 8105260050 C 804 1-012-201-0006 8105260050 C 8041-012-202-0005 8105260050 C 8041-012-203-0004 8105260050 ;C 8041-012-204-0003 8105260050 lC 8041-013-101-0005 8105260050 C 8041-013.-102-0004 8105260050 C 8041-013-103-0003 8105260050 C 8041-01 3-104-0002 8105260050 C 8041-01 3-201-0004 8105260050 C 8041-01 3-202-0003 8105260050 C 8041-01 3-203-0002 8105260050 C 8041-01 3-204-0001 8105260050 C 804 1-01 4-101-0003 8105260050 C 8041-014-102-0002 8105260050 C 8041-01 4-103-0001 8105260050 C 8041-01 4-104-0000 8105260050 C 8041-014-201-0002 8105260050 C 8041-01 4-202-0001 8105260050 C ,8041-014-203-0000 8105260050 C 8041-01 4-204-0009 8105260050 C 8041-102-006-0008 8105260050 C Page 3 SHIIRIDAN HEICd/TS AREA TAX NUMBI~R SITUS ADDRESS LAST NAME FIRST NAME 1998 VALUE PETITION , 022401-3-003-2006 7890 HERON NE NAGEL FREDRICK 69000 022401-3-O04-2005 124 E 31 ST ST PETERS VICTOR L 31000 022401-3-005-2004 27405 WHITIvtAN RD CAREY ARGARET L 69000 022401-3-009-2000 210 EAST 31 ST ST COLE ANNA MARIE 125260 022401-3-010-2007 3231 HALVERSON AVE STURDIVANT EH 38000 022401-3-011-2006 3249 APPALOOSA WAY DICKSON ROLAND S 162930 022401-3.012-2005 3339 APPALOOSA WAY SATHER GRANT L 104450 022401-3-013-2004 PARKER ALLAN 74660 022401-3-017-2000 285 SYLVAN WAY LEHMAN MICHAEL 108510 022401-3-018-2009 PO BOX 2145 SMITH DOUGLAS R 230660 .., 022401-3-041-2000 276 SYLVAN WAY OOUX ROBERT W 217050 022401-3-072-2002 PO BOX 3666 MCCAULEY VINCENT 37000 022401-3-094-2006 124 E 3 i ST ST PETERS VICTOR L 35000 033502-3-095-2005 124 E 31 ST ST PETERS VICTOR L 35000 022401-3-096-2004 i 24 E 3 i ST ST PETERS VICTOR L 36000 022401-3-103-2005 4024 lqW COUNTRY DODD MARK T 38500 38500 LN#28 022401-3-104-2004 3249 APPALOOSA WAY ENGER WILLIAM & SHARON 38000 022401-3-105-2003 PO BOX 2371 KIPFER DOREEN 34000 r 022401-3-107-2001 3040 PAWNEE DR OEGNER NORBERT 257600 022401-3-114-2002 PO BOX 2905 MEISNER GEORGE 70780 70780 022401-3-115-2001 PO BOX 2905 MEISNER GEORGE 40000 40000. 022401-3-116-2000 PO BOX 2905 MEISNER i GEORGE 54000 54000 022401-3-122-2002 3240 APPALOOSA WY STREISSGUTH KENT J 185970 022401-3-132-2000 3251 APPALOOSA WU WEBER JOHN MARK 66610 NW 02240 !-3-133-2009 EDWARDS HARRY K 72530 022401-3-134-2008 PO BOX 118 HOLM ERIC 58000 032401-4-002-2004 PO BOX 15 CHITTENDEN JOHN M 53680 032401.4-004-I1~i02 134 SYLVAN WAY COOK ARMINIA M 152810 032401~2000 400 WASHINGTON AVE BISHOP JH..L D- 132260 0320OI-4-(107-2009 3114 TRACYTON BCH BISSON MABLE i 27330 032401-4-00g-200~ 3114 TRACYTON BCH BODEN JAMES L 149770 032401..4-010-2004 3124 TRACYTON BCH MICHALAK WILLIAM 48450 032401-4-011-2003 3126 TRACYTON 13CH BUI~IN NICHOLAS i 88980 032401-4-013-2001 3244 TRACYTON 13CH CARTER VAN BURTON JR 183080 I. 032401-4-014-2000 3250 TRACYTON BCH OOAKEY LOREN 109600 032401-4-015-2009 15922 E SHORE DR REED RG 30400 032401-4-018-2006 130 SYLVAN WAY FARMER ALBERT J 47080 031401-4-02 !-2001 3 i 22 TRACYTON BCH LECOMPTE GEORGE 183410 RDN~ 0324014-022-2000 3122 TRACYTON BCH LECOMPTE GEORGE 41860 0324014-023-2009 3122 TRACYTON BCH LECOMPTE GEORGE 40360 032401-4-024-2008 3650 NE SULPHUR MARTIN BRUCE 162450 SPRINGS LN 032401-4-025.200q PO BOX 1469 REORGANIZED CHURCH OF 40000 032401-4-026-2006 PO BOX 18469 REORGANIZED CHURCH JLS 42500 032401-4-027-2005 PO BOX 18469 REORGANIZED CHURCH OF 44000 JCLS 032401-4-030-20000 9230 BAYSHORE DR B & P ASSOCIATES 179340 032401-4-033-2007. 9230 BAYSHORE DR B & P ASOC 400 0'J24401-4-034-2006 9230 BAYSHORE DR B & P ASSOC 54000 032401-4-035-2005 9230 BAYSHORE DR B & P ASSOCIATES 48000 032401-4-036-2004 9230 BAYSHORE DR B & P ASSOC 52500 032401-4-037-2003 9230 BAYSHORE DR B & P ASSOC 66160 032401-4-038-2002 9230 BAYSHORE DR BROUOHTON WILLIAM 54500 032401-4-039-2001 9230 BAYSHORE DR BROUGHTON WILLIAM 57000 03240 i-4-040-200~ 9230 BAYSHORE DR BROUOHTON WILLIAM 61500 03240 !-4-04 !-2007 9230 BAYSHORE DR BROUOHTON WILLIAM 62 ! 20 102401-1-001-2002 127 EAST 31ST ST HEEB EVALYN L 82010 102401-1.002-2001 121 EAST 31 ST ST REID THOMAS E 154570 112401-2.004-2006 127 EAST 31ST ST HEEl3 EVALYlq L 27500 112401-2-005-2005 614 DIVISION ST KC GENERAL 100 112401-2-006.2004 2670 TRACYTON BCH VER(3EER GERARD 193270 112401-2-007-2003 414 E 31ST ST NE CALICA THEODORICO 119610 112401-2-010-2008 2824 TRACYTON BCH SCOTT VIOLET E 82330 112401-2-011-2007 2425 YUKON HARBOR SCOTT HG 150 RE)SE ! 12401-2-012-2006 2720 TRACYTON BCH BECKLEY JOY L 148110 112401-2-014-2004 2670 TRACYTON BCH VEROEER OERARD 305450 112401-2-015-2003 ! 24 8HERIDAN RD SCI41.~ CARL F 137680 I 12401-2-021-2005 2670 TRACYTON BCH AMERICAN CUSSTOM 37500 RD NW HOMES 1 i 2401-2.023-2003 PO BOX 4185 BATTLE JAMES E 100 112401-2-024-2002 PORT OF SHERIDAN 260 ! 12401-2.025-2001 239 FOURTH ST CITY OF BREMERTON 1120 ! 12401-2.026-2000 PO BOX 2753 SCOTT HOLLY 450 112401-2-027-2009 2824 TRACYTON BCH SCOTT VIOLET E 300 ! i 24OI-2-028-2008 2425 YUKON HARB(3R SCOTT HG 450 ! 12401-2-029-2007 155 E 31ST ST CRIDER DARLENE 241820 112A01-2-090-2001 239 FOURTH 8T CITY OF BREMERTON 1400 112401-2-107-2002 2778 TRACYTON BCH JAMES HAROLD 168000 ! 12401-2-I08-2001 2670 TRACYTON BCH VERGEER GERARD S 29000 112401-2-109-2000 2670 TRACYTON BCH VERGF~ER GERARD S 31000 112A01-2-111-2006 2670 TRACYTON BCH VEROEER GERARD S 500 112401-2-112-2005 2670 TRACYTON BCH VEROEER GERARD 35500 ! 12401-2-113-2004 2670 TRACYTON BCH VEROEER GERARD 35500 ! 12401-2-114-2003 2670 TRACYTON BCH VEROEER GERARD 42000 1124OI-2-115-2002 2670 TRACYTON BCH VERGEER GERARD 42000 ! 12401-2-1 Ig-2009 205 E 31ST ST CHURCHMA~ MORRIS 180420 ! 12401-2-119-200~ 203 E 31ST ST TARVER RON 134250 ! 12401-2-120-2005 205 E 31ST ST CHURCHMAN MORRIS 94990 112401-2-121-2004 205 E 31ST ST CI-RJRCHMAN MORRIS 86500 ! 12401-2-122-2003 205 E 31ST ST CHURCHMAN MORRIS 58500 4512-001-001-0109 2114 BRASHEM AVE DAVIS KENNETH 2200 4512-001-002-O009 203 ALNUS WY NELSON JOHN R 116940 4512-001-003-0107 DrlJON CHRISTOPHER i 17780 4512-00 !-O04-0007 222NW ALUNUS WY HEINZ GEORGE 127870 4512.001-005-0006 297 BRISTLECONE DR BELL CHRISTOPHER M 22500 4512-001-006-0005 3515 CEEDAR GROVE MICCIO PAUL B 86430 4512-002-001-0008 215 ALNUS WAY I-IASSETT JAMES A 134130 4512-002-002-0007 219 ALNUS WAY MORGAN ROBERT 111680 4512-4)02-003-0006 223 ALNUS WAY LASKO · RUSSELL 111880 4512-002-(R)4-0005 3511 CEDAR GROVE HIKE DL 134090 AVE 4512-(102-005-0004 3509 CEDAR GROVE ST HAJEK JAMES 121130 4512-002~3 3505 CEDAR GROVE ST 1-11IJ.MAN OLEN 114720 4512-002-007-0002 350 CEDAR GROVE AVE CRAFT JW 95120 45 i 2-002-O08-O(K)1 1270 KITSAP LAKE RD SEAMANS RICHARD 25500 45 ! 2-002-009-4X}(g)4 3502 MONTICOLA WAY FLOYD DARRILL 121250 4512-002-010-0007 219 ALNUS WAY MORGAN ROBERT 26500 4512-003-001-00~ 3523 MONTICOLA DR BEARBOWER RICHARD 123960 4512-003-002-0005 3521 NE MONTICOLA LABDON JOHN R 174870 45 ! 2-003-003-(g}04 PO BOX 820 sMrrH WC 170000 4512-003-004-0003 1311 LAKEHURST DR BATES KENNETH 133840 4512-O03-005-0002 208 ALNUS WAY BAILIE RICHARD E 131310 4512-003-006-0001 207 ALNUS WY ANDERSEN LEONARD W 135600 4512-003-007-0000 3503 MONTECOLA DR MOSEY JAMES JS ! 16000 4512.003~ 3505 MONTICOLA WAY REID JN 107720 4~ 12-003-009-(K1(~ 3507 MONTICOLA DR LEFAVOR CHARLES 117800 4512-003-010-0005 3511 MONTICOLA DR BLUHN JAMES L 119110 45 ! 2-003-011-0004 205 ALNUS WAY MCCULLOUGH STEVEN 121150 4706-O00-001-(X}08 103 ROCKWELL AVE WOOD RICHARD R 58000 C29 4706-0004~2~ 142 ALTA DR TICE PAUL 55500 4706-000-003-00~ 142 ALTA DR TICE PAUL 181280 4706-000-004~5 14 ALTA DR NW LIBSACK JOYCE I 186830 ,, 4706-000-005-0(K)4 165 NW ALTA DR LUDDON J R JR 221540 4706-000-0064)(~3 ! 55 ALTA DR NW YOUDERIAN CHARLES 195360 4706-000-00743002 2824 TRACYTON BCH SCOTT VIOLET E 49000 RD , 4706-000-00~0001 123 ALTA DR CLAUSON GL 171620 4715-O00-001-(K~ 129 E 31ST MICKELS DWIGHT L 192330 4715-000002-0006 131 E 31ST 8M1TH LEONARD 201030 47 ! 5-0004X)3-iX}O$ 143 E 31ST ST DAVIDSON RAY C 177420 47 i 5-000-(}04~ 3231HALVERSON STURDIVANT EL 0 4728-000-001-0002 GRADE GEORGE E 188300 4728-000-002-0(K}1 3650 NE SULPHUR MARTIN BRUCE 28000 SPRINGS LN 4728-000-O03~ 3650 NE SULPHUR MARTIN BRUCE G 25500 25500 SPRINGS LN 4728-000-O04~ 3650 NE SULPHUR MARTIN BRUCH G 29000 29000 SPRINGS LN ~004-0O4~02~ 9370 NW ANDERSON MERKEL JOHN C i 35240 135240 I-Illl~ RD ~O4-0O4-00~-000~ 3121 SAHALI DR UNIT C VANGLER HELEN H 102380 102380 I~0O4-005-(I)0-O0~ 0 0 · RI4-005-001-0007 PO BOX 275 BAOLXO BARBARA 148520 ' 148520 8004-005-002-0006 STONE N 139660 139660 ~004-005-003-0005 3129 SAHALI DR MCCARTY ARTHUR 139660 " 139660 8041-001-101-0000 OAST BRIAN L 58610 58610 ~041-001-102-0009 3600 NARROWS LN NE LAMPE VERONICA J 58610 '58610 APT 102 ~041-001-103-0(K~ ~500 NARROWS VIEW BLAISDELL DRMA P 58610 58610 LNUN 103 ~0414)01-104-0007 NARROWS HOMEO~ 58610 58610 8041-001-201-0009 AUSTAD DAN 58610 58610 ~0414)01-202.4(X1~ HEARD CARLTON 58610 58610 ~O41-001-203-0007 135 NE WAAGA WAY THORSEN LUCIIJ.F. M 58610 58610 ~041-001-204-0006 ~61 FOSTER GROVE CT THORSEN DONALD 49560 49560 0041-4102-101-(I)~ 3580 NARROWS LN APT COX LUCILLE 49560 49560 101 BO 2 ~041-O02-10R-0007 3580 NARROWS LN NE l~t'II JJA~ K 49560 49560 ~041-002-103.43(1~ 35280 NARROWS LN NE SIFTON H ELAINE 49560 49560 NO 103 ~O4 !-002-104-0005 3580 NARROWS LN 2- WYNN EVERETT 49560 49560 104 ~041.002-201-0007 3340 NARROWS VIEW HENRICH ROLF W 49560 49560 LN #204 ~041.002-202-0006 3580 NARROW LN 202 WITT TINA J 49560 49560 , · )4 I-O02-203-0005 3580 NARROWS LN NE GOTT STEVEN G 49560 49560 2O3 · )41-002-204-0004 LIVELY BECKY M 49560 49560 ~041-003-101-0006 3570 NARROWS LANE LAMPMAN MAR1LYN N 49560 49560 ~041-003-102-0005 3570 NARROWS LN 102 MARTIN WILLIAM 49560 49560 ~1041-003-103-0004 3037 VIEWCREST DR WISE ROBERT C 49560 49560 ~041-003- !04-0003 3570 NARROWS LAND JOHNSON KAREN R 49560 49560 NWAPT 104 8041-003-2OI-0005 MC)ROAN GRAYSON 49560 49560 IR)41-003-202-0004 BOEDKER JAMES J 49560 49560 ~041-003-203-0003 3570 NARROWS VIEW LINDSAY MICHAEL R 49560 49560 LN NE 3-203 ~041-003-204-0002 PO BOX 338 WATLAND BRYAN A 49560 49560 · )41-004-101-0004 3590 NARROWS LN NE MYHRE ALICE 20250 20250 ~041-(R)4-101-0103 3590 NARROWS LN NE MYHRE A 29300 29300 ~041-004-102-0003 3590 NARROWS LN NE ANDERSON KAREN K 49560 49560 #102 · )41-004-103-0002 OORSLINE RALPH E 49560 49560 · )41-004-104-0001 974 AULOA RD ALBINA RITA 49560 49560 ~0~41-004-201.0003 3590 NARROWS LN NE CAI J AJ-IAN DONALD 49560 49560 201 ~)41.O04-202-0002 CRENSHAW DONALD L 49560 49560 1041-004.-203-0001 3590 NARROWS VIEW ARNOLD AUDEEN A 49560 49560 ~041,004204-00(X) 16123 S WOODSON DR BARRY JOHN 49560 49560 8041-005-101-0001 LANO THOMAS 64790 64790 ~041.,005-102-00(}0 3560 NARROWS VIEW WILLETT CECIL 65690 65690 LN 102 ~041-005-103-O009 COOPER ROBERTA J 65690 65690 ~01-005-104-0(X~ 3560 NARROWS LANE OROBSCHMIT JANET A 64790 64790 ~041-005-201-0000 978 NE CLBY CT POUNDS JULIE GRAY 64790 64790 1104 !-005-202-0009 RONQUILLO 65690 65690 · )41-005-203-0008 HAMMAROREN DONNA C 65690 65690 ~041-005-204-(XX)7 3560 NARROWS VIEW ORAY ELSE 64790 64790 LN 5-204 1041-006-1014X}09 3380 NARROWS LN 101 WANG WR 79940 79940 $041-006-102-000~ FICKEISEN IRA 79940 79940 0041-006-201-000~ 3:}80 NARROWS LN NE MAY VIRGINIA 81080 81080 AP 201 ~}41-006-202.0007 HALABY RAYMOND 81080 81080 ~041-007-101-0007 260 NE MARYOTT LN DIPPLE RONALD F 49560 49560 104 !-007- !02-0006 3400 NE NARROWS LN JAMES DOUGLAS 49560 49560 102 · 341-00q-103-0(X)5 QUINONES SYLVIA 49560 49560 1104 I.(X)7-104-0004 MOONEY WILLIAM L 49560 49560 ~041-007-201-0006 330 E 39TH ST AP 19B ALBINA MAC}DA 49560 49560 8041-007-202-0005 BUSHOR FRANCINE L 49560 49560 8041-007-203-0004 BLACK MB 49560 49560 8041..007-204-0003 PO BOX 2281 SECREST ALBERT 49560 49560 ~041-005-101-0005 5501 NW BRIGHWAY ST SKIFF VICTORIA 49560 49560 8041-(}0~102-0004 2673 S CEDAR ST PEDERSEN RAYMOND 49560 49560 ~O41-4~08-103-0003 KENT WA 98032 SIMS LARRY RONDA 49560 49560 $04~-00g-104-0002 150 SW 104TH VAUPOTIC LUANA 49560 49560 $041-00~201-0004 1518 WINFII~ J~ AVE JOHNSON KAREN R 46560 49560 8041408-202-0003 3390 NARROWS LN NE DOWNES ANNE A 49560 49560 #202 8041-00g-203-0002 ORANDE CURTIS P 49560 49560 0041-008-204-0001 3390 NARROWS LN 204 FREEMAN FREDRICK 49560 49560 $041-009-102-0002 3370 NARROWS VIEW BUNTING DAVID 78800 78800 LNA NE 102 ~041-009-101-0003 3370 NARROWS LN NE BREWER VICTOR 788(~0 78800 101 ~041-009-201'0002 3370 NARROWS VWLN FORCIER - TD 81080 81080 NE 102 ~041-009-202-0001 3370 NARROWS VW LN BUHTING DAVID 81080 81080 NE 102 ~041-010-1010001 POBOX 475 PICKETT DEBBIE 79940 79940 $041-010-102-0000 3360 NARROWS VIEW LEOGETT GERTRUDE 79940 79940 NL 102 ~041-010-201-0000 PO BOX 1445 ROBINSON REGNELD 79940 79940 80414) 10- 202 -0(109 CORCORAN RONALD 79940 79940 · )41-011-101-0009 3350 NARROWS VW LN CORCORAN A 68550 68550 NEI01 80414)! !-1024)00S THOMAS lqEIL 69500 69500 , 80414)I 1-103-0007 OWElq MICHAEL 69500 69500 Il0414)i i-1044X)06 3350 NARROWS LN NE RIEPL LAURENCE 68550 68550 104 8041 4) I 1-2014)008 JACKSON M 70430 70430 $0414)11-202-0007 3350 NARROWS VW LN COUCH LENOARD 71400 71400 NE 11-202 $0414)11-203-0006 3350 NARROWS VIEW BRIOHT RONALD 71400 71400 LN NE 203 8041-011-2044)005 WRIOHT JAMES 70430 70430 80414)12-101-0007 PO BOX602 COTTON SYDNEY 73260 73260 80414)i2-1024)006 LARSON MARY BETH 73260 73260 80414)i2-103-0005 3340 NARROWS VIEW KENNEDY MARGARET 73260 73260 LN 12-103 8041 4)! 2-104-0004 ROWE RICHARD 73260 73260 ~041-012-201-0006 3340 NARROWS V1EW OORDON VERN 73260 73260 LN #201 8041 4) 12-202-0005 BRANDENBURG RICHARD 73260 73260 8041-012-203-0004 3330 NARROWS VIEW DUMONT KEVIN 73260 73260 LN 12-203 · )414) ! 2-204-0003 3340 NARROWS VIEW HENRICH ROLF W 73260 73260 LN 204 1041-01~-!01-0005 3330 NARROWS VIEW BF_,AL ALMIRA F 79820 79820 .... LNNE 0041-013-102-0004 3330 NARROWS VIEW GRAY .ID 80920 80920 LN NE 102 ~041-013-103-0003 3330 NARROWS VIEW IX)RNFELD VIRGINIA 80920 80920 LN 703 8041-013-104-0002 PO BOX 203 ! MULNIX ROBERT 79820 79820 · )41-013-201-0004 3330 NARROWS LN NE PETERSON ' WARREN 79820 79820 201-13 · )41-013-2024}003 EAGANS ALYCE 80920 80920 0041-01~-203-002 162 NE CLEARVIEW LN ADRIG GLEN A g0920 80920 ~041-013-204.4X}01 3330 NARROWS VW LN DAVIS RAYMOND 79820 79820 EN 204 · )41-014-101-43003 3320 NARROWS VIEW CLARKE IDA 64310 64310 8041-014-102-0002 DEWITT STEVEN 64310 64310 · )4 !-014-103-0001 4306 PINE RD MORR1TT ETTRAL L 64310 64310 · )41-014-104-0(}00 3320 NARROWS VIEW HUSSEY JAMES 64310 64310 LNNE 104 11041-014-201-0002 JACOB,SON JO ANN 65120 65120 1104 I-01 4-202-000 ! BEEBE BRIAN 64310 643 ! 0 · )41-014-503-000 STONE SALLY 64310 64310 ~ 1-014-507-0(}09 HAYS MICHAEL 64310 64310 ~041-00~203-0002 PO BOX 145 GRANDE CURTIS P 49560 49560 ~041-009-101-0003 3370 NARROWS LN NE BREWER VICTOR 78800 78800 101 9 ~lO4-003-(g)8.0(g)5 1302 15TH ST NW HUOI-IES MILTON 108070 108070 022401-3-142-200~ PO BOX 5 TIDEWATER HOLDING ! 3340 022401-3-143-2007 PO BOX 5 TIDEWATER HOLDING 13330 02240 i-3-144-2006 PO BOX 5 TIDEWATER HOLDING 13330 022401-3-002-2007 PO BOX 2037 VELONI D H 152610 i 1240 1-2,4)79-2006 ! 51 £ 31 ST ST HARTVIOSEN H B & H J 177760 ! 12401-2~2003 516 HERITAGE LN NE V'I~O~ KATHLEEN P I07010 112401-2-009-2001 PO BOX 2753 SCOTT HOLLY 66950 032401.-4-028-2004 PO BOX 18469 REORGAI~?~O CHURCH OF 44500 JESUS 032401-4.009-2007 3120 TRACYTON KANO JOB 175580 BEACH RD 022401-3-043-20~ 3 ! 46 SAHALI DR BRANCH BARRY D 150 022401-3-113-2003 PO BOX 2905 MORRIS JOANNE M 98150 022401-4-016-2009 29055 E MAGNOLIA MCCLUSKEY THOMAS 96960 AVE STE 200 022401-3-139-2003 321 SCI-R.A~ LN GIBBS STEVE 60500 022401-3-140-2000 321 SCHLAGEL LN OIBBS STEVEN P 52500 022401-3-141-2009 321 SCHLAGEL LN GIBBS STEVEN P 167810 022401-3-132-2000 WEBER JOHN M 66610 022401-3-135-2007 7105 85TH ST NW DRESS~ TODD 8370 022401-3-136-2006 7105 85TH ST NW DRESSEL TOD 8370 022401-3-137-2005 7105 85TH ST NW DRESSEL TOD 8380 022~1-3-11~-2004 7105 8$TH ST NW DRESSEL TOD 8380 1 ! 2401-2-093-200g 239 FOURTH ST CITY OF BREMERTON , 11000 11000 24219628 11080640 City of Bremerton The ANNEXATION PROCESS The following is a general outline of the major steps involved in an annexation: 10% Petition: Municipal Services Coordinator submits 10% Petition to the City Council, along with a proposed Annexation Area Map. 2. Council Decision: (a) If the Council determines that the proposed annexation will be to the City's long- term benefit, it will direct staff to proceed with the annexation process. (b) If the Council determines that the proposal is not in the City's best interests, it may decline the proposal and the process will stop. 75% Petition: Staff will gather the signatures of property owners within the proposed annexation area. At least 75% of the assessed value of the area must be represented on the petition before the City Council can take final action. Boundary Review Board: A Notice of Intent is submitted to the Boundary Review Board. It the Board's jurisdiction is not invoked within 45 days, the annexation may be finalized by the City. If someone does invoke jurisdiction, the Board has 120 days to review and approve or deny the annexation. Neighborhood Meeting(s): Staff will conduct at least one neighborhood meeting to discuss the costs and benefits of aimexation, the City's Comprehensive Plan designation, probably zoning, and answer questions. o Planning Commission Action: Following neighborhood meetings, staffwill prepare a staff report for consideration by the Planning Commission. The report will recommend the most appropriate Comprehensive Plan designations and zones to be applied upon annexation. The Commission will conduct a public heating, accept public comments, and make a recommendation to the City Council. State 60-day Review: Whenever the City considers an amendment to its Comprehensive Plan or land use regulations, it must submit the proposal to specific state agencies for their 60-day review and comment. This submittal must show the recommended Plan and Zoning designations and must be done prior to the City Council's final action. City Council Decision: The City Council will conduct another public heating to consider the Planning Commission's recommendations, to accept additional public comments, and to make the final decisions on the annexation. C~,TY OF BRFM~RJOB PBOPOSFD ANNIEXAT MAY 1997 ~VL£T ~ TRACYTON BEACH ANNEXATION AREA VI CII",II TY AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SL~BJECT:PUBLIC HEAi~ING/RESOLUTION RESOLUTION #2643 ACTION: Preliminary Plat for 5 lot subdivision in single-family zone. APPLICANT: Jerry Vergeer LOCATION: FOR AGENDA OF: February 25, 1998 DEPT. OF ORIGIN: DCD - Land Use ORIGINATOR: James Coombes DATE SUBMITTED:February 17, 1998 Northeast corner of Sheridan Road & Rickey Road. 2. CLEAPJ%NCES: (Conunent on back if necessary) 3. DCD Director : ~, ~ o Dir. Pub. Work~/i~/~ ~ city Attorney:~/~~_~~~~ o City Engineer:/-'/~/-~_j o o EXHIBITS: PC Findings and Conclusions PC Minutes (1/20/98) Resolution No~.~ Written testimony ENDORSEMENT ~ INFORMATION , APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FO~. $~~~: 4. SUMM,~I.Y STATEMENT J~XlD PdgQUIREMENT FOP, COUNCIL ACTION: See attached "4. SUb94ARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:" Be RECOP~qENDATION: Planning Commission recommends APPROVAL of the Preliminary Plat subject to the conditions contained in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of the Planning Commission Recommended Motion: I move to adopt Resolution No. the Preliminary Plat of Hand's Corner subdivision. accepting 6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Judy Johnson ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Judy Johnson EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 7. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: .5-{ 9. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 10. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: If the Preliminary Plat is denied, the applicant will be unable to undertake the project as proposed. Il. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS, FACILITIES~ EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: Additional staff resources will be required to review final plans and permits. 12. RESEARCH SOURCES: Zoning Ordinance File Site Visits ATTACHMENT TO: AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT:PUBLIC HEARING/RESOLUTION ACTION: Preliminary Plat for 5 lot subdivision for single-family zone. FOR AGENDA OF: February 25, 1998 DEPT. OF ORIGIN: DCD - Land Use ORIGINATOR: James Coombes DATE SUBMITTED:February 17, 1998 APPLICANT: Jerry Vergeer LOCATION: Northeast corner of Sheridan Road & Rickey Road. 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: On January 20, 1998, the Planning Commission recommended approval of this project as a Preliminary Plat for single-family unit development. The developer asked at Planning Commission Meeting for relief from the City road standard requirement for a minimum 18 FT paved surface on the proposed road tract. The City Engineer and DCD Acting Director recommend that this request for a substandard road not be granted at this time. Though the road tract serves onl~'~ two lots, it alleviates the flag lot requirement for 150 percent of minimum lot size for interior lot. Since all lots must have a minimum of 20 FT of frontage on a road, this newly created road used for frontage on the interior lot is required to meet the road standard. The City Council is the decision-making body responsible for evaluation of Preliminary and Final Plats. The City Council shall either: 1) Affirm the decision under review; 2) Reverse the decision under review; 3) Modify in whole or part the decision under review; or 4) Remand the matter back to staff for further consideration. RESOLUTION NO. ~ ~'/3 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING TI-IE PRELIMINAKY PLAT OF "HAND'S CORNER," LOCATED ADJACENT TO AND NOKTHEAST OF SHERIDAN KOAD AND RICKEY KOAD, BREMERTON, KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON. WII-EREAS, pursuant to RCW 58.17 Jerry Vergeer, proponem for the proposed subdivision, comprising .70 acres and located adjacent to and northeast of Sheridan Road and Rickey Road within the City of Bremerton, has made application for approval of a preliminary plat containing five lots; and and WItEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed this matter on January 20, 1998; WItEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended to the Council that the Hand's Comer Subdivision Preliminary Plat be accepted subject to certain conditions; and Wlq-EREAS, an environmental checklist has been prepared and considered by the responsible official and a determination of environmental nonsignificance issued; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton City Council held public heating on February 25, 1998, concerning the preliminary plat, and adopted the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation - Exhibit "A"; now, therefore BE IT RESOLVED BY TIlE BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL That the "Hand's Comer" Subdivision Preliminary Plat presented for approval and filing is hereby accepted and approved subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit "B" (Conditions of Hand's Comer Preliminary Plat). Property in the City limits of Bremerton included in this Preliminary Plat is described as follows: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, W.M. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11, BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE N00°38'55"E 216.89 FEET, THENCE S89°32'45'E 198 FEET, THENCE S00°38'55"W 216.89 FEET, THENCE N89°32'45"W 198.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT ON BEGINNING, EXCEPT THERE FROM THE WEST 7 FEET AND SOUTH 30 FEET FOR ROAD PURPOSES, EXCEPT THAT PORTION, IF ANY, LYING WITHIN THE EAST 469 FEET OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, EXCEPT ROADS, AND EXCEPT THE WEST 23 FEET CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF BREMERTON BY DEED RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE No: 934603, SITUATE IN THE CITY OF BREMERTON, KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this , 1998. day of DAVID FARR, President Bremerton City Council APPROVED this day of ,1998. ATTEST: LYNN S. HORTON, Mayor City of Bremerton PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk CITY of BREMERTON EXHIBIT "A" FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION REGARDING: OF THE PREPARED BY: James Coombes SUMMARY The Preliminary Plat for Hand's Corner, a 5 lot subdivision and a road tract, in an area zoned for single-family residential development. 1. APPLICANT: Jerry Vergeer 2670 Tracyton Beach Drive Bremerton, WA 98310 2. LOCATION: 412 Sheridan Road (NE comer of Sheridan Rd. & Rickey Rd.) 3. TAX ASSESSOR'S NUMBER of PARCEL: 112401-2-037-2007 ATTACHMENTS: Application: Preliminary Plat; Plat Map and Legal Description Zoning Map FINDINGS & CONDITIONS The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval to subdivide totaling approximately 0.70 acres into five (5) single-family residential lots with a road tract: Lot "1": 5,784 square feet Lot "2": 5,967 square feet Lot "3": 5,194 square feet Lot "4": 5,194 square feet Lot "5": 5,264 square feet Tract"A": 1,960 square feet o Subdivision Process: Subdivision is the process of dividing land for subsequent sale or transfer of ownership. The subdivision process in the City of Bremerton is regulated by the State Subdivision Act (RCW 58.17) which is intended to ensure that land is properly described and monumented, and adequate improvements such as roads, drainage, sewer and water are provided. Dedications of lands for parks, schools, etc. may also be required if "reasonably necessary" and a direct result of needs created by the subdivision. However, it must be based upon adopted policies and standards when determining such impacts. Subdivision review involves a two-step approval process: preliminary and final. Preliminary Plat approval is conceptual and typically conditioned on installation of various improvements and dedications of land. Final Plat approval and recording are the last steps before land division, sale or transfer of ownership, or development. This step assures that all conditions of preliminary approval have been performed. Usually, final approval will be given if the developer posts a performance bond or other secured method as assurance of actual completion of improvements. The Comprehensive Plan Map designation for the site is "LDR" - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (3 to 8 dwelling units per acre). The Comprehensive Plan Housing Element goal for new housing development is to provide a variety of housing types and densities to meet the changing needs of Bremerton residents. Policy promotes stimulating the production of new housing for all income, age, family type and ethnic group (Policy 3). The zoning designation for the site is "Single-family Residential (SF-3)". A minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and a minimum lot width of 40 feet is required to create new lots in this zone. The Zoning Ordinance requires all new parcels to have a minimum 20 feet of frontage to a street. All lots have the minimum 20 ft. of frontage on a road. Access and circulation: Lo[ 1 - 60.79 FT access to Sheridan Road. Lot 2 - 98 FT access to Sheridan and 60.89 FT access to Rickey Road. Lot 3 - 53 FT access to Rickey Road. Lot 4 - 53 FT access to Rickey Road and 98 FT access to Tract A. Lot 5 - 20 FT access to Tract A. Lot 1 has an existing house within the required setbacks. There is an existing garage on the property that will be removed before Final Plat. Surrounding land use and zoning: Low Density Residential, single-family (SF-3) in all directions. Lot requirements: Land area per dwelling unit Minimum lot size Maximum lot coverage Minimum lot width Setbacks: Front Rear Side Landscaping plan required Maximum height Required Proposed 5,OOO SF 5,000 SF 4O% 40 FT 15 FT 15 FT 5 FT No. 30 FT 5,194 SF - 5,967 SF o o Utilities and Services: Potable water service is provided by the City of Bremerton Municipal Utilities within the Sheridan and Rickey Rd. right-of-way, upon application for service and in accordance with all appropriate utility development standards. Wastewater (sewer) service is available within the tract for ingress, egress, and utilities. Hook-up shall be completed to all appropriate standards. Storm water provisions have met approved standards of Engineering Dept. As a condition of the final plat approval, a street light must be provided and approved at the corner of Sheridan and Rickey roads. Sidewalk along Rickey Rd. must be constructed prior to final plat approval. An Environmental Threshold Mitigated Determination of Non-significance was issued for the subdivision on September 8, 1997. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required. No other comments were relevant to preliminary plat approval were received. 3 PRELIMINARY PLAT CONSIDERATIONS Criteria for Approval of Preliminary Plats: 1. Consistency with the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan. 2. Conformance with zoning and shoreline regulations. 3. Availability and adequacy of utilities and public services. 4. Approved driveway curb cuts and/or apron widths in right-or-way. Conclusions: 1. The subdivision is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and supports the Plan's Goal and Policies. 2. The proposed lots exceed minimum zoning requirements for lot size and width. Future residential construction can be developed in compliance with zoning regulations. 3. Water and sanitary sewer utilities are available and adequate. Adequate access can be designed and constructed to serve the subdivision. RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION Based on the record developed, the Bremerton Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the Preliminary Plat of Hand's Corner subject to the following conditions: The applicant/developer shall design and construct a sidewalk which meets the adopted City Design Standards for work within the right-of-way subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. The applicant/developer shall design and construct underground utilities for water and sanitary sewer subject to the review and approval of the Bremerton Public Works Director. Utilities for power, telephone, and cable television shall be constructed underground. If necessary, any sewer main extension will be constructed as required by City Engineer A pole mounted street light fronting the NE corner of Sheridan and Rickey Roads. Shall be provided and approved by Engineering Department. The applicant/developer shall design and construct a stormwater collection and disposal system for stormwater. The stormwater system shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Curtain drains for foundations, roof gutter, and down spouts shall be provided as necessary. The Final Plat shall be prepared by a licensed surveyor showing distances and bearings for lots and rights-of-way. 4. No nonconforming structural situations will be created as a result of this plat. Prior to making any improvements on the property such as land clearing, grading, or construction of utilities, a sediment and erosion control plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. The facilities required by the plan shall be in operation prior to land clearing and or construction. The erosion control measures shall be maintained until construction is completed and the potential for on-site erosion is absent. All disturbed soils shall be re-seeded or replanted with ground cover and continually maintained to prevent erosion. BILL ROBINSON, Chair Bremerton Planning Commission Date A~ing E~,t~tive Secretary Date 5 EXHIBIT "B' JERRY VERGEER/HAND'S CORNER PRELIMINARY PLAT (FII.E No. LP97-0003) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Infrastructure: 1. Right-of-way: The applicant/developer shall design and construct a sidewalk and road which meet the adopted City Design Standards for work within the right-of-way and road construction in "Tract A" subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 2. Utilities: The applicant/developer shall design and construct underground utilities for water and sanitary sewer subject to the review and approval of the Bremerton Public Works Director. Utilities for power, telephone, and cable television shall be constructed underground. Pole mounted yard light fronting Sheridan Road and Rickey Road shall be provided consistent with other properties on Sheridan Road, or as instructed by the City Engineer. 3. Stormwater: The applicant/developer shall design and construct a stormwater collection and disposal system for stormwater. The stormwater system shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 4. Subdivision Design: The Final Plat shall be prepared by a licensed surveyor showing distances and bearings for lots and rights-of-way. Environmental: Prior to making any improvements on the property such as land clearing, grading or construction of utilities, a sediment and erosion control plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. The facilities required by the plan shall be in operation prior to land cleating and or construction. The erosion control measures shall be maintained until construction is completed and the potential for on-site erosion is absent. All disturbed soils shall be re-seeded or replanted with ground cover and continually maintained to prevent erosion. APPLICATION FOR PROCESSING A PRELIMINARY PLAT Name of Plat HAND'S Corner Date Submitted Sec. !! Twp. 2_4_15k_ Range 1 E. General Vicinity Northeastt corner of Sheridan Rd. & Rickey Road. TotalAcreage 0.70 acre Number of Lots 5 lots Smallest Lot Area 5,194 sq. ft. Average Lot Area 5,480 sq.ft. Acreage in Parks 0 Acres Length of Public Streets 0 LF Total Acreage of Public Streets 0 Acres Length of Private Streets 0 LF Total Acreage of Private Streets 0 Acres Designated Commercial Acreage 0 Acres Name and Address of Land Owner Jerry. Vergeer 2670 Tracyton Beach Road Bremerton, WA 98310 Phone: (360) 373-6948 Name and Address of Developer Jerry. Vergeer 2670 Tracyton Beach Road Bremerton, WA 98310 Phone: (360) 373-6948 Name of Licensed Civil Eng. or Surveyor Craig Baldwin, P.E. West$ound Engineering, Inc. 217 S.W. Wilkins Drive Phone: (360) 876-3770 SOURCE OF WATER Name City. of Bremerton Address 3027 Olympus Drive Bremerton, WA 98310 SOURCE OF POWER Name Puget Sound Energy Address 1300 Sylvan Way BrCmerton, WA 98310 Exist. Zoning SR- 3 Applied for Change of Zone to NA Sanitation Reports and Data Submitted on NA TELEPHONE COMPANY Name US West Communications Address 4920 Kean Street Bremerton, WA 98312 Type of Sewage Disposal System City of Bremerton Sewers FHA Financing ? YES '--~velc¥~s/~ignature) BREMERTON BUILDING DEPARTM£NI City of Bremerton Department of Community Development This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-350; the City will not act on this proposal for at least 14 days from the date of issuance. Responsible Official: Matt Mathes, Land Use Specialist Community Development Department Signature: Phone: (306) 478-5275 Address: 286 Fourth St., Bremerton, WA 98310 Date: September 8, 1997 Appeals: You may appeal this determination to the Bremerton City Council. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the Bremerton Department of Community Development or refer to the adopted Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 21 for SEPA appeal procedures. Ao ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKI JST DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF BREMERTON 286 4TH STREET BREMERTON, WA 98337 BACKGROUND Name of Proposed project: ItAND'S .CORNER Preliminary Plat. BUILDING Name of applicant: Jerry Vergeer Prepared by Craig T. Baldwin, P.E., WestSound Engineering. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Contact: Craig T. Baldwin 2670 Tracyton Beach Drive 217 S.W. Willdns Drive Bremerton, WA 98310 Port Orchard, WA 98366 (360) 373-6948 (360) 876-3770 Date checklist prepared: August 5, 1997. Agency requesting checklist: City of Bremerton Department of Community Development. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction to begin after approval of final construction plans, possibly fall 1997 or spring 1998. Do you have any plans for furore additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal7 If yes, explain. None known. 10. 11. 12. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Preliminary plat approval, construction plan approval and building permits. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This 0.70 acre parcel will be platted to create four (4), new detached single family building sites. Lot 1 will contain the existing house for a total of 5 Lots. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. Ifa proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. This project is located on the north side of Sheridan Road and east side of Rickey Road. The site address is 412 Sheridan Road. The project is a portion of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 11, Township 24 North, Range 1 East, W.M., City of Bremerton, Kit. sap County, Washington. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EARTH EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY General description of the site (circle onet[: Fla~, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 2-8% What general types of soil are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. 2 Kapowsin gravelly sandy loam. Are there surface indications or history of unstable souls in the immediate vicinity? If so describe. None known. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantifies of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Portions of the site will be graded to construct driveways and building site pads. Grading will be balanced on site to avoid import of fill material. It is anticipated that grading quantities will not exceed 500 cubic yards. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. yes, erosion is a potential problem if significant rainfall occurs during the construction phase of About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings? Approximately 41% or 0.29 acre will be impervious surfaces after construction. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: A temporary, erosion and sedimentation control plan will be implemented as approved by the City. of Bremerton Public Works Department. Paving, landscaping and storm drainage control improve- ments will stabilize the site in the long term. Am What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Dust and emissions from heavy, equipment will result from construction. Automobile emissions will increase with increase traffic at the site. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may 3 2) 4) S) 6) affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to a/r, if any: Dust will be controlled by watering during con- struction. No extraordinary, measures are pro- nosed to reduce automobile emissions, WATER Surface: Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? I/yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the describe water? I/yes, please describe and attach available plans. No. Estimate the amoum of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None proposed or required. Will the proposal require surface.water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note. location on the site plan. No. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. 4 2) 2) Ground: Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not as a direct result of this project. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No groundwater discharges are anticipated. Water Runoff (including stormwater): Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (including quantities if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Stormwater runoff from roof downspouts and driveways will enter the City's storm system in Rickey Road. Where necessary., flows will be ditched to the existing storm system. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Yes, household and automobile wastes from could enter the drainage system and flow downstream, Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Temporary. erosion/sedimentation control will be designed and constructed in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology'S Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget PLANTS ,~dr circle types of vegetation found on the site: eciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs ' grass t v 5 pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: other cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage other types of vegetation What kind and mount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Driveways and building sites are located in areas that are currently covered with grass and few fruit trees. Existing vegetation will be retain where practical. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on this site, if any: Typical residential landscaping is anticipated ANIMALS Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, ~ other: mammas.' deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site None known, Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. None known. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. The site is located in an urban setting ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity. will be used for heating and lighting. 6 Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Building construction to comply with current energy conservation codes. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, .spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal7 If so, describe. None. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise l) 2) 3) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? None. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come form the site. Short-term basis: construction noise limited to normal business hours. Long-term basis: noise from increased traffic and population. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any? Limit construction activities to normal business hours. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE 7 do f. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Currently the site is residential, with one single family home and a detached garage. To the north, south, east and west: residential. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. Describe any structures on the site. A single family house, and garage, Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The garage will be removed or possibly relocated on Lot 1. What is the current zoning classification of the si~e? Single Family Residential, SF-3. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Residential 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre, If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. None known. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 10 to 15 people will reside in the completed project. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any? None. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Compliance with all zoning and comprehensive plan requirements. }louse construction will be compatible with adjacent structures. 8 o 10. 11. 12. HOUSING Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Four, (4), new middle-income single family units. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated. whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. Indicate Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. AESTHETICS What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Thirty,(30), foot maximum height with wood What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Construction and landscaping will be compatible with residences in the area. LIGHT AND GLARE What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Residential and vehicular lighting during the night. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with view? What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your project? None. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. RECREATION What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Lions Field and Port Washington Narrows. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. Co Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 14. TRANSPORTATION Co do Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Shown on site plans, if any. Rickey Road is an existing public street which will provide access for Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5. Sheridan Road is an existing public street which provides access for the existing house Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes, a transit stop is located along the site frontage on Rickey Road. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Each lot will have a private garage and driveway for parking. No parking spaces will be eliminated. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally 10 15. 16. describe (indicate whether public or private). Sidewalk may be required along Rickey Road, Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. An increase of approximately 40 trips per day with peaks during morning and evening commuting. Proposed measures to reduce or ~ontrol transportation impacts, if any: None. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Yes, an increase in all of these services is antici- pated in proportion with four. (4), new homes. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None, increased property, taxes will offset additional impacts created by four new homes. UTILITIES Circle utilities cu.n-.~ailable at .the sit~'~'~t n'~r~l g~---~r~ ( re.~se se~c~ t~phone.~,~fil~' tary s.~2..~se~~ ~ 17. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: 11 City of Bremerton Department of Community Development MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal: Hands Corner 5 lot single family residential subdivision plat, including site clearing and grading for driveways and building pads, establishment of temporary erosion control plan and utility systems for a .70 acre site located in east Bremerton. Proponent: Jerry Vergeer 2670 Tracyton Beach Drive Bremerton, WA 98310 Contact: Craig T. Baldwin Location of proposal: The property is northeast of Rickey Road and Sheridan Road in City of Bremerton. Lead Agency: City of Bremerton Department of Community Development Threshold Determination: The City of Bremerton has determined that the project as proposed, as mitigated under City, State, and Federal law, and as subject to the agreed upon mitigation, will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21C. This decision was made after the review of an environmental checklist and technical reports prepared for the plans and other information on file with the lead agency. The applicant reports on the discussion of impacts and mitigation in the areas of drainage are incorporated by reference into this threshold determination. Mitigation Conditions: 1. Earth: Implement a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan (TESCP) as approved by the City Engineer. 2. Air: Implement erosion control measures as approved by the City. Minimize area of exposed soil during construction or demolition; hose debris during demolition; construct truck tire cleaning area; cover dump beds as required by state law; cover stockpiled earth and exposed cuts; employ best management practices; periodically wet sweep streets to control dust. 3. Surface, Ground, and Runoff Water Impacts: Implement applicable local, state, and federal water quality guidelines. Meet Bremerton Municipal Code 15.04 requirements for stormwater management. 4. Public Services: Coordinate supply of utility services for telephone, natural gas & electricity to minimize disruptions. 5. Utilities & Streets Improvements: Provide frontage improvements including street trees, street lighting, drainage, sidewalks, curb and gutter and road lane width continuation, as approved by City Engineer. Comment Period: ,k. LN~Q;3 {...9 .MJ;J ,,t.L~r30:2 Od A..L~f3O2 Z PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING January 20, 1998 1-12 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robinson at 6:00 PM. Those present were Chairman Robinson, Commissioners Boyd, Stone, and Dingfield. Absent Commissioner Adams. Quorum certified. Chairman Robinson reported that Commissioner Adams called and stated she had a work commitment and would be unable to attend. Approval of the Agenda Motion by Commissioner Stone to approve the agenda as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Boyd. Call to the Public No response. Director's Report: Judy Johnson stated that many of the staff attended Don Pratt's funeral yesterday. It is hoped to have a new Director on board by the end of February. Stated the Mayor is actively looking for two new planning commissioners. Minutes of December 16, 1997. Motion by Commissioner Stone and seconded by Commissioner Dingfield to approve the minutes as presented. Question called: Stone, yes; Dingfield, yes; Boyd, yes; Robinson, yes. Motion passes. Old Business Commissioner Dincjfield presented the Eastpark Resolution. Stated her main concern was to get this property back on the tax rolls and that this resolution is a tool for the City Council to use in future discussions. Commissioner Stone stated he felt the resolution was excellent and a good tool for the Council. -77 2-12 Chairman Robinson asked if the Parks Commission was included in the discussion regarding page 1, item 17 Commissioner Dingfieid responded no. Her main goal was to get this property back on the tax rolls. Motion by Commissioner Stone and seconded by Commissioner Boyd to approve the resolution as presented. Question called: Boyd, yes; Stone, yes; Dingfield, yes; Robinson, yes. Chairman Robinson stated he attended a meeting at Bangor last Monday with the Navy to discuss preliminary plans for Eastpark. Public Hearing # 1 Chairman Robinson asked the appearance of fairness questions. No response. James Coombes presented the staff report. Appeal of a cease and desist order at 1424 Gregory Way. Appellant is Roy Roberts. Reference BMC Section 21.02.940 - Enforcement of the Zoning Code. The Director of Community Development has the duty to enforce the zoning code. The Director of Community Development determined that the appellant's property on Gregory Way was being used illegally for commercial and/or non- accessory parking lot (Ref: BMC 21.02.140, Land Use Tables). A Cease and Desist Order was issued to terminate the illegal use. The appellant feels the use is not illegal, but has been ongoing for many years and is, therefore, a continuing legal nonconforming use. Mr. Coombes presented an overhead (copy in the packet) of the subject area. Passed to the Commission an aerial photograph of the site in April 1989. Mr. Coombes read into the record a memo (Exhibit 1) from Randy Witt, City Engineer stating that he held many neighborhood meetings in this area and his sense from these meetings was that the neighborhood was trying to maintain the integrity of the neighborhoods and did not want to encourage neighborhood parking. Chairman Robinson asked if there was any addition correspondence not included in the packet? James Coombes responded that he had handed out prior to the meeting the City Engineer memo. Also referenced a letter (Exhibit #3) from a Seattle Attorney which was distributed prior to the meeting. 3-12 Roy Roberts, owner of 1424 Gregory Way. Stated he feels that he has improved the property and needs the income from the vehicle parking. Stated this parking has gone on for many years. Also owns another piece of property on 4th Street, about a block away and that are several City cars parking in a row. Feels these City cars are unsightly. Commissioner Stone questioned the number of cars being parked? Mr. Roberts responded four. Ben Cooper, 205 State Avenue, stated that the house looks very nice and he has no problem with the parking. Kelly Cooper, 205 State Avenue, stated that the house looks very nice and improves the area. Ruth Galloway, 1414 Gregory Way. Stated the last two people who spoke are also appealing a hearing. Stated that all of the vegetation was taken out. No one in the neighborhood was consulted about the parking and vegetation. The parking is illegal and should not be allowed to continue. William Bailey, 1410 Gregory Way. The trees that were taken down were not unsightly. Concerned with traffic in the alley. James Coombes stated that there are no restrictions on the owner about cutting down trees. Parking is allowable for property owner vehicles only. Commissioner Stone asked what is the definition of commercial parking? Ron Hough responded that if the owner is charging people to park then it is considered commercial. Commissioner Boyd wanted to know how close the City parking was and what zone was it in? Mark Fisher stated that the parking lot is near the City park at 4th and Anoka. Mr. Roberts showed on the overhead where the City currently has a paid parking lot in the same zone. Commissioner Boyd expressed her concern about how there are City owned lots already in the same zone. Chairman Robinson stated that the issue at hand is a residential lot that has been turned into a commercial parking lot. 4-12 Mr. Roberts stated that he did not change the use of the land--continued the use. Feels that he also has the right to cut down any trees that he desires. There have been no incidences of speeding. Submitted a letter (Exhibit 2) from the previous owner stating that the parking has been going on for 25 years. The City lot is in his backyard of another property of his. Commissioner Stone asked if Mr. Roberts bought the property with the need for the parking? Mr. Roberts stated yes, he needs the income. Ruth Gallaway, stated that Mr. Roberts did not talk to her about removing trees. Mr. Bailey stated he told Mr. Roberts he did not like the trees coming down. Commissioner Boyd stated she is bothered that some parking is allowed in a residential zone. Commissioner Dingfield questioned how many spaces were added when the shipyard built the new garage? Ed Parent, operations manager for Diamond Parking responded 500 for E-7 and above. Commissioner Stone questioned if there was enough parking on the base. Ed Parent responded no. Chairman Robinson stated that the Shipyard parking issues has been ongoing. The area is not paved and is commercial--should not be allowed. Commissioner Stone stated that parking such as this does bring down the property values, but has concerns with the "grandfathering" clause? Commissioner Dingfield stated that it is non-conforming because it is commercial and not paved. Commissioner Stone was concerned about "phasing out legal non- conforming" parking lots. Ron Hough stated that the issue is to determine if this is an illegal or legal commercial parking lot? If it were legal, they would need a business license. Chairman Robinson stated that it is clear that it is a non-accessory parking lot. 5-12 Motion by Commissioner Stone and seconded by Commissioner Dingfield to uphold the cease and desist order. Question called: Boyd, yes; Stone, yes; Dingfield, yes; Robinson, yes. Motion passes. James Coombes stated that there is no appeal within the City jurisdiction, except to the Superior Court and that a notice to vacate will be filed. Mr. Roberts wanted to know how many cars his tenants can park there? James Coombes responded that there is no number, however, they must be parked on paved parking. Public Hearing #2 James Coombes presented staff report. Appeal of a cease and desist order Brian J. Hughes, 642 Washington Avenue. Ref. BMC Section 21.02.940 Enforcement of the Zoning Code, The Director of Community Development has the duty to enforce the zoning code. The Director of Community Development determined that the appellant's property on Washington Avenue has a wooden fence in the front yard setback at an illegal height (Ref. BMC 21.02.230 - Fences and Walls). A Cease & Desist was issued to terminate the illegal use. The appellant is appealing the Cease and Desist on the grounds that he doesn't agree with the code that allows a fence height of 3 feet where he feels he needs 4 feet for the security of his property. James Coombes presented an overhead of the zoning and pictures of the area. Chairman Robinson asked the appearance of fairness questions. No response. Mr. Hughes, 642 Washington, stated he built the fence. Presented a Building Department handout regarding fences and a letter from Janet Lunceford. (Exhibit 7) The handout (Exhibit 5) states a "solid" fence must be 3 feet high and his is a picket fence, which you can see through. Presented pictures (Exhibit 6) of his fence as well as similar fences from Highland and Washington Avenue. Janet Lunceford told him that SUP's are rarely approved and he did not want to waste the money. James Coombes read into the record a letter (Exhibit 4) from Joyce McMillen. Concerned with the visibility from her driveway. 6-12 Commissioner Stone questioned Mr. Hughes about the previous letter. Mr. Hughes responded that nothing was said until he was nailing the last board. Stated that if he built a solid fence three feet high, the visibility would be even worse. Feels the visibility problem existed prior to his fence being put up. Feels that he is continually accommodating Mrs. McMillin's parking problems for all of her tenants. James Coombes stated that solid wood fence references any wood fence. Three feet is the maximum height without a special use permit. Commissioner Dingfield asked to review the Building Department handout. Discussion followed regarding the city installed pipe fence. Commissioner Boyd questioned if it is three feet from the ground or sidewalk? James Coombes responded from "where his property starts". Discussion followed regarding the pipe rail that the City installed. Commissioner Stone feels the fence looks very nice. Discussion followed regarding a SUP. Motion by Commissioner Stone and seconded by Commissioner Dingfield to uphold the appeal and encourage the appellant a period of 30 days to apply for a Special Use Permit. Chairman Robinson had some concerns about the location of the fence. is on City property, what is the liability? Feels that the obstructions have been there all along. If it Question called. Boyd, yes; Stone, yes; Dingfield, yes; Robinson, yes. Motion passes. James Coombes stated that the Commission has upheld the appeal of the cease and desist but are allowing the appellant 30 days to make application for a Special Use Permit. A lengthy discussion followed regarding confusion over the motion. Commissioner Dingfield stated that the decision to approve the appeal was based on knowing that Mr. Hughes would go through the Special Use Permit process. However, Mr. Hughes has stated that he does not want to go through the process, therefore we need to revisit the decision. Commissioner Boyd stated she feels the motion is fine and allows Mr. Hughes the 30 days to figure out what he wants to do. A six-minute recess was approved. 7-12 Public Hearing #3 Appeal of a Cease and Desist Order (205 State Avenue) for operating a commercial parking lot in Central Bremerton Residential zone. Appellant is Ben Cooper. Chairman Robinson asked the appearance of fairness questions. No response. James Coombes presented the staff report. The Director of Community Development determined that the appellant's property on State Avenue was being used illegally for off-street non- accessory & commuter parking (ref: BMC 21.02.140, Land Use Tables) in the Central Bremerton Residential (CBR) zone. A Cease & Desist Order was issued to terminate the illegal use. The appellant feels the use is not illegal, but a pre-existing, legal nonconforming use. James Coombes presented an overhead of the area and photographs of the property from the agenda packet. Also presented the Commissioners with an aerial overhead picture of the site. James Coombes presented a letter (Exhibit 3) from Stephen J. Day, Seattle Attorney, supporting the Director's decision. Dave Weibel, attorney representing the appellants. The current use pre- dates the new zoning. Presented and reviewed packet (Exhibit 8). Clients purchased this property with the parking revenues in mind. This parking lot can be identified back to the early 1970's. Stated the City's records are incomplete prior to 1980 regarding business licenses. Presented a map outlining lots in the area and stated the need for off-street parking. Presented photos (Exhibit 9) showing the previous conditions and the current conditions of the property. Also presented photos showing the back-yard space. Feels it is a legal non-conforming use. Commissioner Stone asked if the houses have been expanded? Mr. Weibel responded that the foot print of the house has not changed. 8-12 Mr. Cooper stated he started working on the property in 1989. The house was a "drug house" prior to his purchase. Purchased the property with the assumption that the parking was legal. Talked to Ron Hough in 1990 and nothing was done at that time by the City. Feels he improved the neighborhood. Roy Roberts, nearby resident, stated that with the fence in the backyard you can't see the cars Scoff Banner, nearby resident, feels the house is greatly improved and has no problems with the parking. Has a problem with the double parking on State Street and lack of City enforcement. Davia Bailey, 1410 Gregory Way, resident since 1989, would not have bought their home had she known it was a commercial parking lot. Stated the house has been greatly improved, but does not allow commercial parking. Feels the number of units in the building has been expanded and that the parking should be for the rental units. Complained about this in 1990 and was told that the City did not have the resources to follow through on all of these complaints. Also has safety concerns in the alley. James Coombes reiterated that the issue tonight is the status of the non- conforming use. Mr, Weibel presented a letter from Mr. Hough in 1990. The City took no action and the appellant felt they were "grandfathered" in. James Coombes stated that the letter in 1990 warns that if there is commercial parking it is in violation of City ordinance. Chairman Robinson stated that the City does not have a parking patrol and all actions are generated by complaints. Commissioner Dingfield stated that this use has been expanded. Feels the neighborhood integrity needs to be protected. Commissioner Boyd feels they were evading the business tax and feels that we need to support the department. Mr. Weibel asked for a determination if this is a legal or illegal use? Chairman Robinson stated it was not his intent to make that determination. James Coombes stated that the business license issue should not be considered. 9-12 Commissioner Stone asked Ron Houah if in 1990 it was beincl operated as a commercial lot? Ron Hough stated he did not recall a meeting that supposedly happened. Feels that this "fell through the cracks". Mr. Weibel discussed the law as it relates to legal and illegal conforming uses. Ron Hough stated the code was updated in 1988. Mrs. Bailey asked that if it was grandfathered in, why was there no business license issued? Clyde Cooper stated he met with Ron Hough in 1990 and was under the impression when he left the meeting that the parking allowed. Commissioner Stone asked Mr. Cooper what was stated at the meeting with Mr. Hough? Mr. Cooper stated that he was told it would be all right to have the parking lot. Scott Banner was told that he could have 7 to 9 spaces without a permit. Chairman Robinson stated that you could expand without changing a lot footprint. Commissioner Boyd stated that we have the zones and we don't always have the enforcement. Commissioner Dingfield stated that the City does not have the resources to enforce everything but will act on complaints. Commissioner Dingfield moved for approval to uphold the Director's decision and find the use illegal and the cease and desist order upheld. Commissioner Stone stated that allowing past practices to continue is non- productive. Feels bad for the Cooper's because they have indeed improved the property. Seconded the motion. Question called. Boyd, yes; Stone, yes; Dingfield, yes; Robinson, yes. Additional Director's Report Ron Hough stated: Manette Business Plan will be contracted out to a consultant. issued next month. $20,000.00 available. 10-12 RFP will be Manufactured housing code amendment will be coming forward. County Comprehensive Plan - map should be coming with urban growth areas. Winter Planning Conference is this Saturday. Eastpark Resolution: Ron Hough presented a revised resolution. Commissioner Stone requested that it be brought back next month. New Business: Rules and Procedures (Exhibit 11) were moved for approval by Commissioner Stone and seconded by Commissioner Boyd. approved. Unanimously Preliminary Plat Approval - Jerry Vergeer James Coombes presented the staff report. The preliminary plat for Hand's Corner, a 5-lot subdivision and a road tract, in an area zoned for single-family residential development. Reviewed maps and process in the packet. Staff recommends approval with 5 conditions listed. Craig Baldwin, Engineer, representing the.applicant. Stated the proposal complies with all regulations. Stated that on page 4, #2, paragraph 2, an extension is not necessary. Applicant is willing to fulfill all conditions. Presented a handout (Exhibit 10) regarding the roadway in Tract A. Would like to reduce the width to 12 feet. Commissioner Boyd asked if driveways have the same standards as roads. Ron Hough stated that the Fire and Engineering Department should have a look at this issue. Commissioner Dingfield was concerned about run off issues. Mr. Baldwin stated he felt those issues had been addressed in their storm drain analysis. Commissioner Stone asked for clarification on the page 4, item 2 issue. Mr. Baldwin stated that the extension was in off of Rickey Road. James Coombes read the definition of a flag lot. 11-12 Discussion followed regarding the amended proposal. Discussion followed on amending page 4, 2, paragraph 2, instead of shall change that to will be constructed as required .... Motion by Commissioner Boyd and seconded by Commissioner Dingfield to move that the Bremerton Planning Commission find that the Preliminary Plat meets the requirements of the City of Bremerton and recommend that the plat be approved with the conditions on page 4, subject to the approval of the appropriate departments. Question called. Boyd, yes; Stone, yes; Dingfield, yes; Robinson, yes. Zoning Map Correction - Puget Western Property Ron Hough presented staff report. Overhead map of the area was presented. In 2989, Puget Western acquired a 20-acre parcel of City Utility surplus property in the Gorst area, south of SR-3. The City Council changed the zoning from Forest Management (FM) to residential (SF-2) to allow development of that property. However, because the property was involved in a sale, a Comp. Plan amendment, a zoning amendment, and an annexation involving an adjacent property, the files remained active for some time and the Official Zoning Map was never amended to show the approved change. This oversight was brought to our attention in late 1997 and DCD staff initiated a correction to the Zoning Map to restore the SF-2 zoning that was approved in 1989. Recommends approval. Commissioner Stone questioned State Highway "14" on his map. Ron Hough stated it should be 3. Motion by Commissioner Stone and seconded by Commissioner Boyd to recommend City Council approval of a correction to the Official Zoning Map to restore "SF-2" zoning to the Puget Western property as approved by the City in 1989, and as shown in Exhibit"A". Question called. Boyd, yes; Stone, yes; Dingfield, yes; Robinson, yes. Motion passes. Meeting Adjourned. Respectfully Submitted: Maryl~n V~ail~el, R~cording Secretary 12-12 Approved for Distribution: Bill Robinson, Chairman SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 1 S TA FF REPORT SHERIDAN HEIGHTS A NNEXA T/ON Prepared by Teresa 0 'Neill, City Municipal Services Coordinator IN2~ODUCTION 4 A Letter oflntent to annex properties into the City of Bremerton was received by the city in accordance with RCW 35.13.125. This is the initiating step in the annexation process using the petition method of annexation this is the most frequently used method of annexation in Washington state. I/this Letter of Intent is approved by the City Council, city staff is permitted to work with property owners to determine the impacts of annexation and collect petitions for its eventual approval. The annexation process is lengthy and requires additional study and public comment. At least one public hearing will be held before the City Council and meetings to discuss the impacts will be conducted in the neighborhood prior to further decisions being made. However, it is only with Council approval that staff can begin these steps. Attached as Addendum C, is an outline of the steps required to complete the annexation process. In this step and according to the state, the City Council meets with the initiating parties in a public meeting to determine three issues. These issues are listed below. 1. Shall the City Council accept reject or geographically modify the proposed annexation area; 2. Shall the city require the simultaneous adoption of a comprehensive plan and land-use designations for the 3. Will the city require property owners to assume a proportionate share of existing city indebtedness. Contained within this report is an evaluation of impacts to the city from the annexation and staff's recommendations based on data and information available at the time of this study. SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY EVAL UA TION SUMMARY<~ Annexation can yield both economic and governance benefits to the community. Areas which are functionally already a part of the city are a prime example of the effective use of annexation. Cities specialize in urban services and mst annexations are based on a need for services or utilities. The proper annexation of areas adjacem to cities is oRen crucial to establishing and maintaining urban order and effective government. Rapid development and population growth frequently occur just outside city boundaries where property is sometimes cheaper and zoning laws less rigorously enforced. These fringe areas may cause urban types of problems that concentrations of population create. Examples of this include increased traffic congestion on inadequate roads, a demaud for enhanced police and fire protection and land use planning decisions which result in disorderly growth. These problems, unfortunately, cross boundary lines and add to city problems. Problems such as the spread of congestion, lack of adequate police protection and other urban issues may become a determent to the social and economic~ealth and cohesiveness of the community. In fact, Bremerton is a medium sized city of only 38,000 peopl~ large-city urban issues partially because of the impact of thousands of residents in urban neighborhoods which surrounding Bremerton. However, it would be inappropriate to conclude that these neighborhoods present a hardship to cities. In fact, economic and social ties between the city and fringe areas are generally strong and local city businesses generate sales from these adjacent neighborhoods. Nonetheless, outlying areas benefit in many ways from city parks and recreational programs, streets, utilities and other services without a proportionate contribution to the city tax base. Moreover and unquestionably characteristic of Kitsap neighborhoods, most suburban people need services the same as those found within the city and may recognize that their property tar and other costs (including utility costs and fire insurance premiums) are not necessarily lower but are quite often equal or even greater than those they would pay as residents within the city. In fact, the tax comparison between the city and the area is generally shown as a wash. The impact on individual property owners depends upon individual property value and the number and type of services utilized and many of the Sheridan Heights residents will be delighted to discover that the city services can be provided to them without dramatic changes in tax levels. SUMMARY REC O3,tMENDA TION The city has evaluated this area in accordance with city policies on annexation. The Sheridan Heights region depicts the characteristics of an urban community with a high level of service needs and with taxes assessed at a level generally equal to the city of Bremerton. The area service demands are at a level that can only be described as urban, based on the variety of services rendered from which many are from the city. In conclusion, this area SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 3 of Sheridan Heights is largely reliant on the service of the Bremerton community and is an important part of the city regardless of its political disassociation from it. Not only must the city must evaluate impact of annexation on the area in question, it must protect the existing residents of the city of Bremerton from any decrease in "levels of service" that may occur as a result of annexation. Once their is an initial determinations that the area is appropriate for annexation, decision makers must be consider whether or not the annexation of the areas proposed will decrease the level of service currently enjoyed by existing citizens of the city. The city administration has concluded that impacts are minimal and that citizens of Bremerton would not have levels of service diminished because of the annexation. Further, the area will generate revenue sufficient to cover expected costs of service in a manner consistent with similar neighborhoods already found within the city. The staff is soliciting three determinations from the City Council. · Approval of the area~ for the.i~itial phase of annexation, thereby allowing staff to prepare annexation * Require the pm-annexation land use decisions to be made and hearings to be held before the Planning Commission and the City Council. This will allow the staff to hold a neighborhood meeting with citizem residing in the area. At this meeting, c'rtizens would be able to seek answers about the impacts of annexation and make recommendations on land-use issues so that they could be included in staff reports to the decision makers. If this measure is approved, the community meeting will be held on March 3 at 7:30PM at the Willows Retirement Center on Pine Road. Staff will be there to answer specific questions. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on March 17 to hear testimony and make a recommendation on land use; and finally · Third, staff asks the County to require the area to accept the proportional share of existing city indebtedness in fairness to existing city residents. Inasmuch as the existing bond was an issue supported by Bremerton citizens to fund the purchase of fire equipment and because each of the property owners will be protected by the equipment atter annexation it is legitimate to ask that they pay a proportionate share of the remaining debt. To clarify, this does not include any other city financing such as costs associated with the utilities - which are collected only from utility rate payers. The band is .2153 cents per thousand dollars assessed. SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 4 THE AREA This area proposed for annexation has been designated the Sheridan Heights Annexation Area for the purposes of this process. The area contains 168.54 acres which includes a number of public right of way areas. The area is divided into approximately 280 tax lot parcels and is valued by the County Assessor at approximately $24,200,000. The neighborhood has a variety of residemial housing including condominiums, town houses and single detached homes. The area is uniquely characte~ by its speetac~_fla_r view of the Dyes Inlet and the Olympic Mountains. The area is conveniently located for working in Bremerton's PSNS, Harrison Hospital and Olympic College or ideal for those workers commuting to Seattle on the Bremerton ferry. Nearby, Bremerton School District schools and Olympic College provide educational opportunities while the city Parks and Recreation center, Lions Park, Blueberry Park and the YMCMF, astpa~ facilities provide abundant recreational oppommities. The area is served by the transit district and has a virtual shopping list of services including the fiber-optic cable services of TCI Cable, a Bre~-~erton fianchisee. With these surroundings, services and nearby facilities available development pressures have risen dramatically in this enviable neighborhood. Iasues revolving around land use and roads have caused juri~i~ coufusion for ~ residents here. Discouraged residents have complained to the city that they are ffu~h-ated with bureaucratic processes that frequently put them between the city and county. The city limits frame this area to the east, south and partially on the north (with the exception oftwo parcels) and Washington Narrows on the west. The area is frequently cut off from the county and is routinely unrep~ in city issues and concerns. Input and participation from residents of this area, so much a part of Bremerton, is a desirable outcome of annexation here. IMPACTS TO THE EXSISTING CITIZENS OF BREMERTON As explained in the summary, thc neighborhood of Sheridan Heights is significant to Bremerton. Residents of the area attend work and school, shop and are active civic leaders in Bremerton. However, residents of Bremerton may he concerned that the addition of lands to the city will cause the present levels of service to he diminished. Therefore, city staff have visited and evaluated the conditions and service demands of the area to assess the impact of the annexation to service. The following information was provided by staff from various · Hmming ~nd L~md Use, Community Development City zoning naturally leans toward urban intensities and sometimes offers greater development opportunities at a lower cost than available in rural county areas. Bremerton is a city of the 21 * century. With the heydays of the SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 5 40's and 50's and the mass exoduses of the 70's and 80's behind us, visionary leadership and new families are plottin8 our wansition to the next century. Naturally, city zoning, based on city plans for the neighborhood as a united whole, is not given freely or without consideration of its impact on surrounding neighborhoods and on the community. Bremerton has exciting plans and showing its leadership in community planning with its historic CharlesWn district, Campus Evergreen, Sinclair Landing and the hospital district projects showing that cohesive and effective land uses which promote convenient and sustainable lifestyles, is not only possible but may become preferred. Finally, the city has no impact fees and encourages the redevelopment and economic prosperity of the city. · Emergency Service Emergency Services to the area would be provided by the Brenmm~ Police Department and the Bremerton Fire/Medic Department. Disaster management would also be managed by the city Emergency Operations Center. · Fire The Fire department reports that firefighters and medics are familiar with the area due to muaxal aid calls that cause them to respond to calls there on an infrequent basis. Calls for fire and medic service to this area last year totaled seventeen. The new demand can be accommodated by the fire department's station three located on Olympus Drive with a second response available from station one located on Pacific Avenue. Two engine companies and a medic unit will respond to any structure fire. City fire fighting apparatus is some of the most modem, state of the art equipment available. It is expected and proven that calls for service to this area will fall within five minutes of calls to 9-1-1. This level of service exceeds the recomm~dations of the American Heart Association and the National Fire Protection Association. The station is manned 24-hours a day with paid fire fighters/paramedics. All personnel are trained at a minimum as emergency medical technicians which includes basic life support skills. Additionally, at least two paramedics, with training in advanced life support functions, stafftbe department at all times. These personnel can provide advanced treatments to sustain life including intravenous treatments, defibrillation and are approved to follow doctor's protocol before and during transportation to the hospital. Further, as paid fire fighters, personnel spends several hours each day training to hone skills needed to combat a myriad of emergency situations. These emergency services give optimal advantages to those afflicted with life threatening sit~_a_tions. SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 6 Fire Recommendatfon - A1 Duke, Fire Chief The fire department is particularly concerned about ace. s on roads in th~ area. Steep grades in th~ western section of the annexation area promise difficulties in h~rdous weather. It is recoiniv~ that these roadways be given attention in hn?ardous weather or that other access alternatives are developed. · Police The department has seventy commissioned officers to serve a population of 3g,000 within an area of approximately ten square miles. The city is proud to have the most rapid emergency respon~ countywide. According to a reccm indc3~mdent study, the city reaches emergencies within three to five minutes as categorized by'the county dispatcher. The BPD supports operations to ex,sure a sa.fo aad ~ environment in which to maintain businesses and promote quality lifestyles. The department is highly visible and maintains a School Resource Officer and a DARE program in the Bremerton School District. Our Community Resource Division maintains approximately eighty separate block watch programs and staffs the county wide Crime Stoppers and DUI programs. Thc Department has managed and supported operations to combat illegal drug activities including the countywide WESNET and special departmental units for gangs and drugs. The Department is a state accredited agency with innovative programs and philosophies ~ the bicycle patrol, marine unit and K-9 programs. Officers serve a variety of special operations including task forces which target illegal drug usc and distribution and special patrols such as the bicycle and marine patrols. The city police department has adopted a community policing philosophy recognizing that the best way to fight crime is to prevent it. With this philosophy in mind, the city funds several preveation programs like DARE, Neighborhood Block Watch, DUI Task Force and Crime Stoppers. The police department enjoys a cooperative relationship with the Brcmerton School District. A Brcmerton Law Enforcemeag officer works closely as an adjunct member of school faculty and a presence in secondary schools. Bremerton sponsors a mobile police unit that takes policing to neighborhoods where they are needed and to special community functions. Police Recommendation: The Brcmcrton Police Department has sixty-three commissioned officers, a population of over 38,000 citizens and a service area of over 10 square miles. To maintain the rapid Police response, averaging response time of 3.53 minutes, it is necessary for the department to grow along with thc expansion of city boundaries. Based on the existing service levels, this annexation would require the addition of ½ officer at approx. $27,000 annually (1.7 officers serve 1000 citizens and, using square miles of territory, 6.3 officers are available for every squar~ mile). In order to maintain these staffing levels, impacts of. Additionally, potential future growth in this area may increase the need for personnel. The city police SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 7 depmi~uent has seventy commissioned officers to serve a population of 38,000 within an area of approximately ten square miles. · Recres~tion~i Services The city has an impressive parks and recreation program. This legacy is unparalleled countywide. Regional facilities like the Gold Mountain Golf Complex and Pendergast Regional Park are complimented by the wide variety of state and national park and marine opportunities available here. The city's commitment to coriching lives in Bremerton is leveraged with a diverse schedule of classes, programs and events for all walks of life. Parks within a short distance of the Sheridan Height~ area include the Blueberry Park, Lion's Field, Pat Carey Vista and Eastpark with the Jarstad Aquatic Center. Parks Recommendation The Pat Carey Vista, located within the proposed annexation area, is a small .5 acre area. A $30,000 ~ce project is currently identified in tho 1998 budget to repair damage to the shoreline as a result of erosion damage. The Lion's field, less than one mile from the farthest noxthem point of the annexation, is a fiPagen acre park. This park is assumed to be the most widely used by residents from that neighborhood. The current ratio of acres of park land per 1,000 people in Bremerton is 17.8 acres to 1,000 people (695 acres for 39,000 people according to the 1997 estimate). To maintain the existing level of park land service in Bremerton, 5.34 acres of park land would need to acquired. However, agc~rdin~o to National Park Standards, a rninroum of 39.3 acres of park land per 1,000 people or proportionally 17.8 acres for the existing population of 300 would be needed to meet this goal. · Public Works and Utilities This area is within the Bremerton water and wastew~r service areas. Bremerton currently provides water and wastewater service to properties throughout this area. Since the stormwater service area consists of only areas within the city limits, Bremerton does not currently manage the stormwater system for the area. Water and Sewer Customers connected to city water and wastewater pay county rates and connection fees and monthly rates at the higher county rate (50% additional on water, 15%on sewer). A copy ofthe 1997 water and wastewater fees are attached as Addendum A to this report. Residents would have those rates lowered as a result of annexation. It is also important to note that incorporation of land into Bremerton does not imply that owners will be required to hood to sewer. Instead, it means that if the owner does decide to hook-up for whatever reason, they you pay a lower fee and lower rates for both services. The service demands in this area have resulted in two primary utility extension projects during 1997. They were on Appaloosa Way and the Port SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 8 Washington Narrows project. The sewer in Appaloosa Way will bring service to properties frontin~ between East 31'~ Street and Sylvan Way. The sewer will eventually serve any future development located on the south side of Sylvan Way on the west end. Service to the area No wastewater or water system improvements are planned for this immediate area. However, the downstream wastewater pump station, EB-6, is located near the intersection of Lebo Blvd. and Sheridan Road is scheduled for rehabilitation work which is part of the Tracyton Beach combined sewer basin. Separation or other means of combined sewer overflow reduction are not anticipated within the proposed annexation area. Stormwater There has been no city study conducted thus far indicating other than minor stormwater problem in the area. However, the city is aware that some residents from the area have voiced concerns about water there. · Primary Roadways: Tra~ton Beach Road Approximately one mile of this seaside roadway would be incorporat4~i into Bremcrton as a result of this process. The drainage along Tracyton Beach appears to be sufficient but several other concerns are raised. Most impo .gantly, the sloughing and erosion of the bank on the west side of the Tracyton'Beach Road is occurring in approximately twelve locations. There is a minor slide area on the east side of the road below a residence. Kitsap County Road Depammat is currently engaged in a rockery project along the waterside of this roadway. There are several utility poles less than three feet from the fog line. This distance is not appropriate for the ROW. There are several locations that could become drainage problems if ditches are not maintained. The use of old drainage covers contribute to'this problem, but water seems to nm offhigher areas. Some existing patches in the roadway need to be repaired. It is estimated that the roadway may need over-layment in approximately five years. Sylvan. Way_: Drainage appears to be sufficient and no overlay will be necessary for at least five years. Traffic patterns and signage appears to be appropriate for all areas. SHERID~ HEIGHTS STUDY 9 · Non-primary roadways: East 31 st Street The road width fluctuates from eight feet to fiReen feet in different areas. Overlay appears to b~ overdue and there are minor drainage issues. The fire department has concerns about the condition and access~ility of the area. City engineers are concerned about the abrupt slope in this road. Alta. Drive: Minor drainage issues here. Also noted were the poor lighfi'n~ of the streets via street lights and the disrepair of street shoulders where they are used as lookouts and turn around areas. See map a~tached as Addendum B which identifies areas discussed above. The city uses a rating system to determine priorities for city ROW. The roads are evaluated on an annual basis TAXATION IMPACTS: · Estimating Revenue Every annexation has some financial impact on the city. An analysis of potential revenues to accrue from this annexation area is made below. The character of the area is primairly residential. Factors such as the exact population of the area and its future land use patterns will affect the area's furore impact. This study is an estimates all existing methods of raising revenue the city would apply to the area being considered. This study includes property taxes, state-shared revenues, sales taxes, bussiness and occu~ taxes and inspection and license fees. · Property Tax Receipts The property tax has the longest lag between annexation and the receipt of the first tax revenues. The boundaries of a city for property tax purposes are officially established by the state Office of Financial Management (RCW 84.09.030) on March 1 each year. Because the annexation of this area can not be completed by that date, the property classifications would not be altered until next March 1. The city may levy taxes for the area in November, aider the property has beea reclassified into the city limits. If the current projected schedule for this annexation is maintained, the annexation may be effective by Fall of 1998. Taxes from the city could then be levied in November, 1999 and billed in February 2000. The first property taxes to the city, from this area would be received in April 2000, over two years from now. Although the residents of the area would experiance no changes in tax until 2000, we have projected revenues from 1997 tax rates (billed in 1998) to provide an example of what may in time be assessed. SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 10 1998 City G-~n~ Multiplier Projected Property Tax Tax assessed value Obligation Revenue Based on 1997 Sheridan Heights $24.2 million 3.3469 per $1,000 sed $80,995 annually* * This wouM not be assessed and collected until 2000. Based on the assumption of a consistent level of taxation, the area would provide $80,995 in property taxes to Bremerton. Adding to this rather confusing scenario, one might consider _th~ based on existing county applications for developmeat in the area and the ideal features of this area, more development to the area is likely to occur increasing the revenues from property tax. · Special Allowance However, with regards to county road taxes collected, according to RCW 35.13.270 the city does receive the revenue fi-om the levied but uncollected county road taxes levied atter annexation. The county road tax is $1.7662 per thousand. This tax supports the county sheriff~ prosecutor, and clerks as well as county roads. The tax diversion to the city could be as high as $19,745 if the annexation is effective before October tax deadline and ff citizens wait to pay the second half of the property taxes until October. In 1999, the full $42,742 ($1.7662 x 24200) would be collected by the city. Sheridan Heights Multiplier based on AV: County Road tax I 1998 1999 24200 $1.7662 [ less than Apr. $21,370. $42,742 · Special Bonds One of the decisions the City Council must consider in the Letter of Intent phase of the process of annexation is whether to require those being annexed to assume a proportional share of existing city indebtedness. This indebtedness represents those issues that the existing citizens of Bremerton voted to support. The city of Bremerton has and Fire Bond for .2153 per thousand assessed. This bond funded the purchase of fire fighting equipment. The bond was recently refinaaeed in 1997 to take advantage of lower interest rotes. The bond will nm until 2006. This would be an increase in collection of $5,210. Because the bond amount will not change, the indebtedness of the citizens would be decreased by the Sheridan Heights contribution. Sheridan Heights Assessed: Proportional Share Taxable to new area $24.2 million 0.2153 per $1K $5,210 SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 11 · City Real Estate Excise Tax Based on a evaluation of real estate excise tax in Bremerton over the past seven years, is estimated that the tax would be.0251% (.000251) of assessed value. $6,070 ISheridan Heights Assessed: $24.2 million The expected annual contribution to excise tax would be Real Estate Excise Tax I Estimated excise tax Estimate: .0251% of AVl $6,070 · State-shared Revenues The state-shared revenues include gasoline tax, the motor vehicle excise tax, liquor board profits and the liquor excise taxes which are distributed to cities based onthe basis of population. To have the city population adjusted to account for newly annexed areas the city must conduct a physical census of the area and submit it and other documents to the Office of Financial Management to be certified. Generally, the annexations are certified and adjustments are made to the population and allocation within two quarters depending upon certification dates. The city Treasurer estimates that about $50 per capita will be directed to the city as a result of the annexation. The population estimate for the annexation is very conservatively estimated at 300 people (about 2 per lot). Following this estimate the allocation would be about $15,000 annually. Two other si~mificant points should be made in relation to this category. First, the city population is a factor in the city size ranking among other Washington cities. Over the last decade, our share of state gas tax had decreased as Bremerton has remained much the same size while other cities have gown. This is because cities are ranked according to population. The annexation of additional population may help the city to obtain a higher ranking for grant funding and allocation of roadway funding. Finally, once again because the number of citizens in the annexation area may increase as development occurs. Inasmuch as a new census of the entire country will be performed in 2000, the city may anticipate additional population allocations from this community in the furore. Sheridan Heights Population estimate: [ State-shared revenue Total anticipated to 300 I per capita $50 EST Bremerton $15,000 an. · Utility Tax and fees The city of Bremerton assesses Utility Tax on most utilities provided in the area. The taxes on utilities are as follows: water, sewer, power, gas telephone six-percent; cable is seven-percent, service refuse service sixteen percent. Although most of the utility taxes are low, the refuse tax is high by most standards. The city of Bremerton has been working for the last three years to lower this tax to a level equal to other utility taxes in Bremerton. So far the city has approved four years of reductions of one percent annually. Additionally, the tax SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 12 collected on water and sewer is offset for most people annexing into Blcauerton by a reduction in water and sewer rates of fii~y and fn°~n percent, respectively. The city does assess Business and Occupation taxes however this area does not have any land dedicated to business uses. If there were home occupations in the area, the owner would be subject to a $30 annual business license and a tax. The B&O tax is .00125% for retail, .0016% on wholesale sales and .002 on service providers. The city does not assess impact fees on new development. Tax Revenue Summary Tax Category Rate Est. Time Est. Amount Property Taxes $3.3469 per K Year 3+, 2000 $80,995 Road Taxes diverted* 1.7662 per K Year 1 $21,370 Year 2 $42,742 Real Est. Excise Tax ¼ % real estate tram Year 1 $6,070 Utility Tax 6% on most; within five years of 16% garbage annexation State Shared Taxes $50 First Quarter Yr 1 Fees/Licenses No impact fees immediately None expected B&O Bonds 0.2153 per K 2000 $5,210 · Parks Acreage 5.34 to 17.8 acres Police officer ~A to 1 full time $27,000 to $54,000 PW&U rates support costs of projects Roadway E 31 ~ access roads and drainage unknown no longer collected after the city tax is assessed. The Fire District tax is also e 'hminated in 2000 at $1.8116 per thousand assessed. Total difference ($1.7662 + $1.8116 = $3.5778; $3.5778 - City Service needs: SHERIDAN HEIGHTS STUDY 13 Resident tax changes (based on 1998 for 2000) Category City County Net Change County Road Tax 0.00 $1.7662 (1.7662) County Fire Dist 0.00 $1.8116 (1.8116) City Bremerton Tax 3.3469 0.00 3.3469 City Bonds 0.2153 0.00 0.2153 Total change (0.0156) less in city · All others no change · Additional charges to utility bills are offset by decreased rates. · City garbage/recycling rate~ available for 10gal can and up. CITY OF BREMERTON UTILITY WATER SERVICE 1997 ASSESSMENTS EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1, 1997 GENERAL FACILITY FEE Single Family Duplexes Multi-Family (3 or more units) Transitory Living Units (Motel/Hotel) Commercial/Industrial (each 2000 sq ft of structure) Irrigation Systems (separately metered) FRONT FOOTAGE FEE Per Front Foot Off Road Rate SERVICE INSTALLATION FEE 3/4" 1 1/2" 2" Greater than 2" PAVEMENT RESTORATION cHARGE* Asphalt Concrete *t~ftmdabte, if ~ and. not r ~j.~r~t. COUNTY ROAD PERMIT INSPECTION FEE Water main extensions Pump Station Miscellaneous WITHIN OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS CITY LIMITS $177.89 $266.83 $355.78 $533.66 Units x .8 x Rate Units x .5 x Rate (Total Sq Ft/2000 Sq Ft) x Rate (Total Sq Ft/2000 Sq Ft) x .5 x Rate $9.49 $14.23 $474.53 $711.52 $757.19 $1,135.27 $814.00 $1,221.{)1 $1,454.46 $2,181.70 $1,631.11 $2,446.14 Actual Time 150% Of & Material Actual Time & Mateha~ $300.00 $450.00 $300.00 $450.00 N/A Cost $0.75/~. but $1.125/ff. but notlessthan notlessthan $300.00. $450.00. $500.00 $750.00 $40. O0/hr $60.O0/hr CITY OF BREMERTON UTILITY SEWER SERVICE 1997 ASSESSMENTS EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1, 1997 GENERAL FACILITY FEE Single Family Duplexes Multi-Family (3 or more units) Transitory Living Units (Motel/Hotel) Commercial/Industrial (each 2000 sq ft of structure) FRONT FOOTAGE FEE Per Front Foot Off Road Rate INSPECTION FEE Lateral connection at PA-. Lateral connection at main Conveyance Facility Ext. Pump Station Miscellaneous UTILITY PLANT INSPECTION (SEWER CAP) PLAN CHECK FEES Conveyance Facility Extensions (Includes manholes and appurtenances and connection to wastewater system.) Pump Stations System Connections VIiscellaneous WITHIN OUTS IDE CITY LIMITS CITY LIMITS $177.89 $266.83 $355.78 $533.66 Units x .8 x Rate Units x .5 x Rate (Total Sq Ft/2000 Sq Ft) x Rate $9.49 $14.23 $474.53 $711.52 '$40.00 $60.00 $250.00 $375.00 $1.25/ff. but $1.90/ff. but notlessthan notlessthan $300.00. $450.00. $500.00 $750.00 $40.00/hr $60.00/hr $30.00 $30.00 0.10/ft but not less than $100.00. 500.00 54.00 27.00 / hr Billing Month Months Covered Billing Month Months Covered CITY OF BREMERTON Utility Billing Cycles West Bremerton (Cycles 1,2,3,4) JANUARY I MARCH I J~LY /I SF_PT~MBF-R L~ NOV I I DEC I JAN FEB I I MARl I APRI "' ......... ": ..... <'Et' ~ ..... "' ....... ::~ ' ,, ~I~..~i~a~~.... --~MER ~ ~ ......... East Bremerton (Cycles 5,6,7,8) FEBRUARY "t APRIL I JUNE LI AUGUST LI °CT°SeR t DEC JAN J [ FEB J I MARl I~i=~I~'~EI~i~I~'~I~i~S~t I OCTI I NOVJ ......... S~M~ ~R ~A~S ......... Fixed Service Charge - Bimonthly Meter Size 5/8' x 3/4' 1' 1 1/2' 2' 3' 4' 8' 10' 12' Utility Water Rates E[fective January 1, 1997 Metered Rate CITY COUNTY PORT OF BREMERTON TRACY-f'ON $ 4.50 $ 6.70 $ 5.92 $ 4.95 5.10 7.00 6.76 5.63 7.20 10.80 9.54 7.95 9.70 14.60 12.90 10.75 18.50 27.80 24.54 20.45 34.50 51.80 45.76 38.13 122.40 183.60 162.54 135.45 446.40 669.60 592.50 493.75 1,594.10 2,391.20 2,116.05 1,763.38 5,993.90 8,990.80 7,956.48 6,630.38 0.75/1-iCF 1.125/HCF 1.125/HCF 0.9375/HCF HCF = 100 cubic feet = 748 gallons Surcharges -- Bimonthly North Perry $ 2.40 Ughting - Bimonthly 10% of Water Charges Rocky Point $ 4.70 $ 7.00 $ 3.00 City Fixed Charge - Bimonthly Metered Rate County Fixed Charge - Bimonthly Metered Rate Port of Bremerton Fixed Charge - Bimonthly Metered Rate Utility Sewer Rates Effecdve January 1, 1997 Single Family Multiple Family $ 10.60 $ 8.50/Unit $ 3.70/HCF $ 3.70/HCF $ 12.20 $ 9.80/Unit $ 4.2_.5/HCF $ 4.25/HCF N/A N/A N/A N/A Commercial $ 12.40 $ 3.70/HCF $ 14.30 $ 4.25/HCF $ 2.50 $ 2.00/HCF Commercial $ 12.40 $ 5.80/HCF $ 14.30 $ 6,67/HCF $ 2.5O $ 2.00/HCF City Only Fixed Charge - Bimon~ly UTILITY STORMWATER Effective February 1994 $ 8.00 RATES Meter Size .3" 6~* 1 O" FIRELINE SERVICES Effective January 1, 1997 City County $17.30 $26. oo $19.1 o $28.60 $20.80 $31.20 $26.00 $39.00 $:34.60 $51.90 $48.40 $72.60 $69,20 ~103.80 LOW INCOME SENIOR Meter Size 3/4' WATER Fixed Charge - Bimonthly Metered Rate For Usage ol' o - 1,ooo CF For Usage ot over 1 ,ooo CF SEWER Fixed Charge - Bimonthly Me£ered Rate For Usage ot o - 1,0oo CF For Usage o1' over 1,0oo CF STO RMWATER Effective Al~ii 19, 1994 Fixed Charge -- Bimonthly AND LOW INCOME DISABLED RATES City County Tracyton $ ~.oo $ ~.oo $ 4.38 No Charge No Charge No Charge $0.75/HCF $1.1 25/HCF $O.$~75/HCF $ 2.30 ~ 2.60 None No Charge No Charge None $3.70/HCF $-l..25/HCF None $ 5.O0 None None METER TEST RATES Meter Size Cost 314" & 1" $72.00 I 1/2" & 2" $88.00 3" or greater $105.00 W/Test Port ~105.00 WO/Test Port Time & MateriaJs MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT CHARGES DELINQUENT CHARGE DELINQUENT NOTICE CHARGE DOORKNOCKER CHARGE SHUT OFF CHARGE AFTER HOURS TURN ON CHARGE LEIN RECOVERY CHARGE NEW OWNER/TENANT CHARGE DUPLICATE BILL CHARGE METER REMOVAL CHARGE FLOW AND PRESSURE TEST A.C.H. CREDIT 1% of the unpaid balance $ 2.5O $10.00 $30.00 ; $80.00 $50.00 $ 5.O0 $ 1.00 $40.00 $30.00 3/4" & 1' Meters ($ ~.00) cluster of trees 3.0' from fog line west side ~ minor slide east side bank sloughing west side 0,8 telephone pole 2.5' front fog line ........... r~ Tracyton Beach Road Notes: O, ~5;.~ telephone poles are close to the road ~bank on west side is sloughing away ~ (approximately 12 locations from 0.4-0.8 miles) patches in the road need to be repaired '~;': ...... overlay will be necessary in about 5 years O,.g ......... drainage along road is sufficient telephone pole 2.0' from fog line bank sloug west side telephone pole 3.5' from fog line East 31st Street Notes: road width = 15.0' (narrows to 8.0' in places) overlay necessary minor drainage issues low traffic volume (local use) Alta Drive Notes: minor drainage issues