HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/12/97 AGENDABREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
239 4TH STREET
BREMERTON, WA 98337
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
MARCH 12, 1997
CALL TO ORDER - 5:30 P.M.
A. Pledge Of Allegiance
B. Invocation
2. CONSENT AGENDA
Items listed below have been distributed to Council members in
advance for study and will be enacted by one motion· If
separate discussion is desired on an item, it may be removed
from the Consent Agenda and placed on the Regular Agenda at the
request of a Council member.
A. Minutes of Meeting - February 26, 1997 #AB97-051
3. CLaIMS/CHECK I~GISTERS
4. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
5. MAYOR,S REPORT
6. PUBLIC RECOGNITION -- (Comments Limited to 3 Minutes)
NEW BUSINESS
A. Membership In The Kitsap Regional Coordinating
Council And Related Budget Adjustment
#AB97-052
Be
Bid Award - Callow Avenue Basin Priority,
Phase 2 Storm Drainage Separation
#AB97-053
Bid Award To Olsen's Land Development Inc., - #AB97-054
Pump Station CE-1 Sanitary sewer Main Replacement
RESOLUTIONS
A. Resolution #2589, Authorizing The Establishment
Of A Health Care Reimbursement Account and A
Dependent Care reimbursement Account
Resolution #2590, endorsing The Home Porting
Of A Third Nimitz-Class Carrier At Puget
Sound Naval Shipyard
ORDINANCES
A. Ordinance #4590 (Second Reading) Prohibiting
Broadcast Feeding Of Birds And Animals
#AB97-055
#AB97-056 33
(CONTINUED NEXT PAGE)
~es~ 2588 Approv~j~3'~relimin~ry Planned #AB97
Unit Development_.~) For Sinclair Landing; -057
Applicant -~rd S. Wright Construction Co.;
Location~-~remerton's Central Business District,
Down~
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT:
MINUTES - FEBRUARY 26, '1997
FOR AGEND~ OF: 3-12-97
ORIGINATING DEPT: City Council
ORIGINATOR: David Fart,
DATE SUBMITTED: 3-6-97
2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back
if necessary)
ENDORSEMENT__ INFORMATION
MAYOR
COUNCIL PRESIDENT
4. ~.U~Y. STATEMENT AND R~OUIREMENT FOR'COUNCIL ACTION:
8. RECOMMENDATION:
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:'
REVIEW DATE:
PULLED TABLED
COUNCIL DIRECTI.VE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
APPROVED DISAPPROVED
DATE:
11. AGENDA BILL
TAPE #1443
UNAPPROVED DRAFT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
FEBRUI%RY 26f L997
#0039
#0062
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 26, 1997, at 5:30 P.M.,
with Council President David Farr presiding. Council members
present were Bob Winters, Carlos Montgomery, Sherril Huff-Menees,
Richard Neville, Lon Overson, John Law, Cecil McConnell, and A1
Colvin. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and Acting
City Clerk Paula Johnston.
The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council
President Farr and Invocation given by Reverend Talmage Wilson of
the Charleston Baptist Church.
President Fart made the following announcements:
(1) Immediately prior to Council tonight, an Executive Session was
held to discuss "Potential Litigation".
(2)
Council will hold a Study Session on March 5, 1997, 4:45 -
5;25 P.M., in the Council Conference Room. Topic of
discussion will be "Sinclair Landing Project Update".
(3)
Council will hold a Study Session on March
immediately following the Council meeting in
Conference Room. Topic to be discussed:
Commission's Role".
19, 1997,
the Council
"Planning
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Minutes of Meeting -- February 12, 1997
#AB97-038
M/S/C/U(Neville/Montgomery)
presented.
to approve the Consent Agenda as
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.
M/S/C/U(Colvin/Montgomery) on February 26, 1997, the Council does
approve for payment those vouchers included and further described
as follows: EFT-4111, 206201 through 206333, 206334 in the amount
of $233,296.63; and Retirees' payroll for the period ending
February 28, 1997, in the amount of $109,381.62.
COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
TAPE #1443
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 2 of 18
Mr. Winters congratulated the members of his Westgate Pee Wee team
on their taking 5th place. On February 24 he held the first
Telecommunications meeting. He and Council members David Farr and
Carlos Montgomery attended a workshop on Telecommunications on
February 24, where he obtained lots of information that can be
applied to the City. He thanked The Sun and Bonnie Loop for a fair
and accurate statement regarding the public's concerns.
Mr. Montgomery reported on February 14 he had the opportunity to
ride on a new prototype passenger-only ferry between Bremerton and
Seattle. He was impressed with the iow noise and reduced wake
produced by this boat. He is hopeful Bremerton will get its second
passenger-only ferry in the not too distant future.
Mrs. Huff-Menees pointed out the prototype passenger-only ferry
was brought to this area from Vallejo, California, for test runs in
the Sound. THE SUN ran a nice article reporting on that event, but
omitted the fact that a local engineering firm, Art Anderson &
Associates, was involved in the development of that ferry, which
received a lot of rave reviews. She felt it was important to take
pride in the fact that a local firm had some involvement in the
design of that ferry.
Mr. Neville extended a "speedy recovery and best wishes" to Pat
Westhoff, who is in Harrison Hospital.
Mr. Overson expressed his appreciation to the Swing City Committee
for their beautification project placing flower barrels around the
City. He asked the public's cooperation to leave the flower
barrels where they are placed.
Mr. McConne11 reported he attended the AWC Legislative Session
February 19-20, which he found to be very informative.
Mr. Colvin thanked all who participated at the February 20 District
#1 Neighborhood Meeting. The main topics of discussion at that
meeting were "Parking" and "Scotch Broom Replacement". He came to
the conclusion that no matter what decisions are made, everyone
will not be satisfied. He will appeal to the Mayor to permit
citizens to try and solve the planting replacements for the Scotch
broom that was removed. And, he will be seeking individuals
interested in making financial pledges towards that project. He
also attended the AWC Legislative Conference in Olympia on February
19-20, where he learned a lot about fiber optics.
Mr. Fart reported he also attended the AWC Legislative Conference,
where members of the Council had the opportunity to meet with local
Legislators, who are working hard for their constituency regardless
of their political party affiliation. One theme that kept coming
TAPE #1443
city Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 3 of 18
up by the various Committee chairmen, was the impact of decreases
in social service funding, and what to be aware of and look out
for.
NA¥OR'S RBPORT
Mayor Lynn Ho~ton reminded members of the public that the Navy is
seeking comments pertaining to the homeporting of a third carrier
in Bremerton. Written comments are to be mailed to Mr. Daniel
Muslin (Code 03PL), Southwest division Naval Facilities Engineering
command, 1220 Pacific Highway, San Diego, CA 92132-5190. Letters
should be postmarked no later than February 27, 1997. She will be
submitting written comments from the City on this issue.
In regard to comments made by pastor Danny Allen regarding
Westsound Cable Access Television at the previous Council meeting,
she met with one of the Cable Access Board members and Doyle
Detroit. During their discussion, it was suggested that Westsound
take a step back and schedule a Study Session with the Council to
review their expectations and goals for public access in the short
and long term for the City and County. Following that discussion,
she would then bring the proposed contract with Westsound back
before Council for their consideration. She also encouraged
Westsound to set up a similar Study Session with the Kitsap County
officials. President Farr stated today he was contacted by
Westsound, and a Study Session will be set up in 2-3 weeks.
PUBLIC RBCOG~ITIOH
Charles Brown, Bremerton resident, reported on February 24 at 4:00
A.M., he was awakened by what sounded like a parking lot sweeper;
however he did not make the effort of traveling 4-5 blocks to K-
Mart to see the source of the noise. On February 25 he received a
copy of the Court's decision concerning the lawsuit brought by the
City of Bremerton against Mr. Sandifur involving noise nuisance
from parking lot sweepers. According to the documentation, the
City lost the lawsuit due to statements made by City employees.
Mr. Brown posed two questions to the City Attorney and Mayor, 1)
Does this end the matter?, and 2) Is there anything more that can
be done to rid his neighborhood of the noise nuisance so that he
can get a good nights sleep? He pointed out that he could do
something if his neighbor mowed his grass at 4:00 A.M.
8han~on BelL, Bremerton resident, thanked all the volunteers for
their help at the Tournament For Special Olympics held on February
22.
Don Atkinson, KITZ, made the following announcements:
(1) Bremerton Central Lions Club Radiothon will be held on February
28, starting at 9:00 A.M.
TAPE #1443
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 4 of 18
(2) The first annual Senior Fair will be held March 1 -3, at the
Kitsap Mall.
Presi4e~t Fart announced Agenda Items 7A and 7B had been pulled off
the Agenda.
7C - RENEW ONE-YEAR KITSAP FAMILY YMCA MEMBERSHIP FOR aLL QUALIFIEn
CITY EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS, ~AB97-041
In February 1996, City Council approved an agreement with the
Kitsap Family YMCA to provide a health/fitness program. This
program was to assist, motivate, and support employees in the
improvement of their well-being. The Wellness Committee believes
this program has been successful in improving City employees'
morale, increasing energy, and decreasing stress levels. In some
cases, job performances has been enhanced.
Ordinance No. 4514 allows expenditures from the Employee Medical
Insurance Reserve Fund for employee wellness programs, subject to
the budgetary authorization of the City Council.
Barbara Forbes, Human Resources Specialist, reviewed the following
questions that were included in a Wellness Committee survey of
employees participating in this program:
(1) As a regular participant, how have you benefitted from this
program? Responses: overall stress level has decreased, stronger,
more stamina, better attitude.
(2) Has your health improved overall? If yes, briefly describe
how. Responses: no more back aches, more energy, lost weight,
lowered cholesterol, last year my health was exceptionally well.
(3) Has stress in your life been relieved to some degree as a
regular participant? Responses: 69-yes, 1-no, 2-some and 2-had
none.
(4) Have you found yourself to be more productive or energetic due
to this program? Responses: 73-yes, 1-no.
(5) Optional question - lost weight. Responses: 49-yes, 18-no, 7-
no response.
The survey also included a section for personal comments or-
suggestions as to whether or not the employees wanted to continue
this program. Responses received included: (1) This by far is the
best benefit the City has offered the employees, even over pay
increases. (2) When a person feels good his/her attitude is
reflected in job performance, relations with the public, and fellow
5
TAPE #1443
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 5 of 18
employees, etc. (3) It is a wonderful facility with a friendly
staff, the entire family enjoys using the YMCA. (4) This is an
excellent program, City personnel meet at the "Y" and work-related
discussions are not uncommon. (5) I think it is great that the City
cared enough about its employees to offer a program such as this.
Keep up the good work, it is greatly appreciated.
Mrs. Forbes stated statistics were kept, by Department, as to the
number of employees participating, and the number of visits per
month. Over the past 11 months, an average of 148 employees
participated in the program per month.
Richard Bow, owner of the Bremerton Health & Racket Club, stated
his health club is the largest, most complete, and most
professional facility in Kitsap County. He spoke before Council a
year ago when this issue first came up and urged Council to offer
a program whereby people could participate in health/exercise
programs of their choice and not limit it just to the YMCA. In his
opinion, the Council had already made their decision prior to it
coming before the public at that Council meeting. This year, he
hoped Council had more open minds and would take into consideration
some of the things he brought up last year. According to his
calculations, approximately 70-80 City employees participate in
this program at a cost of $30,000. He was skeptical about Mrs.
Forbes's statement that 148 employees participated during the past
11 months. He has had City employees that use the "Y" come to his
health club for professional testing because the "Y" does not have
nationally certified staff. He believes the only way to get more
employees to participate in a fitness program is to offer them the
opportunity to go to a program that is located close to their
residence...let the money follow the employee. He urged Council to
revisit this issue and get the correct statistics before making a
decision rather than "rubber stamping" another year. He is a
taxpayer and essentially the money being spent on this program
comes from the taxpayers.
John Thomas, Bremerton resident, stated it was his understanding
the money spent for this program is not City funds, but bargaining
unit negotiated funds and those bargaining units decided to go to
the YMCA.
Elizabeth Buell, Bremerton resident, stated she does not understand
why all City employees do not participate in this program, if the
City is paying $30,000. She supported the idea of paying for those
who wished to participate and let them choose the program/facility.
Charles Brow~, Bremerton resident, suggested using some kind of
receipting and reimbursement system for those City employees
wanting to participate in a fitness program.
TAPE #1443
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 6 of 18
Mrs. Forbes emphasized the overall consensus in 1996 was the
majority of the employees want to use the YMCA facility. The idea
of reimbursing employees on a receipting system was reviewed;
however, it was determined the cost to administer such a process
would not be cost effective. A cost analysis was conducted, and
the result revealed the City is getting its moneys worth. She
emphasized at the end of 11 months, not one person has requested
the Wellness Committee to consider the use of some other fitness
facility.
Roy MoInnis, Bremerton resident, asked if the City employees were
given an option to select some other facility other than the YMCA
prior to limiting it to one specific place?
Mr. Bow stated no option was given when the contract was awarded a
year ago. To his knowledge, the money used to run the City comes
from tax dollars in some manner; therefore he views the dollars
used for this program as being tax generated. He believes the YMCA
should be providing a list of those participating at no cost to the
City. In his opinion, the Council are fools to fund the program .in
its current structure. He has seen statistics as to what motivates
people to attend health clubs, and unless people are allowed to
choose the facility/program, the City is paying for only a small
segment of the employees.
Mark Schmidt, Bremerton Fire Department, disagreed with Mr. Bow's
comment that no option was offered to the employees prior to
approving the YMCA contract. A survey was sent out to all City
employees asking them if they wanted to participate in a fitness
program. The decision specifying the YMCA facility was the result
of the comments provided on that survey.
Mr. Winters stated he would step down from this issue because his
family utilizes the YMCA, and he was recently hired by the YMCA as
a disc jockey for a fund raising dance.
Mrs. Huff-Menees pointed out funding for this program comes out of
the Employee Insurance Reserve Fund, which is paid into by the
employees, not from the City's general budget. There have been
times when members of the public have not agreed with Council's
decisions, and everyone is entitled to their opinion. In this
case, she is not willing to be called a fool because Council made
a decision a year ago based upon a recommendation that was based
upon the majority of the City employees, who responded to a survey
indicating they wanted to utilize the YMCA facility. She believes
the City is getting its moneys worth based on the number of
employees utilizing that facility; and the benefits identified by
Mrs. Forbes are added incentives. The additional benefit of what
that has meant to many employees is immeasurable. She also
#1334
TAPE #1443
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 7 of 18
believes the City has been tremendously well served by the YMCA and
has not heard from even one city employee that they were unhappy
with the choice or services that are provided by the YMCA. She
believes to renew this contract with the YMCA is one of the wisest
decision the City has made in terms of taking care of its
employees.
Mr. Law stated he has been contacted by a number of City employees
regarding this program, and they were all very positive about their
utilization of the YMCA facility; therefore, he will support the
program as presented.
Mr. McConRell stated if approving this contract is foolish, then
Council should do more "foolish" things. As stated earlier, the
funding for this program comes out of the employees' pocket. He
asked if employees utilize the YMCA facilities on their own time?
Mrs. Forbes stated yes, except the Fire Fighters, who are allowed
to exercise while on shift, but if an emergency response is
signaled, they must respond at that time. Only personnel from Fire
Stations 1 and 3 are able to utilize the YMCA facility while on
shift. Fire Station 2 is located on Kitsap Way, which is too far
away from the YMCA, and it would not be practical.
Mr. Colvin stated he supports the program, and asked how many
Council members participate? Mrs. Forbes stated 3. Mr. Colvin
asked many annual memberships the $30,000 represents? Mrs. Forbes
stated 79 is the number needed to make this program work, and the
building assessment fee has been waived.
Mr. Overson added this program was audited with the results showing
it is achieving the intended goals and providing a "good return" on
the investment. He did wish however, that employees could choose
to go to a facility of their choice, with a reimbursement schedule.
Mr. McConne11 asked if the cost would be the same if there were 200
members? Mrs. Forbes stated yes.
M/S/C/U(Montgomery/Huff-Menees) to approve the expenditure of
$30,000 from the Employee Medical Insurance Reserve Fund to pay for
the cost of a YMCA membership for all regular City employees and
officials beginning March 1, 1997 to February 28, 1998.
Expenditure to be paid in monthly installments of $2,500 per month.
Jim Meith, Human Resources Director, stated for clarification the
Employee Medical Reserve Fund is a fund made up of employee
contributions, as well as money that has been set aside for
insurance premiums, and not spent. The fund balance has built up
over the years.
#1681
TAPE #1443
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 8 of 18
Mr. Bob Winters returned to the Council Chambers at 6:25 P.M.
8A - RESOLUTION NO. 2586 E~TAB~IS~ING AD HOC COUNCIL ~DVISORY
COMMITTEE ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS, #AB97-042
This resolution would create a short term citizen/council advisory
committee to research and recommend a telecommunications ordinance
to Council by May 29, 1997. The committee, as proposed, would
consist of two council members, and three citizens, with necessary
staff support.
Mr. Law proposed two changes to Resolution No. 2586: 1) to the
second line of the paragraph 1. COMMITTEB ESTABLISHBD, after "...by
the Council President..." insert with the approval of the City
Council; and 2) to the last line of same paragraph, strike out the
words "...President, and", and insert with.
President Fart asked the City Attorney if the proposed changes
would be in accordance with the Bremerton City Council Rules &
Procedures. Mr. Sievers stated this is a special Ad Hoc Committee,
with citizen members. He did not think it would violate the rule
requiring Council Approval of appointments and is correct in the
format proposed.
Public comment - none.
M/S/C/U(Huff-Menees/McConnell) to adopt Resolution No. 2586,
establishing an Ad Hoc Telecommunications Advisory Committee, with
changes as proposed by Mr. Law.
9A - ORDINANCE (FIRST RE~DING) PROHIBITING BROADCAST FEEDING OF
BIRDS /%ND ANIMALS~ ~B97-043
This ordinance amends the municipal code section declaring certain
animal nuisances, and makes it unlawful and a nuisance to throw or
scatter animal or bird feed. If consumed, the feed becomes
unsightly refuse which attracts vermin. There have been recent
complaints that broadcasting large amounts of bird feed on a set
schedule has caused large numbers of birds to congregate, creating
a noise disturbance to surrounding properties and droppings on
public sidewalks.
Mayor Lynn Horton stated over the last several months, the
Administration has dealt with problems from people feeding large
numbers of birds. This has created a health concern as well as the
mess of dealing with bird droppings. The intention is not to
penalize citizens, who want to have bird feeders, or prohibiting
people from feeding birds that do not cause a public nuisance.
John Thomas, Bremerton resident, found it strange that a law had to
be created to address situations where 3 or 4 people were causing
TAPE #1443
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 9 of 18
problems.
conflict?
He asked if there was another way to handle this
Fannie Be~lau, Bremerton resident, stated she has lived in
Bremerton since 1962, and she feeds many birds. She described how
she schedules the time she places food out side for the birds and
the fact that once they have eaten they leave her yard. She
questioned whether she would be able to continue this practice, and
pointed out that she owns her property? She took over this duty
from her brother who has now passed, and has always felt this was
from a christian attitude.
Elizabeth Buell, Bremerton resident, asked if she would be able to
continue feeding birds on the docks while waiting for a ferry? She
questioned if this new law would apply to people who feed stray
cats? Mr. Sievers said it would not prohibit feeding birds or
animals from containers or dishes. However, she would be
prohibited from "broadcast" feeding, such as throwing handfuls of
food for birds on the docks.
Mr. McInnis questioned how would this new law be effectively
enforced, especially for people feeding birds and animals on their
own private property. Mr. 8ievers stated it would be easy to
enforce this particular ordinance because it regulates behavior and
not thoughts of the person. The very act of throwing food in a
wide dispersing pattern in private yards or public right-of-way is
the illegal conduct. Such activity could create a garbage refuse
problem or attract unwanted birds or animals. The City would
enforce on a complaint basis.
Charles Brown, Bremerton resident, asked if this ordinance was
approved would a Police Office, observing people feeding birds on
the boardwalk, enforce the law or would they ignore it unless a
complaint is lodged? Mr. Sievers stated he does not believe that
kind of feeding behavior is being addressed in this ordinance or
prohibits. Someone feeding sea gulls one at a time from their hand
is not prohibited under this ordinance. Mr. Brown asked if other
cities have similar ordinances? Mr. Sievers stated he could not
comment, but the City did not use any other city as a model. Mr.
Brown acknowledged there can be problems when people feed wild
animals, i.e. deer, Canadian geese, etc., and sea gulls and pigeons
are scavenger birds; however, he sees this legislation as being
intrusive of government when it affects what he does on his own
private property.
Diane Killa~., Bremerton resident, described how a neighbor feeding
birds, initially using a broadcasting method and then switching to
feeders to distribute feed, adversely affected her home by covering
the yard, windows, roof, fence, plants and driveway in bird
TAPE #1443
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 10 of 18
droppings. She estimates that 100+ pigeons sit on the power lines
above her property everyday, all day long. In the summer time when
it does not rain as often the grass outside her fence is stiff with
droppings. She views this kind of a situation as a health hazard
and was surprised that no one has become ill because of it. The
neighbor feeding the birds believes it is her right to continue
that activity. Mrs. Killam has contacted everyone she should think
of from Puget Power and the Health District, but no one will do
anything to resolve the situation. At this point, she has
exhausted most options and views the proposed ordinance as a way to
give her some relief from being invaded by the birds and their
droppings.
Mayor Horton pointed the City of Seattle adopted legislation that
establishes no-feeding zones around each property where a problem
developed. That kind of action was discussed; however, it was felt
a broader application of the law would be of more benefit to the
City rather than having lots of little isolated zones throughout
the City. She agreed this is not a rampant problem, but for people
that are afflicted by such a situation it is a big problem. The
problems identified in the City have not been in neighborhoods that
have lots of little children, who might be more apt to come in
direct contact with the bird droppings. She also sees it as a real
health concern. If Council wishes to have language added to
address feeding birds where it causes problems with noise and/or
droppings on adjacent properties, it can be provided by the second
reading of the ordinance.
Mr. McConne11 stated after listening to the testimony, he
recommends the issue be sent back to the administration to be
reworked so that something can be included that will protect the
neighbors in addition to identifying specific birds that create the
problem.
Mr. MontqomerF stated he was personally aware of the problem sea
gulls and pigeons create for the Naval facilities and ships and
private property owners; therefore he would support the ordinance
as presented.
Mr. Winters asked Mrs. Killam if the problem existed prior to her
purchasing her property? Mrs. Killa~explained about two years ago
Bachman Park was refurbished and signs were posted "do not feed the
birds". Since that time, the problem has multiplied with the birds
migrating to her property. Mr. Winters asked Mrs. Killam if she
had asked the neighbor feeding the birds to come over to her
property to see the condition that exists and if she had, what was
their response? Mrs. Killam stated the response she was given was
"oh well, I guess we could clean it up"; however no one did clean
it up. She did ask the neighbor to clean up the scattered bird
TAPE #1443
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 11 of 18
feed in her yard and alley and that was when she started
broadcasting the feed up and down the alley and dumping garbage in
the alley. Mr. Winters stated he wanted to make sure that Mrs.
Killam had exhausted every option to resolving her problem before
instituting a new law. Mrs. Killa~ stated she had reached the
point where she had no other option to deal with this situation.
Mr. Law stated Mrs. Killam had contacted him several times and he
did discuss the various points Mr. Winters raised with Mrs. Killam,
who has had more patients than anyone on the Council could realize.
Mr. Winters raised the issue of people purposely going to a local
business to buy food to feed birds on the boardwalk, which he did
recently. During the discussion before Council, Mayor Horton and
the City Attorney expounded on the fact that this is an isolated
situation where the feeding of birds have created a problem. Prior
to hearing the comments and testimony by the pubic, he was not
supportive of the proposed ordinance, but the information provided
helps him make his decision on the issue.
Mrs. Huff-Menees stated she also feeds small birds and enjoys
watching the variety of birds that come into her yard; however,
they also live in a neighborhood where large numbers of birds have
created an extreme problem. It would be wonderful if neighbor-to-
neighbor people could address these issues. When she consulted the
City about the problem in her neighborhood, she found there wasn't
anything available to resolve the problem, if the person involved
does not want to cooperate. She appreciates Mrs. Killam
willingness to come before the Council and give her testimony
regarding this issue. She agreed that it was unfortunate to have
to address the issue with an ordinance, but without it there is no
way to resolve such problems.
Mr. Colvin called Fannie Beglau to the podium and asked her
how she would reconcile a situation as described by Mrs. Killam?
Ms. Beqlau stated she would be distressed, if she had a similar
problem, but she doesn't. She feeds the birds at specific times
after which they leave her property and she is careful to clean up
after the birds leave. Mr. Colvin stated he was not sure if the
ordinance could be modified to satisfy everyone.
TAPE #1444
Mr. Sievers explained people can feed birds if they control the
feeding method so that the number of birds do not get unreasonable
and create noise and droppings problems. He did not know if there
was a better way to articulate the behavior we want to prohibit,
but birds can be fed by using containers in an area without
broadcasting it widely in all directions so that it cannot be
#0115
TAPE #1444
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 12 of 18
picked up and lose control of the kinds or numbers of animals/birds
that are being attracted. Mr~ Co~vSn asked if this ordinance would
apply when there is snow on the ground? Mr. Sievers stated yes.
Mr. ~eville questioned if the penalty identified would be a
misdemeanor and would the enforcement be handled by Animal Control?
Mr. Sievers stated yes, Animal Control would handle enforcement;
however, he was not sure if the penalty was a misdemeanor or civil
infraction, but no more than a misdemeanor. ~r. ~e¥ille asked if
Mrs. Buell's feeding of the sea gulls at the Ferry Dock would be
considered broadcasting? Mr. Sievers stated he did not believe
that kind of feeding would be prohibited by the ordinance. The
Judge will apply the common meaning of broadcasting, which
according to the dictionary is "widely distributed in all
directions".
President Fart stated he received a call from a constituent, who
also cited some problems with birds in their neighborhood and the
mess that accompanies them. He personally enjoyed taking his
granddaughters to Bachman Park to feed the pigeons and they were
disappointed when the pigeons no longer favored that area. It is
his opinion that the ordinance needs to address specifically the
problem areas that are intolerable. He believes the City is
obligated to help people in a way to give them relief from such
problems, but on the other hand he sees the City stepping into
another area where people have a right to their own enjoyment. He
did not believe the Council, given a limited amount of time and
resources before them, was prepared to provide a well thought out
ordinance that addresses all the issues.
M/S/C(Montgomery/Huff-Menees) to approve ordinance, on first
reading, prohibiting outdoor broadcast feeding of birds or animals
and amending BMC 7.08.100.
Mr. Overso~ questioned if the administrative staff felt the wording
of the ordinance was appropriate given the testimony and concerns
raised during this discussion? He noted the ordinance identifies
"broadcasting" feed is a nuisance, but it does not identify large
numbers of birds gathering in a location and ruining ones property
as a nuisance. He believes the ordinance should identify what is
a nuisance and how to eliminate such nuisances. Mayor ~orto~
pointed out if people do not feed birds, they will not gather in a
specific location. She again pointed out she was not totally
convinced the use of "no feeding zones" around problem properties
was the best solution. She suggested if Council passes the
ordinance on first reading, the City Attorney could tighten up the
language yet keeping the intent of the ordinance.
Mr. MoCo~ell asked if the maker of the motion was willing to amend
#0295
TAPE #1444
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 13 of 18
the motion to include the wording: "to feed pigeons, sea gulls,
geese, ducks or starlings by broadcast feeding"? Mr. Montgomer~
stated no, he wished the motion to stay as stated.
M/S/C/F(McConnell/Law) an amendment to the motion by striking the
words "any domestic or wild animals or birds" and inserting
"pigeons, sea gulls, geese, duoks or starlings', so that the
ordinance would read: "To feed pigeons, sea gulls, geese, ducks or
starlings by broadcast feed outdoors onto the ground or other
surface".
Mr. Overson questioned the correct version of the ordinance being
considered? P&~I& Johnston, Acting City Clerk, explained the
substitute ordinance handed out by Mr. Sievers prior to the Council
meeting was to be considered on the floor during Council's
discussion. Mr. Montgomery's motion references the ordinance
included in the Agenda packet.
Mayor Horton stated in reference to Mr. McConnell's amendment to
the motion, there are lots of other birds, i.e. stellar jays,
crows, etc., that people do feed and are problems, which can make
enforcement more difficult. The intent of the ordinance is to
identify broadcasting feed as a nuisance, which results in noise
and pollution caused by numbers of birds responding to people
broadcasting feed in a particular location. The City will only
deal with an animal/bird feeding situation, if it becomes a
nuisance.
President Fart stated he would not support the amended motion or
main motion because he firmly believes there is a problem to
address, but it cannot be thoughtfully addressed in the time
allocated at this meeting. He preferred the ordinance be remanded
back to the administration so that the comments given at this
meeting can be incorporated and brought back to Council that does
not step on people's rights.
Mr. Law urged Council to approve the ordinance, on first reading,
and allow the staff to work on changing the language prior to
second reading.
Vote on amended morion:
In Favor:
Opposed:
Law, McConnell
Overson, Colvin, Winters,
Montgomery, Huff-menees,
Neville, Farr
Motion failed.
Vote on main motion:
In Favor:
Overson, Law, Fart, Colvin,
Montgomery, Huff- Menees,
TAPE #1444
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 14 of 18
Opposed: Winters, Neville, McConnell
Motion carried.
~%ND I~P By ~OpT~NG ~D ~PpLY~NG ~O ~W $O~S= "HEALTH C~E" ~
-SHO~LI~ NIXED USE"; ~ O~I~CE (FIRST READIN~)~ ~97-044
The Breme~on City Council adopted the Harrison District Plan in
Septe~er 1996. That Plan included a reco~endation to adopt two
new zones. The "Health Care (HC)" zone is intended to better
define and protect the health care district in the vicinity of
Harrison Hospital. The "Shoreline Mixed Use (S~)" zone would
provide a more compatible mix of land uses for the high bluff area
along Campbell Way and Old ~eaton Way. The Planning Co~ission
studied the proposed amendments and conducted a public hearing on
Dece~er 17, 1996, after which it reco~ended City Council adoption
of these amen~ents.
President Fart asked the "Appearance Of Fairness/Conflict Of
Interest" question with all Council members being seated.
Ron Hough, Planning Manager, stated both of the subject zones were
developed in cooperation with each other to be consistent and
compatible and came out of the Neighborhood Harrison Plan, which
was adopted in September 1996. Mr. Hough provided a view graph
showing the boundaries of the Health District as Clare Avenue
around Canteberry Manor up Callahan Drive crossing over to Cherry
Avenue to Ash Street over the East Park Nature Center traveling
downward along the east edge almost to Wheaton Way and back up Lebo
and around the Sheridan Village Shopping Center. The boundaries
for the Shoreline Mixed Use zone are: Port Washington Narrows to
the south and Campbell Way and Old Wheaton Way to the north.
One of the most controversial issues discussed during the
discussions of the Harrison Plan had to do with the Shoreline
Master program providing public access to and along the shoreline.
When the discussion centered on the high bluff area along Campbell
Way, along the SMU Zone, it did not make sense to put in a paved
public walkway along the top of the bluff or the bottom of the
bluff since access to the bottom was not available and the top of
the bluff was steep and unstable and would be dangerous to have
people on top of it without some kind of railing. Rather than
require that public access, a change was made to the Harrison
District Plan, which was approved, to provide a landscaped pathway
along the street side of the properties.
The Health Care District itself is based on several objectives that
came out of the Harrison Plan and were discussed at neighborhood
meetings. The zoning in the Health District is comprised mostly of
TAPE #1444
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 15 of 18
General Business (GM), which is the City's most intensive
commercial zones, is highway oriented, and allows a number of land
uses that may not be in the best interest of a health care
district. The suggested "HC" zone is a combination of the most
appropriate uses from the Professional Office Zone and the General
business Zone and is intended to promote objectives of the Plan
while preventing most incompatible uses. A list of primary uses
and support uses were included in amendments to the Zoning
Ordinance, which will be addressed later. Originally, the intent
was to include the PO zone, which goes up the east side of Cherry
Avenue, in the Health Care zone, but a number of neighbors in that
area voiced their concern that they would be looking over some high
buildings in the more intense HC zone, so it was retained as PO
since it has a lower maximum building height requirement.
The shoreline Mixed Use Zone primarily maximizes the potential of
bluff-top areas; encourage redevelopment and infill; promotes a mix
of water-oriented commercial, office and residential uses; ensure
that new development is designed and sited to take advantage of
high bluff views while enhancing the unique qualities of the
shoreline location; discourage development that endangers the
stability of the bluff or functions of the Tracyton Beach Natural
System, such as buildings that "step down" or cut into the bluff.
And, to provide public access to the shoreline along Old Wheaton
Way and maybe along the realignment of Campbell Way.
The Planning Commission reviewed the uses and recommended Council
adoption. The ordinance is pretty specific as to what sections of
the Zoning Ordinance will be changed to add the new zones.
Public comment - none.
Mr. Overson stated in the City's present residential zones SF-1, 2
and 3, there are minimum lot sizes for residences. In SMU 8C area,
the SMU residences are allowed outright, but there is no minimum
lot size. He asked if that was not a contradiction? Mr. Hough
stated the SMU is a mixed use zone and the lot sizes are very
narrow and it is hard to do minimum lot sizes when half the lots
are steep bluffs. Minimum lot sizes were considered, but the
intent was for more compact development with minimum setbacks
between buildings so the side setback was reduced to five feet.
Mr. Ovgrson referenced a small piece of land in the east corner of
the SMU zone, which is a very small lot, and presently not
developed. He hoped that this proposal will give the owner
allowance to develop the site into something useful. Mr. Houqh
stated if the owner could design something to fit the lot, meet the
required parking and minimal setbacks of that zone, the site could
be developed.
#0919
TAPE #1444
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 16 of 18
Mr. MontgomeNy complimented the staff for not being afraid to make
changes where that were needed.
Mr. Colvin asked if consideration for parking was given for the
subject area? Mr. Hough states yes, parking is allowed. In the HC
district non-accessory parking, which is commercial parking lots,
and parking structures were provided.
M/S/C/U(Montgomery/Winters) to approve ordinance on first reading,
amending the Bremerton Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map to add the
new "Health Care (HC)" and "Shoreline Mixed Use (SMU)" zones.
10B - PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND BREIiBRTON'S OFFICIAL ZONING lOop FOR
CONSISTENCY WITH TW0 ~996 COHPREHENSIVE PL~N~ENDHENTSo #~B97-045
During the summer of 1996, the City processed its annual docket of
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Those amendments were
approved and adopted by Ordinance No. 4570 in September 1996. Two
of the amendments require adjustments to the city's Zoning Map to
maintain Plan/Zoning consistency. The Planning Commission has
processed those amendments, conducted a public hearing to accept
public comments, and recommends City Council adoption. An
ordinance has been prepared for the Council's consideration.
President Farr asked the "Appearance Of Fairness/Conflict of
interest" question with all Council members being seated.
Ron Hough, Planning Manager, stated the zoning amendments came out
of the 1996 docket of Comprehensive Plan Amendments approved in
September 1996, along with the Harrison District; and are now
before Council for the final adjustments of zoning. Both of the
areas are fairly small and non-controversial. The Sciepko Area is
located along the south side of State Route 16 east of Gorst. Mr.
Hough provided a view graph showing the Anderson Creek area where
the City sold part of it land to Ron Sciepko a year or two ago.
Mr. Sciepko then annexed a portion of his property into the City.
When that annexation went before the Boundary Review Board, they
recommended including six lots to the north of Mr. Sciepko's
property in the annexation area, which were then annexed with the
Industrial Park (IP) zoning, the same as that given to the Sciepko
property. When that annexation was completed and the IP zone was
designated, it was done with the understanding it would come back
before Council for review and possible changes later, which was
done in summer of 1996, and approved in the Comprehensive Plan in
September of 1996, and now Council is being asked to amend the
zoning. The proposal is change the zoning from IP back to
residential (SF-1), which is the City's lowest density zone and
allows a minimum lot size of 13,000 square feet and was designed
for areas that do not have sewer system, which is the case in this
instance, and an area with fairly steep and unstable banks that
TAPE #1444
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 17 of 18
slope down toward SR-16.
The second part of this proposal is Arvon Park, which is a 1/4 acre
lot that was donated to the city several years ago and located on
Arvon Avenue just north of 15th Street. The City developed the
site into a neighborhood park with a Special Use Permit. The City
has a policy of including all public parks in the Parks and School
zone (PS); therefore, this change would take the subject lot out of
the SF-3 zone and place it into the PS zone.
Both of the above described changes have been recommended by the
Planning Commission.
Public comment - none.
Mr. W!nteNs questioned the length of time required for this
process. Mr, Hough explained the action was initiated by the City
as part of the follow through process for the Comprehensive Plan
adjustment. Mr. Winters asked when someone does apply for rezone
what is the normal length of time before it goes before the
Planning Commission and Council? MN. Hough stated if it does not
involve a Comprehensive Plan Amendment it can be accomplished in
approximately 3-4 months minimum.
Mr. McConne11 noted the recommended action for Council is listed as
two motions. He asked the City Attorney if a Council member could
vote for only one part of the requested action? Ian Sievers, City
Attorney, stated they are tied together in one ordinance, which
demands a single Zoning Map for the City. Therefore, it is a
single action that addresses one document and changes to that
document. If Council didn't approve the motion, which is to pass
the ordinance on first reading, then some how the ordinance would
have to be amended to separate the two changes to the Map. Mr.
McConnell quoted from the Agenda documentation: "the area is
relatively hilly and consists of steep slopes, unstable soils...",
and asked how unstable were the soils? Mr. Hough stated the area
is included on the Critical Lands Map as being an unstable deep
sloped area. The parcels that are already developed are quite a
distance up from SR-16. Mr. MoConnell asked the City Attorney what
the City's liability would be if the area was rezoned by the City
and someone build on the hillside and it gave away? Mr. Siever$
stated not a lot, the zoning is still a fairly broad land use
control, the City has sensitive critical areas in the SEPA review
process that would go with the actual construction project.
Hopefully, that would disclose problems and require engineering, if
problems arose. Basically, on such a situation the City would
require a certified Engineer to stamp any building drawings that
were approved by the Department. Mr. Hough explained the SF-1
zoning is the least intense zoning in the City other than parks.
#1249
TAPE #1444
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
February 26, 1997
Page 18 of 18
It was felt that SF-1 was more suitable for that particular area
than IP. Mr. MoConne11 stated based on Mr. Sievers' comments,
there would be no need to split the two actions.
Mr. Overson asked, from a developmental standpoint, was there any
opposition from the owners of the residential lots over their
properties being rezoned from IP to SF-i? MN. Hough explained
those properties were designated residential in the County before
being annexed and they did not apply to be annexed, but were
brought in along with Mr. Sciepko's industrial annexation. The
property owners had no interest in being zoned IP in the first
place and had no objection to going back to the residential
designation.
M/S/C/U(Montgomery/Colvin) to approve ordinance on first reading,
revising the Official Zoning Map of the City of Bremerton,
Washington.
PreSident Fart thanked the TV camera crew for their services: Rob
Rupe, James Noble Jr., and Jamie Campbell.
With no further business meeting adjourned at 7:59 P.M.
KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk
DAVID D. FARR, Council President
City of Bremerton
KLM/DDF/me
cc: Normal Distribution
File/Vault
AGENDA BILL -
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
MEMBERSHIP in the Kitsap Regional
Coordinating Council
and Related Budget Adjustment
FOR AGENDA OF: March 12, 1997
ORIGINATING DEPT: Mayor
ORIGINATOR: L. Horton
DATE SUBMITTED: February 26, 1997
2. CLEARANCES Comment of beck if necessary)
Dir Admin Ser.
Council Comm.
3. EXHIBITS:
Proposed Membership Agreement
Proposed Budget Adjustment
ENDORSEMENTS
INFORMATION
APPROVED BY COUNCIL.I~RESIDENT FOR SUBMIT
COUNCIL PRESIDENT ~)~//~ ~r) ~
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
The Council is requested to approve the City's membership in the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council. The cost of
membership in 1997 will be $12,792. A budget adjustment to provide for this expenditure is attached. The
administration believes that membership is in the best interests of the City.
8. RECOMMENDATION;
Motion to approve the proposed membership in the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council.
Motion to approve Budget Adjustment Request No. 97-4.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Mayor
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: N/A
EXPIRATION DATE: Dec. 31, 1997
REVIEW DATE: N/A
PULLED
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE:
TABLED
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
APPROVED
DISAPPROVED
AMENDED
11.
AGENDA BILL NO: ___
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS;
5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE;
The City will not participate in this forum for dialog with other Kitsap municipalities.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
As indicated in the attached Budget Adjustment Request.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
Requesting Department:
- CITY OF BREMERTON
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
GENERAL FUND 001-73
NO.
97-4
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
Description
INCREASE:
BEGINNING CASH
Amount
12,800
USE OF FUNDS:
Description
INCREASE:
MEMBERSHIP KRCC
Amount
12,800
NARRATIVE:
This adjustment will provide for the City's membership in the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council.
Department Head Signature
Treasurer Comments:
Date
Director Signature
Date
~-~'Re~~mmended
Mayor Comments:
Not Recommended
Treasurer's SignOre -'"'-
[-~ Recommended
~-~ Approved
Not Recommended
Denied
Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments:
M~or's Signature
~;~Recommended ~-]
Approved ~
Not Recommended
-~ Fiscal'-& Budget Co,~mittee Signature" Date
LYNN S. HORTON, Mayor
239 4th Street · Bremerton, WA 98337 · (360) 478-$266 · FAX (360) 478-$883
March 3, 1997
MEMO TO:
City Council
FROM:
Mayor Horton
Attached is a letter from Mayor West regarding the dues to the Kitsap Regional
Coordinating Council.
Since they want a response, unless I hear otherwise from you, I will indicate in the
affirmative and bring an agenda bill to you for approval.
LH:ev
· Celebrating 50 Years of Freedom ·
L~UBJECT: CALLOW AVENUE BASIN
?dORITY 1, PHASE 2 STORM DRAINAGE
,EPARATION - BID AWARD
2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back
if necessary)
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
FOR AGENDA OF: March 12, 1997
ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & Utils
ORIGINATOR: R. Witt, City Eng.
DATE SUBMITTED: March 3, 1997
3. EXHIBITS:
1. Location Map
2. Bid Tabulation
Director of Public Works & Utilities
City Attorney
City Treasurer
Purchasing Supervisor
Council Fiscal & Budget Committee
Council Operations Committee
ENDORSEMENT [] INFORMATION []
MAYOR
APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
Bids were opened for Callow Avenue Basin Priority 1, Phase 2 Storm Drainage Separation Project on March 6, 1997.
6 bids for this project were received. The low bid from Thomco Construction, Inc. was $4,814,505. The engineer's
estimate for this project was $4,650,000. The action before the City Council is approval of a contract with Thomco
Construction, Inc. for Callow Avenue Basin Priority 1, Phase 2 Storm Drainage Separation Project.
5. RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council approve a contract for $4,814,505 with Thomco Construction, Inc. for Callow Avenue Basin Priority
1, Phase 2 Storm Drainage Separation Project and authorize the Mayor to execute the same.
e
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED [] TABLED [l APPROVED 11 DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED []
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE:
(OVER)
11. AGENDA BILL NO.:
CITY OF BREMERTON
BID TABULATION
DATE OPENED: ~//,,./cj-*/ .. TIME OPENED:
OPENED BY
RECORDED
BIDDER REc'r~ ITEM 1 ITEM 2 ITEM 3 ITEM 4 ITEM 5 NET BID TAX TOTAL
L~ BI~
~D ~ m~
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. ~ CALLOW AVENUE BASIN
PRIORITY 1, PHASE 2 STORM DRAINAGE
SEPARATION - BID AWARD
2. CLE,/~~mment on back
D~i~. ~o~~lities
City. A"I~'o~~//
C~ty Treasur~
Purchasing Supe~iso~2ZT~ --
Committe~ rMll rm~4~w on ~-I 1-97
Council Fiscal & Budget Corranittee
Com2ittee will review _,z,n 3-12-97
Council Operations Committee
FOR AGENDA OF: Marchl2, 1997
ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & UtiJs
Witt, City Eng~
ORIGINATOR:
R.
DATE SUBMITTED: March 3, 1997 ~
1. Location Map
2. Bid Tabulation
ENDORSEMEN~INFORMATION [] APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
Bids were opened for Callow Avenue Basin Priority 1, Phase 2 Storm Drainage Separation Project on March 6, 1997.
bids for this project were received. The low bid from was
$ The engineer's estimate for this project was $ 4,650,000. The action before the City Council is
approval of a contract with for Callow Avenue Basin Priority 1, Phase 2 Storm
Drainage Separation Project.
5. RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council approve a contract for $ with for Callow Avenue
Basin Priority 1, Phase 2 Storm Drainage Separation Project and authorize the Mayor to execute the same.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED Il TABLED 1]
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE;
APPROVED Il
DISAPPROVED [l AMENDED [l
(OVER) 11. AGENDA BILL NO.:
CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
3. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION - Continuation
5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE:
Separation of storm drainage in the Callow Basin would be delayed.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES:
Staffing: Existing staff will provide full-time construction administration and inspection.
Budget: This project is included in the 1997 budget and sufficient funds exist to do this work. An expenditure
from the Wastewater Capital Fund of $ is necessary.
Facilities/Equipment: No impact.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT: PUMP STATION CE-1
SANITARY SEWER MAIN
REPLACEMENT - BID AWARD
2. ~Comment on back 3.
Direct /, Utilities
~,Wodo-~ Utilities
City Treasurer -- "V ~
~'b'uncil Operations Committee
FOR AGENDA OF: March 12, 1997
ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & Utils
ORIGINATOR: R. Witt, City Eng.ff~-
DATE SUBMITTED: February 25, 1997
EXHIBITS:
1. Location Map
2. Bid Tabulation
ENDORSEMENT ~ INFORMATION [] APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL:
MAYOR .~ COUNCIL PRESIDENT (:L-:_'>-2-'---, ? ~'' ,~',_."~,.
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
Bids were opened for Pump Station CE-1 Sanitary Sewer Main Replacement Project on February 13, 1997. One bid
for this project was received. The bid from Olsen's Land Development, Inc. was $42,602.21. The engineer's estimate
for this project was $29,950. Replacement of this sanitary sewer main will remove a restriction that has contributed to
combined sewer overflows at this site. The action before the City Council is approval of a contract with Olsen's Land
Development for Pump Station CE-1 Sanitary Sewer Main Replacement Project.
5. RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council approve a contract for $42,602.21 with Olsen's Land Development, Inc. for Pump Station CE-1
Sanitary Sewer Main Replacement Project and authorize the Mayor to execute the same.
10.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
NOTICE QF ACTION
PULLED [1 TABLED [1 APPROVED [1 DISAPPROVED [1 AMENDED [1
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE:
(OVER) 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: 0~2}1~__
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
3. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION - Continuation
5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE:
Replacement of this sanitary sewer main will be delayed.
IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES:
Staffing: 60 staff hours for construction administration and inspection.
Budget:
This project is included in the 1997 budget as part of the 1997 Sanitary Sewer Main Replacement
item and sufficient funds exist to do this work. An expenditure from the Wastewater Capital
Fund of $42,602.21 is necessary.
Facilities/Equipment: No impact.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
3N 3A¥
"~AV
m
0z
~C
A099¥0
~A¥
L
'~A¥ 9~NOII'e'N
BID TITLE:
DATE OPENED: ,,,
CITY OF BREMERTON
BID TABULATION
TIME OPENED: ~.'~O
OPENED BY
RECORDED BY
BOND
BIDDER REC'D ITEM 1 ITEM 2 ITEM 3 ITEM 4 ITEM 5 NET BID TAX TOTAL
· ~..~ ~ ......... '~ 2cl:qSD
LOW BIDOER
SECOND LOW BIDDER
THIRD LOW BIDOER
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT%J~5-~7 FOR AGENDA OF: _March 12 , 1997
A resolutio~ authorizing the ORIGINATING DEPT: Human Resources
establishment of a Health Care ORIGINATOR: Jim Meith
Reimbursement Account and a Human Resources Manager
Dependent Care Reimbursement Account. DATE SUBMITTED: March 4 , 1997
2. CLEARAN. CES: (.Comment.on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS:
'"~"/~- ~/' /// //'//.~:/Z/~.' , ~ Resolution
FISC~/& BUDGET,/C'OMMITT~ / // '
Q~ERAT,/~ONS COMMI/TEE ~ITY ATTORNEY
,/
MAYOR~ ~. ~ . ?OUNCIL PRESIDENT ..(,t~/!:¢, ~,,
4. SU~R¥ STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
Under IRS regulations, an employer may establish a "Reimbursement Account"
program. This allows an employee to set aside, through payroll deduction, a
portion of her or his salary on an pre-tax basis that can be used to reimburse
certain dependent care and/or health care expenses.
The Insurance Benefits Committee is recommending this as part of a package of
voluntary plans to be made available to employees. These plans will be paid for
by the employees participating.
8. RECO~4~ENDATION:
Motion to approve Resolution OS~g authorizing the establishment of a
Health Care Reimbursement Account and a Dependent Care Reimbursement Account in
accordance with applicable Internal Revenue Code Requirements.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
Mayor, Lynn Horton
Jim Meith,
Human Resources Manager
On Going
On Going
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED [] TABLED [] APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [] DATE:
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE:
I OVeR I
2. Ct.~.ARANCE C~NTS:
Se
IMPA~T OF NON-PASSAGE:
Non passage would result in this benefit not being available to employees.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS~ FACILITIES~ EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
It is anticipated that there will be no impact on the budget as employees
will use a portion of their salary to fund their account. Any administrative
cost should be offset by the savings resulting from not paying FICA on these
accounts.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
RESOULUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION authorizing the establishment of a Health Care Reimbursement
Account and a Dependent Care Reimbursement Account in accordance with applicable
Internal Revenue Code requirements.
WHEREAS, the City Council desires for the City to address the needs of our employees
who are working parents or caregivers; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to be responsive to the needs of its employees, by providing
a dependent care plan and a health care reimbursement plan which allow pretax salary deductions
to be used for covered expenses incurred; and
WHEREAS, the Insurance Benefits Committee has expressed high interest in the City's
offering flexibility and more voluntary options in the benefit package; and
WItEREAS, pursuant to IRS regulations, an employer may establish a "Reimbursement
Account" program which allows employees to set aside a portion of their salary on a pre-tax basis
which can then be used to reimburse certain dependent care and health care expenses; now,
therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
The Mayor or designee is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to prepare and sign the
required documents in order to establish a Health Care Reimbursement Account and a Dependent
Reimbursement Account, pursuant to IRS regulations.
PASSED by City Council of the City of Bremerton this
day of__.,1997.
DAVID FARR
Council President
AGENDA BILL
BREM~RTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT:~5~ FOR THE AGENDA OF:__3/12/97
A resolution'endorsing the home ORIGINATING DEPT: Executive
porting of a third NIMITZ-CLASS ORIGINATOR: Mayor Horton
carrier in the PSNS. DATE SUBMITTED: 3/6/97
2. CLEARANCES.~o~m~nt on back
Ian Sievers --~ -~ .... ~
3. EXHIBITS:
~ Resolution
ENDORSEMENT 2<~ INFORMATION APPROVEDzBY COUI~C/~L PRESIDENT
4. S~Y STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
The Administration is seeking the City Council's endorsement of
the Department of the Navy proposal to place a third NIMITZ-CLASS
carrier at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard.
8. RECOMMENDATION:
Support the resolution~f
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
8
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED [ ] TABLED [ ] APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED [ ]
AMENDED [ ] DATE:
11. AGENDA BILL N0.: ~7-O5~
33
2_=. CLEABANCE COMMENTS:
5__=. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE:
6__=. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGET
7 o
RESEARCH SOURCES:
Department of community Development
RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION, endorsing the home porting of a third NIMITZ-CLASS aircraft carrier
in the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (P.S.N.S.) of Bremerton, Washington.
WHEREAS, the Department of the Navy is studying the environmental effects associated with
developing and operating a home port for a third Nimitz class aircraft carder; and
WHFREAS, the Navy pledges to be responsible environmental stewards when addressing:
geological; topographical; domestic; transportation; parking; and public health issues; and
WHEREAS, in order to increase efficiency and reduce federal costs, the most appropriate home
port is Bremerton where there would be a cost effective, aggregation of carriers (CVNs);
and
Wlt-F~REAS, by utilizing the existing, highly-skilled work force and the existing infrastructure
now available at the P.S.N.S., the Department of the Navy could maintain the carders and
support ships more efficiently and economically than would be possible at another naval
port; and
WHEREAS, this growth will facilitate the continued provision of meaningfifl employment for
thousands of Bremerton citizens; and
WHEREAS, Bremerton has a proud naval heritage and long standing, successful association with
the Department of the Navy; and
WltF~REAS, the quality of life for crew members would be enhanced in this city, which is
nationally reco~ized for providing a suitable lifestyle for raising families; and
BE IT
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Bremerton that the Mayor, City Council,
and city staff stand firmly behind their commitment to support this additional NIMITZ-
CLASS carder to the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard located at Bremerton, Washington.
PASSED, by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this 12th day of March, 1997.
Lynn S. Horton, Mayor
David Farr, President
Bremerton City Council
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT~/~-~ ~ FOR AGENDA OF: 2/26/97 /-~-
Ordinanc~w~rohibiting broadcast ORIGINATING DEPT: Police
, Att .
feeding of birds and animals ORIGINATOR: I. Sievers City
DATE SUBMITTED: 2/10/97
2. ~: (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS:
'~. _ ~7/t~=--~__- Proposed Ordinance
CO~IL COMMITTEE
ENDORSEMENT ~/~ INFORMATION [] APPROVED BY COUNCIL ~RESID~ENT~F~k~ SUBMITTAL:
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
This ordinance amends the municipal code section declaring certain animal
nuisances, and makes it unlawful and a nuisance to throw or scatter animal or bird
feed. If unconsumed, the feed becomes unsightly refuse which attracts vermin.
There have been recent complaints that broadcasting large amounts of bird feed on
a set schedule has caused large numbers of birds to congregate, creating a noise
disturbance to surrounding properties and droppings on public sidewalks.
8. RECOMMENDATION:
~~ ordinances_on f-i-cat ~
second reading.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED [] TABLED [] APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [] DATE:
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE:
11. AGENDA BILL NO.
9A
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS=
5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
Continued complaints and lack of direct enforcement authority.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EOUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
Minimal
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
O . r ANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE prohibiting outdoor feeding of birds or animals and amending BMC
7.08.100.
WHEREAS, the practice of feeding wild or domestic birds or animals by throwing or
scattering feed or otherwise allowing access to feed or edible waste creates a public nuisance by
attracting uncontrollable numbers of animals which irritate surrounding properties, littering of
private and public properties with uneaten feed, and attracting rodents and other pests to the
uneaten feed; now, therefore,
THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN:
Section 1. Amendment. Bremerton Municipal Code 7.08.100 is hereby amended to
read as follows:
· 100 NUISANCES. The following acts are prohibited and will constitute public
nuisances, and unless otherwise specified, shall constitute civil infractions:
· . . [(a)-(1) unchanged]
(m) Outdoor Feeding: To feed or allow any domestic or wild animals or birds to
feed outdoors at such times and in such numbers that (1) feeding birds or animals create an
unreasonable disturbance or accumulation of droppings on surrounding properties including
p~bliq: property, or (.2) feed remains uneaten for more than four hours.
APPROVED by the City Council ofthe City of Breme~on this
,1997.
PASSED by the City Council ofthe City of Breme~on this
,1997.
day of
day of
DAVID D. FARR. Council President
APPROVED this ~ day of 1997.
ATTEST:
LYNN HORTON, Mayor
KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, CITY CLERK
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
I. SUBJECT: Public Bearing/Resolution f:~oTD"~
PRELIMINARY PUD for Sinclair Landing.
APPLICANT:. Howard S. Wright Construction Co.
LOCATION: Bremerton's Central Business District, downtown
FOR AGENDA OF: March 12,1997
ORIGINATING DEPT.: DCD - Planning
ORIGINATOR: Jack Allingham, Sr. Planne .~
DATE SUBMITTED: February 27, 1997 (
2. CLEARANCE~S:
Director of DCD: ,..~-~c .
Operations Comm:
Public Works Dir.:
City Attorney:~ ,~*':'~ ,
3. EXHIBIT
"A": Synopsis, Opinion and Consens~ts of the
Bremerton Planning Commission regarding Sinclair
Landing. PUD
"B": Planning Comm. Minutes 1/21/97
"C": Planning Comm Meeting Notes 2~4~97
"D": Resolution No. ;,'~o°~'
ENDORSEMENT fit' INFORMATION m APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR ~,~I, BMITTA...L:..~____.__..,
c UNC~ ' '
MAYO~ ~-" ~ 0 LPRESIDENT
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
The Sinclair Landing Planned Unit Development will redevelop a significant portion of Bremerton's central business district. It
includes the construction of 18 ne~v buildings housing offices, retail stores, cinemas, residential/hotel units, a museum, parking
garages. The plan also proposes a new ferry terminal referred to as the Bremerton Transportation Center (BTC). In order to
accomplish the plan, the City Council is being requested to approve the following: Planned Unit Development (PUD), Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use, Site Plan Review, Right of Way Vacation, Zoning Map Amendment
(Zone portion of PSNS for Bremerton Transportation Center. These proposals were presented and discussed at the Planning
Commission public meeting on January 21, 1997. The Planning Commission recommends City Council APPROVAL of
the Preliminary PUD and accompanying applications subject to the conditions contained in the Synopsis, Opinion and
Consensus of the Bremerton Planning Commission (Exhibit A).
5. RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of Resolution No.: ,~. S ~<~ , approving (with conditions) the Preliminary PUD for "Sinclair Landing ".
Requested Motion: I move to adopt the Synopsis, Opinion and Consensus of the Bremerton Planning Commission as Finding of
Fact and Conclusions of Law and approve Resolution No.: 025'1~$ , , approving the Preliminary PUD for "Sinclair
Landing" subject to the conditions contained therein.
6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Donald L. Pratt
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: David Nelson
PULLED
7. NOTICE OF ACTION
TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE:
8. AGENDA BILL NO.:
AMENDED
DATE:
IOA
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL (CONT.)
CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
10.
IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
Applicant: Approval of the Preliminary PUD will be denied.
City: Future development will not occur.
Re-application would be required.
11. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
· Additional staff time will be required to process and review the Final PUD approvals Right of Way
Vacation Ordinances and Rezone Ordinances.
· Future development will require building permits.
12. RESEARCH SOURCES:
· ·File #'s: PUD96-002
· Zoning Ordinance
· Site visits
RESOLUTION NO.:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT OF "SINCLAIR LANDING", LOCATED WITHIN THE AREA
GENERALLY BOUNDED BY: PUGET SOUND NAVAL SHIPYARD AND PARK
AVENUE (AVE.) ON THE SOUTH AND WEST; FOURTH STREET (ST.) BETWEEN
PARK AVE. AND PACIFIC AVE. AND BURWELL ST. BETWEEN PACIFIC AVE.
AND WASHINGTON AVE. ON THE NORTH, AND SINCLAIR INLET ON THE EAST
INCLUDING WATERFRONT PARCELS TO FIFTH ST.
WHEREAS, HOWARD S. WRIGHT CONSTRUCTION CO., proponent for
the proposed Sinclair Landing Planned Unit Development, comprising
approximately 22.5 acres acres and located within the central business district
within the City of Bremerton, has made application for approval of a Preliminary
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. and
WHEREAS, an environmental checklist has been prepared and
considered by the responsible official and a mitigated determination of
environmental nonsignificance issued, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public meeting concerning
this matter on January 21, 1997; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended to the Council that
the "Sinclair Landing" Preliminary Planned Unit Development be accepted
subject to certain conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Bremerton City Council held a public hearing on March 12,
1997, concerning the preliminary Planned Unit Development with mitigating
conditions; now, therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
That the "Sinclair Landing" Preliminary Planned Unit Development
presented for approval is hereby accepted subject to the following conditions:
1. Earth: Implement a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan (TESCP)as
approved by the City. Minimize exposed soil during construction.; construct truck fire
cleaning areas; cover dump beds as required by state law; cover stockpiled earth
and exposed cuts; route runoff to temporary sedimentation ponds; employ best
management practices to control erosion; construct a concrete truck wash-down
area; periodically sweep the streets with street sweepers; and phase construction, to
minimize exposed areas.
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. Comply with Puget Sound Air Poflution Control Agency
(PSAPCA) Regulation ~ , Section 9. f5 requiring reasonable precautions to avoid
dust emissions. Implement proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) traffic,
transit, and pedestrian improvements to improve circulation.
3. Surface, Ground, and Runoff Water Impacts: Locate existing surface parking areas
underground and partially cover the Bremerton Transportation Center (BTC) car
waiting areas. Instafl and maintain oil/water separators as required by City
stormwater regulation. Implement: WA. ST Department of Wildlife's Hydraulic
Project Approval (HPA) conditions; U.S. Army Corp of Engineer's Section fO
conditions; applicable local, state, and federal water quality guidelines. Use
concrete marina floats; use concrete or steel pilings instead of creosote wood
pilings; construct interconnecting replacement First St. bulkhead in the dry.
4. Plants: Use landscaping plants or similar measures to provide replacement
vegetation on the site. Incorporate street and public space landscaping into project
as proposed.
5. Wildlife: Remove existing First St. Dock and approximately '120 creosote timber
pilings which covers 12, 600 square feet of intertidal area. Remove existing First St.
fill which covers intertidal area. Remove 45 creosote timber pilings that support the
Wheelhouse deck. Implement HPA and Corps Section 10 conditions.
6. Energy: Conform with applicable City and State energy code requirements. Create
new pedestrian facilities as proposed to reduce auto energy use. Implement one-
way couplet street system, and other circulation improvements to increase
transportation efficiencies and lower energy use.
7. Environmental Heath: Property or business owners to comply with applicable local,
state, or federal law regulating the storage, handling, or use of hazardous materials.
8. Noise: Properly size and maintain equipment mufflers, engine intake silencers,
engine enclosures; turn off idling equipment; restrict noisy operations from 6:30
A.M. to 9:00 P.M. unless special circumstances approved by construction manager.
Construct BTC as proposed which serves as noise barrier between terminal and
waterfront park. Place Wash. Ave. below grade to reduce traffic noise in
Washington Ave. pedestrian plaza.
9. Land, Shoreline Use, Housing: Create approximately 79 additional housing units
than exist. Create new commercial and redevelop commercial space as proposed.
Provide business relocation assistance as required by state law.
10. Land Use Planning: Incorporate uses -- retail, parking, office, entertainment, transit
as permitted under zoning. Preserve views to Sinclair Inlet in conformance with
Downtown Waterfront Urban Renewal Plan (DWURP). Create: Washington. Ave.
plaza; open space adjacent to Waterfront Park; and linear waterfront Pathway-Park.
Relocate marina as recognized in the City's DWURP Design Element.
11. Aesthetics: Create view corridors through waterfront and along Burwell St. as
proposed to preserve views. Create linear waterfront pathway as proposed to view
Sinclair Inlet and other natural attractions. Conform to City zoning with regards to
height and bulk as applied through PUD process. Comply with City's Design Review
standards required by the DWURP. Place current waterfront parking below the
surface as proposed.
12. Light and Glare: Design lights within BTC and relocated marina so as to not create
off-shore glare. Obtain United States Coast Guard (USCG) approval of marina
entrance marking lights.
13. Recreation: Create Second St. pedestrian walkway. Create new linear Waterfront
Pathway-Park (esplanade) from Waterfront Park to Fifth St. and create lateral
access points to the existing Waterfront Park and new Pathway-Park. Create a new
public plaza at Washington. Ave. and Second St. and expand Waterfront Park.
Provide alternative siting for Wycoff Park as approved by Puget Sound naval
Shipyard (PSNS) and City Parks Dept.
¢4. Cultural and Archeologicah Notify State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) if
archeological resources are identified during construction. Provide Public Art in
compliance with DWURP requirements.
¢5. Transportation: Separate pedestrian, transit, and auto traffic as proposed to
enhance traffic safety. Convert Burwefl St./Pacific Avenue intersection eastbound
and westbound combined through/left turn lanes to left turn turn-only lanes and
convert eastbound and westbound right turn only lanes to combined through/right
turn lanes to provide additional capacity and improve operations to an acceptable
level of service. Coordinate BTC construction staging plan with WA ST Department
Of Transportation, City, Port of Bremerton, and Kitsap Transit. Coordinate
construction traffic routing plan with City and Kitsap Transit. Vacate and dedicate
rights of-way as described in rights of-way vacation application. Compensate the
City as required by State and City laws for vacated rights of-way.
¢ 6. Public Services: Provide fire protection systems for buildings according to Uniform
Fire Code requirements. Upgrade existing stormwater and water lines serving the
project site as required by City's Public Works Director. Coordinate replacement of
utility services with Puget Power, WA Natural Gas, US West, and City to minimize
disruptions.
17. Scope of approvah This approval recognizes the preliminary, conceptual and
phased nature of the project. As allowed by the zoning ordinance: a) The ultimate
development with specific uses and sites may change at the time of the Final PUD
application(s); b) Final PUD approval(s) shall be subject to the Final PUD approval
criteria of the zoning ordinance. Final PUD application(s) shall require signature(s)
from all affected property owners signifying their acceptance of the plan and
application(s). This preliminary PUD approval does not mandate participation by
any or all property owners within the boundaries of the PUD, allowing any or afl
property owners to utilize their property in conformance with zoning regulations.
Property in the City limits of Bremerton included in this Preliminary Planned Unit
Development is described as follows:
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS:
Lots 9 to 14 Block 1; Lots 1 to 9 Block 2; Lots 1 to 19 Block 3; Lots 1 to 8 Block 4;
Lots 1 to 29 Block 7; Lots 1 to 34 Block 8; Lots 1 to 26 Block 9; Lots 1 to 9 Block 10;
Lots 1 to 50 Block 14, Town of Bremerton plat as recorded in volume 2, page 30
of the plat records of Kitsap County and the following waterfront tax lots:
242401-2-00%2006; 132401-3-015-2009; 132401-3-033-2007; 242401-2-011-2004;
24201-2-010-2003; 242401-2-055-2000; 242401-2-006-2009; 132401-3-014-2000;
132401-3-19%2007; 242401-2-004-2001; 3718-001-009-0006
PASSED by the City Council this
day of March, 1997.
APPROVED this
DAVID FARR
President, City Council
day of September, 1995.
ATTEST:
LYNN HORTON, Mayor
KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk
CITY of BREMERTON
Synopsis, Opinion and Consensus of the Bremerton Planning Commission
Regarding:
"SINCLA LANDING" PUD
(File #: PUD96-0002,)
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE:
PREPAR. ED BY: Jack Allingham, Senior Planner
January 21, 1997
SUMMARY
APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS - City of Bremerton:
Planned Unit DeveloPmem (PUD)
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
Shoreline Conditional Use
Site Plan Review
Right of Way Vacation
Zoning Map Amendment (Zone portion of PSNS for Bremerton Transportation
Center)
APPLICANT:
Howard S. Wright Construction Co.
425 Pontius Avenue North, Suite 100
P.O. Box 3764
Seattle, WA 98124-2264
CONTACT PERSON: Craig Norsen, Vice President
ATTACHMENTS:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Master Plan of Planned Unit Development - M1.01
Master Plan building Information - M1.02
Revised Shoreline Development Plan (JARPA)
Plaza Perspective Looking N - M3.01
Plaza Perspective Looking SE - M3.02
WFT Perspective looking SE - M3.03
Existing building and Marina Site Plan - Gl.01
Right of Way Property Modification - C3.01
Property Rezoning - C3.02
1
10. DWURP Land/Water Use Plan - Ex. D
11. DWURP Design Concepts - Ex. E
FINDINGS for:
PRELIMINARY PUD and ASSOCIATED APPLICATIONS
BACKGROUND
1. Procedural Background:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The Sinclair Landing Planned Unit Development will redevelop a significant portion of
Bremerton's central business district. It includes the construction of 18 new buildings housing
offices, retail stores, cinemas, residential/hotel units, a museum, parking garages. The plan also
proposes a new ferry terminal referred to as the Bremerton Transportation Center (BTC). This
portion includes:
Terminal Building
BTC Commuter Retail Building;
Passenger-Only Ferry Terminal;
Passenger Waiting Area -- Kalakala or similar waiting facility;
Washington State Ferry and private passenger-only ferry float.
These developments will have a combined total of 2,611,679 gross square feet. There will be
552,810 square feet of retail; 58,450 square feet of restaurant, and 249,874 square feet of
office space. The projects will provide 99 hotel rooms, 142 residential units and parking for
2,930 vehicles. In addition, the plan proposes a floating historic ship, public plazas, waterfront
esplanade, and reconfiguration of the existing marina.
Other approvals necessary to undertake the plan include the vacation of portions of First
Street, 2nd Street, Washington Avenues with re-dedications for right of way realignments.
Also, a portion of PSNS which is currently not zoned will be zoned as "General Industry"
for the Bremerton Transportation Center.
The upland portion of the project site excluding City rights-of-way is approximately 22.5 acres.
The marine portion is approximately 15.5 acres.
For the most detailed description, please refer to the Project Manual and Plan Sheets for the
Sinclair Landing Planned Unit Development & Transportation Center available for review at
2
the Department of Community Development and the City Council's office and the attachments
to this report.
LOCATION OF THE PROPOSAL:.
Sections 13 and 24
Township 24 North
Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian
The PUD is generally bounded by: Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Park Avenue on the
south and west; Fourth Street (St.) between Park and Pacific and Burwell St. between Pacific
and Washington (Wash.) on the north, and Sinclair Inlet on the east including waterfront
parcels to F~h St.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND SITE PLAN REVIEW
PUD PROCESS
A PUD application is reviewed by the City in a two-part process; review of a preliminary
plan, followed by review ora final plan. The purpose of this process is to minimize
development costs prior to a city determination of the acceptability of the
preliminary plan, and to allow greater public involvement.
The steps involved in the preliminary review outlined in Chapter VI of the Zoning
Ordinance are:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Conceptual review
Neighborhood meeting (optional)
Preliminary PUD application
City departmental review
Public meeting by Planning Commission
The steps involved in the Final Plan are:
Final PUD application
City review and administrative decision
Record with County Auditor
Location of Project:
The Sinclair Landing project is located within these general boundaries:
· beginning from a point on the outer harbor line (at a point where the south margin of Fifth
Street as extended intersects the outer harbor line);
· southward along the outer harbor line to a point where the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
('PSNS) property line extends to the outer harbor line;
· northwesterly along the PSNS property line as extended to the outer harbor line to the
southern fight-of-way line of First Street;
· westerly along the southern fight-of-way line of First Street to the PSNS property line;
· northerly along the PSNS property line and northerly along the lot line separating lots 22
and 23, block 13, the Town of Bremerton plat as recorded in Volume 2 of plats, page 30 of
the records of Kitsap County to the northwest corner of lot 23, block 13 of said plat;
· easterly along the southern fight-of-way line of Burwell Street to the southwest corner of
Burwell Street and Pacific Avenue;
northerly to the northwest corner of Burwell Street and Pacific Avenue;
· westerly along the northern fight-of-way line of Burwell Street to the easterly fight-of-way
line of Park Avenue;
· northerly along the easterly fight-of-way line of Park Avenue to the southerly right-of-way
line of Fourth Street;
· easterly along the southerly right-of-way line of Fourth Street and easterly across Pacific
Avenue to the eastern fight-of-way line of Pacific Avenue;
· southerly along the eastern right-of-way line of Pacific Avenue to the northwest corner of
lot 1, block 7, of said plat;
· easterly to along the northern lot lines of lots 1 through 10, block 7 of said plat to the
northeast comer of lot 10, block 7 of said plat;
· north along the lot line separating lots 29 and 30, block 7 of said plat to the southern right-
of-way line of Fourth Street;
· easterly along the southern right-of-way line of Fourth Street to the southwest corner of
Fourth Street and Washington Avenue;
· northerly along the western right-of-way line of Washington Avenue to the southwest
corner of Fifth Street and Washington Avenue;
· easterly across Washington Avenue and easterly along the lot line separating lots 8 and 9,
block 4 of said plat as extended to the point of beginning at the outer harbor line.
Legal Description:
Lots 9 to 14 Block 1; Lots 1 to 9 Block 2; Lots 1 to 19 Block 3; Lots 1 to 8 Block 4; Lots 1 to
29 Block 7; Lots 1 to 34 Block 8; Lots 1 to 26 Block 9; Lots 1 to 9 Block 10; Lots 1 to 50
Block 14, Town of Bremerton plat as recorded in volume 2, page 30 of the plat records of
Kitsap County and the following waterfront tax lots: 242401-2-009-2006; 132401-3-015-
2009; 132401-3-033-2007; 242401-2-011-2004; 24201-2-010-2003; 242401-2-055-2000;
242401-2-006-2009; 132401 - 3-014-2000; 132401-3-199-2007; 242401-2-004-2001; 3718 -
001-009-0006
4
COMPREItENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:
The portion of the Master Plan located south of First Street is designated Transportation
Facilities (T) and the portion of the Master Plan located north of First Street is designated
Central Business District (CBD).
The Downtown Waterfront Urban Renewal Plan, a sub-plan of the Comprehensive Plan
assigns the following designations to property within the PUD:
· the area south of First Avenue as Ferry Terminal (FT);
· the area north of First Street and east of Washington Avenue as Mixed
Commercial/Residential/Tourist (CRT);
· the area approximately 10 feet wide measured from the top of the bluff.line along
the shoreline as Linear Park Pathway (LP/P);
· the area bounded between the existing First Street pier on the south, the Turner Joy
on the north, the ordinary high water mark on the west, and the outer harbor line
on the east as Marina South (MS); and
· the area west of Washington Avenue that includes buildings fronting on the west
side of Washington Avenue as Waterfront/CBD Transition Area (TA).
ZONING DESIGNATION:
The Bremerton Zoning Code designates the area east of Washington Avenue and south of First
Street as Urban Renewal District (URD) and the area west of Washington Avenue and north
of First Street as Business Core (BC). The Puget Sound Naval Shipyard portion of the project
is not zoned, but is proposed to be rezone d General Industry (IG).
PUD Phasing:
The Sinclair Landing PUD is intended to be a phased PUD approval with the following uses
constructed according to a phased t~vo year schedule keyed off of the City's Preliminary PUD
approval date:
Phase 1:1997 through 1999 -- Buildings 1, 2, 3,4, and 5;
Phase 2:1999 through 2001 -- Buildings 8, 9, 10, 11, 20 and 23;
Phase 3:2001 through 2003 -- Remainder of the PUD elements.
Site area (in acres):
The upland portion of the project site excluding City rights-of-way is approximately 22.5 acres.
The marine portion is approximately 15.5 acres.
Parking:
Number of existing and proposed spaces:
Within the PUD boundary, there are approximately 1,500 existing spaces which will be
removed. Most of these spaces are provided within substandard commercial parking lots
which line the waterfront. The PUD proposes to create 2,930 parking spaces in the locations
and numbers as set forth in Plan Sheet M1.02.
The project will develop parking spaces to meet the standard parking lot space requirements
pursuant to Chapter VII, Parking Provisions, of the Zoning Code.
Parking Lot Type: The proposed parking lots are a Type B which are only allowed within the
CBD. Their modified development requirements take into consideration the limited space,
lack of building setbacks, and other features unique to the CBD area. They will be used
primarily to support Master Plan retail, office, and visitor parking requirements.
Pursuant to the Parking Provisions of the Zoning Code and Figure VII-5, off-street parking is
not required within the CBD-designated portion of the Master Plan that is located outside of
the DWURP. Within the DWURP portion of the Master Plan, the number of parking spaces
provided shall be equal to no less than 30% of the parking required in the Zoning Ordinance for
areas outside the Central Business District. Other than within the DWURP area, parking is not
required within the CBD. The following parking ratios and spaces required reflect the
DWURP 30% rule. Both the underlying zoning standards and DWURP 30 % standards are
provided in the parking calculation table below.
The 30% rule does not apply to parking standards associated with the BTC requirements
which are specifically cited in the DWURP and provided in the table below.
PARKING CALCULATION TABLE
Bldg Building Use Gross Zoning DWURP Spaces Required Comments
Sq. Ft. Ratio Ratio / Std.
1 BTC - car N/A N/A 206 206 232 spaces provided
holding area
1 BTC - transit N/A N/A 10 buses 10 buses 21 bus spaces provided
deck
1 BTC - ferry N/A N/A 50 k/ss/ride; 50; spaces provided in
terminal 160 pass; 160; building 2
50 overflo~ 50; and
5% of 260 for 13
employees
1 BTC -Retail 23,170 1/300 sq. ft. .3/300 sq. ft. 23
1 BTC - Parking N/A N/A N/A none 14 parking spaces
provided in this bldg.
2 Museum 18,650 1/400 sq. ft. .3/400 sq. ft. 14
2 Unassigned 8,196 1/300 sq. ft. .3/300 sq. ft. 8
2 Parking N/A N/A N/A none 68 k/ss/fide and 714
total spaces provided
6
3 Restaurant 12,400 1/300 sq. ft. .3/300 sq. ft. 12
3 Retail 37,900 1/300 sq. ft. .3/300 sq. ft. 37
3 Office 47,200 1/300 sq. fl. .3/300 sq. ft. 47
4 ReStaurant 11,700 20+1/100 7 + .3/100 sq. ff. 42
4 Retail 45,000 1/300 sq. ft .3/300 sq. ft. 45
4 Office 94,900 1/300 scl.ft. .3/300 sq. ft. 95
5 Restaurant 24,900 20 + 1/100 7 + .3/100 sq. ft. 82
sq. ft.
5 Retail 18,900 1/300 scl.ft. .3/300 ~. ft. 19
5 Hotel 99 rooms 1/2 rooms + .3/2 rooms + 15
1/200 sq. ft. .3/200 sq. ft.
5 Health Club 10,717 10/1,000 3.3/1,000 sq.f~. 35
sq.ft.
6 Housing 50 2.0/d.u. .7/d.u. 35
7 Housing 70 2.0/d.u .7/d.u. 49
These uses are located within the CBD zone where off-street parking is not required.
8 Retail 67,!00 N/A (CBD) none
8 Museum 35,100 .. N/A (CBD) none
9 Restaurant 20,400 N/A (CBD) none
9 Retail 20,400 N/A (CBD) none
10 Retail 238,100 N/A (CBD) none
11 Retail 13,400 N/A (CBD) none
11 Cinema 37,700 N/A (CBD) none
12 Retail 38,000 N/A (CBD) none
12 Museum 22,200 N/A (CBD) none
13 Retail 52,950 N/A (CBD) none
14 Retail 64,200 N/A (CBD) none
14 Co-op/Da,vcare 50,100 N/A (CBD) none
14 Office 104,000 N/A (CBD) none
14 Parking N/A N/A (CBD) none 55 spaces provided
15 Waterfront Park none N/A (CBD) none
16 Waterfront none N/A (CBD) none
Esplanade
5'he marina and Historic Ship are within the DWURP Project Area and are subject to the .30 parking requirement rule.
17 Marina 50 trans. 1/20 trans; .3/20 transient 61
up to 200 1/1 perm. .3/1 perm.
18 Historic Ship up to 1/400 sq. ft. .3/400 sq. ft. 38
50,000
These uses are located within the CBD zone where off-street parking is not required.
19 Plaza none N/A (CBD) none
20 Parking Bldg. 3,025 N/A (CBD) none
Retail lobby
20 Parking N/A NIA (CBD) none 257 parking spaces
provided in this bldg.
21 Parking N/A N/A (CBD) none 1592 parking spaces
Building provided in this bldg:
22 Residential 22 N/A (CBD) none
22 Parkin[ N/A N/A (CBD) , none ,, 298 parking spaces
pro,tided in this bldg.
23 Office 4,800 N/A (CBD) none
23 Retail 4,800 N/A (CBD) none
Parking Requirements Summary_:
Total parking spaces required within the PUD: 930 spaces.
Total park/ng spaces provided within the PUD: 2,930 spaces.
DWURP parking requirements for the BTC auto holding area: 206 spaces.
Parking spaces provided for the BTC auto holding area: 232 spaces.
Open Space:
Applicable Open Space Standards:
The PUD Open Space provision (BMC 21.02.500(d)) requires:
(1) "There shall be a minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of the total area of a PUD
dedicated as common open space, accessible to all owners or tenants of the
development. Open space shall be provided for active as well as passive recreational
activities, and for the preservation of existing natural site men/ties whenever possible.
Open space shall not include:
i. Streets, alleys, and other rights-of-way.
ii. Vehicular drives, parking, loading and storage areas.
iii. Required buffering and landscaping for parking areas; nor
iv Perimeter setback areas of the PUD project."
(2)...
(3) "Open space and its intended uses shall be clearly designated on the site plan. At
least two-thirds of the open space area shall be suitable for active recreational
purposes."
The PUD provisions go on to further state:
(7) "The total requirement for active open space may be reduced by no more than
twenty-five percent (25%) through the provision of a recreation building, swimming
pool, or similar major recreational facility that, in the opinion of the Planning
Commission, will better provide for the needs of the residents without significantly
detracting from the project's appearance or environmental quality."
Open Space standards as applied to the Master Plan:
The upland portion of the project contains approximately 22,5 acres.
Applying the 15% open space standard yields a requirement for 3.3 8 acres of open space.
Two thirds of 3.38 acres or 2.23 acres must be suitable for active recreation.
The active recreation requirement may be reduced by 25% because the Master Plan will: · provide for a linear waterfront Pathway-Park,
8
· will provide lateral access to the Pathway-Park at Fifth Street, Fourth Street and at
several locations between First Street (as extended) and Fourth Street;
* provide a waterfront park expansion;
, provide a public water feature for children's active recreation.
Summary. of required Open Space as applied to the Master Plan:
Active open space requirements may be reduced to a requirement of 1.67 acres due to the
construction of public recreation discussed above.
Passive open space requirement totals 1.15 acres. Passive open space may be met by credits
for natural features such as steep slopes or beach areas.
Accounting for the 25% reduction in active open space due to providing the above-referenced
public recreational facilities, 2.82 acres of open space is required in total.
Open Space provided by the Master Plan:
Based on the above requirements, the Master Plan includes approximately 5.88 acres of open
space which will be open to the public. The Open Space provided exceeds the required total,
even if allowed deductions in active open space are not accounted.
Approximately 3.76 acres of active recreational space and approximately 2.12 acres of passive
recreational space will be provided. This estimate includes: the waterfront pathway/park
provided by the project and the pedestrian areas located between the Second Street cul-de-sac
and the existing waterfront park. Provided the existing Second Street and First Street are
vacated as requested, this estimate would not include streets, alleys, and other rights-of-way as
provided in the code section cited above. This estimate also includes as allowed by BMC
21.02.500, an accounting for natural areas, which in this case includes inter-tidal area to the
mean lower low water elevation (0 foot).
LOT DEVELOPMENT REQUIRE3/[ENTS
The following tables correspond to each Downtown Waterfront Urban Renewal Plan zone and
each building that is sited in a particular zone. The building numbers are the same as assigned
to the buildings listed and shown on plan sheets M1.01 and M1.02. The standards cited
below reflect the standards allowed under the DWURP as granted by the Design Review
Board (DRB) when an addition to the Waterfront Park Pathway is included into a development
proposal (The Director of Community Development is the acting DRB as the City Council has
not established one. Design review will be undertaken at the time of building permit
application when specific building designs and construction materials are known). The Sinclair
Landing Master Plan will add a Park Pathway (esplanade) along the front of the development
from the existing Over-water Park to Fifth Street.
DWURP Ferry Terminal Area Standards as applied to:
Buildin[[ 1 (BTC)
9
STANDARD REQUIREMENt PROPOSED ANALYSIS
Front Yard Setback: none none N/A
Rear Yard Setback: none none N/A
Side Yard Setback: none none N/A
Height: 50 lt. 78ft. (48 ft. excluding Conforms
(above WA Ave.) clock tower)~
Alloxmble Density: N/A N/A N/A
Dwelling Units: N/A N/A N/A
Lot Coverage: 100% 100% Conforms
Landscape Plan: Yes With Building Permits Conforms
DWURP Commercial/Residential/Tourist Area Standards as applied to:
Buildings 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. and 7
STANDARD REQUIREMENT PROPOSED ANALYSIS
Front Yard Setback: none none N/A
Rear Yard Setback: none none N/A
Side Yard Setback: none none N/A
Shoreline Setback: 25 ft from OHWM or bldgs. 45 to 60 feet from Conforms. Bluff setback subject to Geo-
10 ft. fi'om top of bluff OHWIVl tech. analysis.
Height: S of 4th 100 It. bldgs, from 64 to 86 feet Conforms
N of 4th 120 ft. above WA Ave.
(above WA Ave.)
Allowable Density: N/A N/A N/A
Dwelling Units: N/A N/A N/X
Lot Coverage: 100% 100% Conforms
Landscape Plan: Yes .... With B ,uildin~ P'ermits Conforms
Downto~vn Business Core (BC) Zone as applied to:
Builctin~s 8, 9. 10. 11, 12. 13, 14,21 and 23.
STANDARD REQUIREMENT PROPOSED ANALYSIS
Front yard Setback: none none N/A
Rear Yard Setback: none none N/A
Side Yard Setback: none none N/A
Height: 120 ft. + ffPUD 19 to 53 feet (applying Conforms
BC standards)
Allowable Density: N/A N/A N/A
Dwelling Unitsi N/A N/,~ N/A
Lot Coverage: 100% 100% Conforms
Landscape Plan: Yes ,, With Bu/ldin~ Permits Conforms ,
PUD allows height to be varied if PUD approval criteria met.
10
DW~JRP Linear Park Pathx~y Area Standards as applied to:
, the Park Pathwa,v improvements (no buildin~ proposed ~dthin the corridor) ,,
STANDARD REQUIREMENT PROPOSED ANALYSIS
Front Yard Setback: none none N/A
Rear Yard Setback: none none N/A
Side Yard Setback: none none N/A
Height: 12 f. or per DRB no buildlings proPosed Conforms
approval within the corridor
Allowable Density: N/A N/A N/A
I>,velling Units: N/A N/A N/A
Lot C~verage: N/A NIA NIA
landscape Plan: Yes With Building Permits Conforms
DWLrRP Marina South (MS) Area Standards as applied to:
Passen~er-Ord~ Fer? Terminal. Marina Expansion. and Floatin~ Brealovater ,,
STANDARD REQ~NT PROPOSED ANALYSIS
Front Yard Setback: N/A N/A N/A
Rear Yard Setback: N/A N/A N/A
Side Yard Se~ack: N/A N/A N/A
Hei,~ht: 25 fi. above OHWM Kalakala - (45 ft.): Conforms
Allowable Density: N/A N/A N/A
N/A
Dwelling Units: N/A N/A N/A
Lot Coverage: . N/A N/A N/A
Landscape Plan: N/A N/A N/A
PROPOSED SIGNAGE: Signage will be submitted in conjunction with building permits.
PROPOSED LANDSCAPING: Landscaping plans will be submitted in conjunction with
building permits.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Criteria for Action: Chapter VI, Section 15, General Development Standards of the
Bremerton Zoning Ordinance states:
"A PUD may be approved if it is found that the development conforms to all of the
following general criteria":
PUD allows height to be varied if PUD approval criteria met.
11
The location, design, and uses of the PUD shall be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, Bremerton Shoreline Management Program, and with
other applicable plans and ordinances adopted by the City.
The PUD shall be integrated with its surroundings and designed to
harmonize with existing or proposed development in the neighborhood. In
the case of a departure in character from the surrounding land uses, the
scale, intensity and design shall adequately reduce the impact of the
development in such a way that the project will not be detrimental to the
neighborhood.
The traffic generated by the PUD shall be accommodated safety without
congestion on existing or planned streets.
All development will be adequately served by existing or planned facilities
and services.
The PUD will result in an attractive, healthful, efficient and stable
environment for living, shopping, working and leisure activities.
The development plan shall make adequate and appropriate provisions for
the preservation of the environment, both natural and man-made, and the
conservation of energy.
RIGHTS-OF-WAY VACATION AND DEDICATION
Request:
Vacation of City of Bremerton right-of-way a City Council initiative as allowed
by RCW 35.79.010, and
Acceptance by the City Council of future property dedications for City right-
of-way purposes.
Back ~ound:
Several changes in the circulation pattern within the project will occur as follows:
Pacific Avenue will be widened an additional 10 feet south of Second Street to create room for
a bicycle lane and reconfigured traffic lanes, First Street will be modified to allow a grade
transition from Pacific Avenue to the Washington Avenue Tunnel which will place Washington
Avenue under a proposed plaza which would span the existing Washington Avenue between
First and Burwell Streets. Second Street will be partially vacated and a cul-de-sac will be
created off-of Pacific Avenue. Pacific Avenue, First Street, and Washington Avenue will
12
become one-way streets to improve traffic flow, pedestrian safety, and air quality within the
project area. Burwell will be realigned at the intersection with Washington Avenue and a new
Burwell street end will be dedicated to the City for public access purposes. Traffic signals at
the Pacific Avenue/Burwell Street and Washington Street/Burwell Street intersections will be
modified to match the one-way street revisions. Additional mitigation at the Pacific
Avenue/Burwell Street intersection will also be required to provide the capacity needed to
serve increased traffic volumes. This added capacity will be achieved by converting the
eastbound and westbound combined through/left mm lanes to left mm only lanes and
converting the eastbound and westbound right mm only lanes to combined through/right mm
lanes.
To accomplish these changes, the following rights-of-way will be vacated and dedicated:
Legal description of property to be vaca. ted:
1. First Street right-of-way from Washington Avenue to its terminus in Sinclair Inlet:
That portion of First Street lying southeasterly of the southeastern margin of
Washington Avenue.
2. Washington Avenue right-of way from First Street to its terminus at the Puget Sound
Naval Shipyard:
That portion of Washington Avenue bounded on the north by a line between the
northeast comer of Lot 6 of Block 10 and the westerly comer of Lot 1 of Block 2
of'the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as filed in Volume 2 of the Plats on Page 30,
Records of Kitsap County, Washington, and bounded on the west by the east line
of the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard as shown on a Record of Survey filed in
Volume 41 of Surveys on Page 215, Records of Kitsap County, Washington.
3. Second Street right-of-way from Pacific Avenue to its terminus in Sinclair Inlet:
That portion of Second Street lying southeasterly of the southeastern margin of
Washington Avenue and that portion of Lot 1 of Block 3 of the Plat of the Town
of Bremerton deeded to the City of Bremerton by deed filed under Auditor's
Number 8603260082, Records of Kitsap County, Washington.
ALSO
That portion of Second Street between the east margin of Pacific Avenue and the
northwestern margin of Washington Avenue.
4. City alley from Washington Avenue to First Street:
The 14 foot wide alley in Block 10 of the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as
recorded in Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30, Records of Kitsap County, Washington.
5. City alley from First Street to Second Street:
The 14 foot wide alley in Block 9 of the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as
recorded in Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30, Records of Kitsap County, Washington.
6. City alley abutting lots 12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 located between Second and Bm-well
Streets, Block 8:
That portion ora 14 foot wide alley in Block 8 bounded on the south by the
northerly limits of the previous alley vacation in said Block 8, all within the Plat of
the Town of Bremerton as recorded in Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30, Records of
Kitsap County, Washington.
13
5;7
7. City alley abutting lots 16 through 23 and lots 15 and 24, Block 7:
That portion ora 14 foot wide alley in Block 7 bounded on the north by the south
margin of Fourth Street and bounded on the south by the north margin of Burwell
Street as shown on the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as recorded in Volume 2 of
Plats on Page 30, Records of Kitsap County, Washington.
8. City alley abutting lots 11 through 15 and 24 through 29, Block 7:
That portion ora 14 foot wide alley in Block 7 lying east of a line connecting the
southwest comer of Lot 29 with the northwest comer of Lot 11 of said Block 7
and lying west of a tine connecting the southeast comer of Lot 24 with the
northeast comer of Lot 15 of said Block 7 as shown on the Plat of the Town of
Bremerton as recorded in Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30, Records of Kitsap
County, Waskington.
9. City alley abutting Lots 22, 23, 24, and 25, Block 13 and Lot 12, Block 12:
That portion of a 14 foot wide alley between Blocks 12 and 13 lying east of the
west property line of said Block 12 extended north to the south line of said Block
13, all within the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as recorded in Volume 2 of Plats
on Page 30, Records of Kitsap County, Washington.
10. City alley from First Street to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard:
That portion of a 14 foot wide alley in Block 1 lying easterly of the east line of the
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard as recorded in Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30,
Records of Kitsap County, Washington
11. City alley abutting Lots 1 through 50, Block 14:
A 14 foot wide alley in Block 14 of the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as filed in
Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30, Records of Kitsap County, Washington; except
that portion previously vacated by the City of Bremerton Ordinance No. 779.
12. West margin of Washington Avenue (within Second to Burwell Street block):
Commencing at the intersection of Washington Avenue and Burwell Street; thence
along the centerline of Burwell Avenue North 69° 42'58" West 35.20 feet; thence
South 26° 22'22" West 30.17 feet to the northeast comer of Lot 20 of Block 8 of
the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as recorded in Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30,
Records of Kitsap County, and the True Point of Beginning; thence South 26°
22'22" West along the easterly line of said Block 8, a distance of 97.09 feet; thence
North 29° 24'52" East 97.78 feet; thence North 69° 42'58" West 5.22 feet to the
Point of Beginning.
13. East margin of Washington Avenue between First and Burwell Streets:
Beginning at the intersection of Washington Avenue and Second Street; thence
South 29° 24'52" West 7.00 feet; thence along a line 1.00 feet easterly of(normal
to) and parallel with the centerline of Washin~on Avenue South 37° 37'27" West
212.22 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the east having a radius of 89.00
feet; thence southerly along said curve an arc distance of 80.51 feet through a
central angle of 51° 49'53" to the most westerly comer of Lot 1 of Block 2 of the
Plat of the Town of Bremerton as filed in Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30, Records
of Kitsap County, Washington; thence North 37° 37'27" East 292.57 feet along
the westerly line and its extension thereof of Block 2 of said Plat; thence North 26°
22'22" East 327.59 feet along the westerly line and its extension thereof of Block 3
14
of said Plat; thence continuing along said westerly line of Block 3, North 12°
38'00" East 24.81 feet; thence North 88° 24'34" West 11.97 feet; thence South
29° 24'52" West 343.71 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Legal description of property to be accepted for dedication:
1. Portion of Lots 16 and 17, Block 7:
That portion of Lots 16 and 17 of Block 7 in the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as
filed in Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30, Records of Kitsap County, Washington,
lying southerly of the easterly extension of the north margin of Burwell Avenue
fronting Lots 1 through 15 of said Block 7, from the southeast comer of said Lot
15 to the northwestern margin of Washington Avenue.
2. Second Street Cul-de-sac:
All that portion of Block 9 of the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as filed in Volume
2 of Plats on Page 30, Records of Kitsap County, Washington and that portion of
vacated Second Street included within the circumference of a circle having a radius
of 62.50 feet, the center point of which is located as follows: Commencing at the
intersection of Burwell Avenue and Pacific Avenue; thence south along the
centerline of Pacific Avenue a distance of 280.02 feet to the intersection with
Second Street; thence East (normal to the centerline of Pacific Avenue) a distance
of 132.04 feet; thence South (parallel with Pacific Avenue) a distance of 32.60 feet
to said center point. Also, all that portion of vacated Second Street lying westerly
of said circumference.
3. Pacific Avenue expansion from Second to First Streets:
The west 8 feet of Lots 1 through 7 inclusive of Block 9 of the Plat of the Town of
Bremerton as filed in Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30, Records of Kitsap County,
Washington.
4. Extension of Burwell Street from Washington Avenue to the mean higher high water line:
That portion of Lots 11 through 14 of Block 3, the vacated 14 foot wide alley
fronting thereon and uplands and tidelands fronting thereon lying within a strip of
land 60 feet in width being the easterly extension of that portion of Burwell Avenue
fronting Lots 1 through 15 of Block 7 and Lots 21 through 34 of Block 8, all
within the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as filed in Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30,
Records of Kitsap County, Wastfington.
5. Western margin of Washington Avenue (wilt'fin Second to Burwell Street block):
That portion of Block 8 of the Plat of the Town of Bremerton as filed in Volume 2
of Plats on Page 30, Records of Kitsap County, Washington, described as follows:
Commencing at the intersection of Washington Avenue and Second Street; thence
along the centerline of Second Street, North 63° 37'38" West 35.00 feet; thence
North 26° 22'22" East 30.00 feet to the southeast comer of Lot 15 of said Block 8
and the True Point of Beginning; thence North 26° 22'22" East along the easterly
line of said Block 8 a distance of 158.93 feet; thence South 29° 24'52" West
159.16 feet to the south line of said Lot 15; thence South 63° 37'38" East 8.45 feet
along said south line to the Point of Beginning.
6. Pacific Avenue expansion at comer of Pacific and First Street:
15
That portion of Lot 1 of Block 9 of the plat of the Town of Bremerton as filed in
Volume 2 of Plats on Page 30, Records of Kitsap County, Washington, described
as follows: Beginning at the southeast comer of the west 8 feet of said Lot 1;
thence East along the south line of said Lot 1 a distance of 10.00 feet; thence
Northwest on a straight line to a point on the east line of said west 8 feet of Lot 1,
a distance of 35.00 feet North fi'om the Point of Beginning; thence South along
said east line 35.00 feet to the Point of Beginning.
BASIS FOR THE REQUEST TO VACATE SURPLUS:
The above requested vacations are sought in order to develop the proposed Sinclair Landing
Master Plan. Vacation of public streets and alleys will serve the following purposes:
· create access into the proposed Bremerton Transportation Center, create adequate
area for the ultimate Ferry Terminal and adequate area for off-street Ferry Terminal
auto holding area as is consistent with the Downtown Waterfront Urban Renewal
Plan (requests 1, 2, 4 and 10);
· create a pedestrian-oriented and auto-flee Washington Avenue Plaza and create a
new public waterfront underground parking lot (request 3);
· vacate the remainder of a partially-vacated alley (Block 8) in order to create a
consolidated development parcel (request 6);
· create consolidated development parcels that are currently bisected by alley ways
(requests 5, 7, 8, and 9);
· create a new public parking garage to be built in association with the Master Plan
improvements (requests 3 and 11); and
· align Washington Avenue with the proposed Washington Avenue tunnel which will
allow the development ora pedestrian plaza which links the upland portions of the
project to the waterfront portions (requests 12 and 13).
Dedication
·
of property for City rights-of-way will serve the following purposes:
create a new waterfront street end (Burwell Street) to enhance public access to the
waterfi-ont which will, in conjunction with the creation of the new waterfront
esplanade and new Fourth Street and Fifth Street public access, compensate for the
vacation of First and Second Streets (dedication requests 1 and 4);
align Washington Avenue with the proposed Washington Avenue tunnel which will
allow the development ora pedestrian plaza which links the upland portions of the
project to the waterfront portions (dedication request 5);
allow for the creation of a new Second Street cul-de-sac which would serve the
proposed Master Plan area (dedication request 2);
create additional right-of-way to permit a dedicated left turn lane at Pacific and
First Street (dedication requests 3 and 6).
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Shoreline Management Master Program, and other
state and local law:
16
Comprehensive Plan:
Comprehensive Plan Economic Objectives establish the following goals:
· to stabilize local economic fluctuations;
· strengthen the tax base;
· create new jobs.
These goals can be best achieved by creating retail, office, transportation, and pedestrian
improvements that attract new businesses and the public. The proposed Master Plan and its
associated vacations will create parcels that optimize the development potential of private land
while also optimizing public benefits such as increased public access to the waterfront and
increased economic and employment benefits associated with the development of the Master
Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan establishes as a sub-plan the Downtown Waterfront Urban Renewal
Plan (DWUKP). The DWURP establishes the following policies that are relevant to the
vacation request:
1. Develop the downtown Bremerton Waterfront area to its highest economic and
social potential and take advantage or the site's unique public and natural resources
and amenities;
2. Increase private sector employment in the Project Area;
3. Promote development of a high intensity, water-oriented, diversified environment
that will be a draw to visitors, ferry users and local people. Cultural, recreational
and commercial activities are encouraged. Desirable uses include office,
hotel/conference center, museum/cultural, and residential facilities;
4. Route circulation flow so as to minimize conflicts between ferry users and local
traffic, and between motorized veh/cles, bicycles and pedestrians;
5. Unneeded right-of-way shall be recortfigured to provide a more appealing
pedestrian environment, through such features as wider sidewalks, plantings, street
furniture, etc.
6. The City will vacate Washington south of first Street in order to expand the Ferry
Terminal Area to the northwest;
7. The primary function of First Street east of Washington shah be to provide local
access to the fishing pier, marina, pathway-park system and adjacent business. It
shall also provide supplementary access to the Ferry Terminal Area; and
8. Second Street shall provide two-way vehicle access into the Project Area from
Washington Avenue, with priority given to pedestrians.
Vacating the requested areas satisfies the first three policies by creating an optimal
development that is capable of attracting private investors, retailers, and the public. Policies
four and five also support optimizing the Master Plan's economic development potential by
creating an attractive pedestrian-oriented retail environment. The proposed Master Plan with
its focus on pedestrian waterfront access and access to retail and other uses will help insure that
the economic development policies of the DWURP are met.
17
Vacating portions of Washington Avenue, portions of First Street, Second Street, and the alley
between Washington and First Street will create a circulation pattern that separates vehicular
and pedestrian uses and therefore creates consistency with the forth and fifth policies listed
above. The separation of incompatible uses for both public safety and economic reasons
support the vacation of the requested public fights-of-ways. Vacating Second Street will also
achieve the pedestrian-oriented focus of the eighth policy listed.
The primary purposes of the existing First Street right-of-way, establishing pedestrian access to
the waterfront, will be maintained by the dedication of the extension of Burwell Street, the
creation of public access at Fourth Street and Fifth Street, the establishment of the waterfront
esplanade, and the maintenance of public access at the current First Street location by the
proposed pedestrian hillclimb which is located immediately to the north of the Commuter Retail
Building. The hillclimb ,Mil provide pedestrian access to the passenger-only ferry, to the
marina, to the Pathway-Park, and to businesses located in the immediate area.
Shoreline Master Pro,am:
The City's Shoreline Master Program defers to the DWURP as the controlling document in
most circumstances. The following Master Program policies also apply to the vacation of
streets and alleys:
1. Vacation of right-of-way: The City shall vacate public right-of-way abutting a body of salt
or fresh water only in compliance with RCW 35.79.035
RCW 35.79.035(1)
A city or town shall not vacate a street or alley if any portion of the street or alley abuts
a body of fresh or salt water unless: ...
The vacation is sought to enable a city or town to implement a plan, adopted by
resolution or ordinance, that provides comparable or improved public access to the
same shoreline area to which the streets or alleys sought to be vacated abut, had the
properties included in the plan not been vacated.
The proposed vacation of First and Second Streets will serve the public use by creating
developable areas that are necessary to allow the construction of an enlarged public
transportation center and adjacent public garage that will serve the citizens of the City of
Bremerton and the larger Kitsap County community. The Master Plan is designed to permit
the construction of these public uses.
In addition to creating these public uses, the Master Plan will improve public access to the
shoreline. Proposed access will occur at six linear or perpendicular access points along the
shoreline including the newly dedicated Burwell Street extension and the proposed Fourth
Street and Fifth Street improvements. By comparison, there are currently two existing lateral
access points at First and Second Street. In addition to creating additional lateral access points
to the shoreline, the Master Plan will create a new shoreline Pathway-Park from the existing
over-water park to Fifth Street.
18
All proposed access points will be fully open to the public pursuant to a development
agreement with the City or by dedication to the City. The adoption of the shoreline access plan
described above and incorporated into the Master Plan PUD submittal will not only create
comparable public access to what now exists but will in fact, create superior public access to
the shoreline.
The Master Plan design which allows the creation of the proposed enhanced public access
points and the public transit and garage facilities would not be possible if the existing rights-of-
ways were not vacated.
Public interest will be served by this right-of-way vacation:
Vacating the requested streets and alleys within the Sinclair Landing Master Plan will serve the
following public interests:
· A new public Bremerton Transportation Center (BTC) which meets the necessary
requirements for off-street auto holding capacity, for Kitsap Transit bus capacity,
for sheltered commuter waiting areas, and for commuter retail services will be
constructed.
· New public underground and above ground parking garages which will meet the
parking demands associated with the Sinclair Landing proposal will be constructed.
· Public access to the shoreline will be increased by vacating the existing rights-of-
ways which permit the creation ora development pattern that establishes new
additional waterfront access points.
· Developing an optimal Master Plan design will create attractive public spaces such
as the Washington Avenue Plaza (proposed), the waterfront esplanade (proposed),
attractive public buildings (BTC), and private retail, office, hotel, and other uses
that will attract the public and new businesses into the downtown core.
· Public tax revenues from property tax and retail sales taxes will be increased by
creating an Master Plan layout that optimizes public amenities and optimizes retail
and other private commercial space which will be desirable to retailers, other
businesses, and the general public.
· Creating an optimal Master Plan layout will attract businesses and create new jobs
within the Bremerton community.
Easement and existing utilities that abut or cross the proposed vacation:
Existing and proposed utilities are illustrated on the Utilities Improvement Sheets on the
Sinclair Landing Master Plan PUD plan sheet submittal.
APPLICATION FOR
ZONE RECLASSIFICATION (REZONE)
Title Holder:
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
19
Farragut Avenue
Bremerton, WA 98314-5001
Property_ Location:
Address: 221 First Street
General location:
The property is generally located on Lots 1 through 5 of the Town of Bremerton plat
as recorded in volume 2, page 30 of the plat records of Kitsap County and the former
City right-of-way fronting lots 1 through 5, Block 10 and Lots 10 through 14, Block
11 of said plat. See Plan Sheet C3.02 dated 28 August 1996.
Comprehensive Plan Designation: Heavy Industrial
Current Zoning: The subject property is not currently zoned by the City of Bremerton.
Requested Zoning: General Industry
Basis for request:
The area subject to this application will be used for a new access drive into the
Bremen-ton Transportation Center (BTC). The proposed access drive will enter the
BTC at the point where Pacific Avenue intersects with First Street. This access
location will allow for direct access into the BTC auto holding area from Pacific
Avenue. The proposed access route will allow for additional auto holding capacity so
as to prevent autos waiting for ferry service from backing up onto City streets.
The property subject to this application is proposed to be transferred from PSNS
ownership and into ownership of the BTC operator. The proposed access area is
currently not zoned because the property is PSNS owned and not subject to City
zoning. Once the property is transferred out of PSNS ownership, some form of zoning
must be applied to the property by the City.
In that the current Comprehensive Plan designation is Heavy Industrial, the zoning
proposed to be applied to the subject property, General Industry, is fully consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan. Access drives are a permitted use within the General
Industry zone.
Criteria for approval:
This rezone request can be approved by the Bremerton City Council only if all of the
following criteria can be met.
1. The rezone is substantially consistent with the Comprehensive Plan:
20
The proposed General Industry designation is the zoning equivalent of the
existing Comprehensive Plan Heavy Industrial designation. No other City
zoning designation is more consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
designation. The proposed access drive is a permitted use under the proposed
zoning.
2. The rezone is necessary because either:
a. Conditions in the immediate vicinity have so markedly chcvzged that a rezone is
required in the public interest;
The subject property will come out of PSNS ownership which is not subject to
City zoning and some form of City zoning must be applied in order to approve
the proposed BTC access drive.
Although the policy of not applying City zoning to PSNS property is
appropriate when there is federal ownership, the current circumstances dictate
the application of City zoning in that the subject property which will no longer
be held by the Navy.
b. The rezone will correct a zone classification or zone boundary that was
inappropriate when established; or
The lack of any zone classification was appropriate when the City adopted
zoning in this area. However, the change of ownership necessitates the
application of the proposed zoning. See the response to 2a above.
c. The rezone is to place or remove an overlay zoning designation on the Zoning
Map;
This element is not applicable to of the proposed zoning request.
3. The rezone would not result in adverse environmental consequences;
The proposed zoning request would allow the creation of an access drive into
the BTC. Previously prepared environmental assessments for the BTC indicate
that the construction of the BTC will improve air quality by better integrating
auto and transit service into downtown traffic patterns. Further environmental
benefits associated with the zoning request and BTC project include the
separation of auto, transit, and pedestrian traffic which will create a safer and
more convenient use of transit and ferry services. The impacts to the
environment associated with the construction of the entire BTC and other
Sinclair Landing Master Plan improvements will be analyzed by the City in
association with the Sinclair Landing Master Plan PUD SEPA review.
21
The rezone bears a substantial relation to the public interest or welfare because
there is a public need for a change of the kind in ~testion; and that public need will
be best served by changing the zoning classification of the subject property;
The proposed zoning will allow the construction of an access drive which is
necessary to developing the proposed BTC, a public/private development
project which will provide enhanced public transit and public ferry services and
new commuter retail services to the commuting public.
TM existing transportation cemer functions poorly, lacks adequate auto
storage capacity, and creates by its current configuration auto, transit, bicycle,
and pedestrian safety problems and circulation conflicts. The proposed access
configuration that requires the acquisition of PSNS property and that requires
the zoning map amendment will correct the public safety and circulation
conflict problems.
The proposed access location creates a superior BTC entrance alignmem off of
Pacific Avenue and maximizes the auto holding capacity of the BTC which
minimizes the potential of autos waiting for ferry service backing omo and
blocking City streets.
The proposed BTC will also enhance local and state tax revenues due to the
increased property valuation of the privately owned Commuter Retail Building
portion of the BTC and the retail sales associated with the commuter retail
function of the BTC.
Essential public facifities and services are presently available and adequate, or can
be reasonably be made available;
The area proposed for zoning could use public police and fire services which
are present within the downtown area. Sewer, water, and electricity would be
used for the operation of the auto ferry toll booths and associated office space.
All utility services are present at the site.
6. In the case of a City-initiated area-wide rezone only: The rezone is area-wide m
scope, the action directly and similarly affects a significant class of properties
rather than individual parcels.
This element is not applicable to the proposed zoning request.
SHORELINE MANAGEM]iiNT SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND
SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
The Bremerton Shoreline Master Pro_mm defines &tbstcmtial Development as:
"Any development of which the total cost or fair market value, whichever is
higher, exceeds two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or any
development which materially interferes with normal public use of the water or
shorelines of the state ..... ".
Also, Conditional Use Permits (CLIPs) are issued for proposed substantial
development activity when the activity is classified as a Conditional Use in the
Shoreline Use/Activity Matrix (Table 3-1). The purpose of the Conditional Use
Permit is to allow greater flexibility in the application of the Shoreline Program.
Proposed Uses:
The following uses are proposed for development within shoreLine jurisdiction under a
Substantial Development Permit:
· removal of existing buildings within shoreline jurisdiction;
· removal of the existing First Street pier;
· removal of existing First Street pier fill and bulkhead; construction of an
approximately 140 foot long bulkhead which would interconnect to existing
bulkheads; the proposed new bulkhead would be constructed in the dry behind the
existing bulkhead and the old bulkhead and fill that occupies the intertidal area
would be removed at low tide once the new bulkhead is installed;
· removal of existing piles and pile-supported deck underneath the
Topside/Wheelhouse and replacement with a concrete deck and concrete pilings;
· relocation (partial) of the existing marina -- no new moorage slips are proposed as
part of this substantial development permit;
· up-sizing of the existing storm drain outfall at the BTC from 18 inches to 36
inches;
· Construction of the following:
· the Bremerton Transportation Center (BTC) which includes:
· Ferry/Transit Building and ticket sales structures;
· Commuter Retail Building;
· transit deck;
· reconstruction of auto holding deck and access/egress lanes;
· new passenger-only ferry float; passenger ferry waiting area (the
Kalakala or other equivalent); and access ramp to waiting area;
· partial relocation of the existing 50 slip marina and relocation of the
existing floating breakwater; installation of new slips to retain the pre-
existing 50 slips;
· mooring dolphins and access ramp to the Historic Ship;
· repositioning and possible re-anchoring of Turner Joy;
23
· underground parking garage for approximately 1,400 cars and
retail/museum space;
· expansion of ex/sting waterfront park;
· two mixed-use retail and office buildings;
· a hotel/retail building;
· two parking and residential use buildings;
· waterfront esplanade and retaining wall; and
· street, sidewalk, utility and other similar project improvements.
The following uses are proposed for development under shoreline jurisdiction under a
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit which is subject to final approval by the Department of
Ecology:
· relocation of the ex/sting floating breakwater which will occur in conjunction with
the relocation of the ex/sting marina slips; and
· siting a historic ship, a floating maritime museum use which is designated as a
conditional use under the City's Shoreline Master Program.
Location of proposed project:
The improvements within shoreline jurisdiction occur within Sections 13 and 24, Township
24 North, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian.
The portion of the Master Plan within the City of Bremerton's shoreline jurisdiction occurs
generally within the following boundaries:
· beginning from a point on the outer harbor line (at a point where the northerly lot
line of Lot 8, Block 4, Town of Bremerton plat as recorded in volume 2, page 30
of the plat records of Kitsap County as extended intersects the outer harbor line);
· southward along the outer harbor line to a point where the Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard (PSNS) property line (which is the same as the southern lot line of Lot 9,
Block 1 of said plat) extends to the outer harbor line;
· northwesterly along the PSNS property line as extended to the outer harbor line to
the easterly right-of-way line of Washington Avenue;
· northerly along the eastern right-of-way of Washin~on Avenue to the northwest
comer of Lot 8, Block 4 of said plat;
· westerly along the northern lot line of Lot 8, Block 4 of said plat to the point of
beginning.
Use Location:
The City of Bremerton Shoreline Master Program designates the upland portion of the site as
Downtown Waterfront Upland (DW/U) and the marine portion of the project as Downtown
Waterfront Marine (DW/M).
24
Chapter 3, Environment Designations and Requirements describes the use of the Downtown
Waterfront/Upland and Downtown Waterfront/Mar/ne (overwater):
Downtown Waterfront:
This designation is a special Urban Commercial designation for the downtown
shoreline area that is subject to the Bremerton Downtown Waterfront Urban
Renewal Plan. This area is located along the west shore of the Port
Washington Narrows where it meets Sinclair Inlet. It is bounded on the south
by PSNS; on the west by the west side of Washington Avenue; on the north by
the extension of Sixth Street; and on the east by the Outer Harbor Line.
The intent of this designation is to encourage development of the downtown
waterfront into a vital, attractive water-oriented area that maximizes
opportunities for large numbers of people to interact passively and actively with
the shoreline for leisure and enjoyment. It is characterized by mixed water-
dependent, water-related, and water-enjoyment uses. The Downtown
Waterfront designation is divided into two sub-areas: Upland and Marine.
Downtown Waterfront/Marine (Over-water) (DW2): This designation consists
of the area waterward of the OHWM. It includes areas designated Ferry
Terminal, Pathway-Park, Marina/South and Marina/North by the Urban
Renewal Plan.
Water access and moorage facilities including piers and docks are permitted
activities identified in the Shoreline/Use Matrix (SMP, Table 3-1, page 2 of 3).
The proposed development is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the
SMP and complies with the regulations.
ENVIRONMENT-SPECIFIC REGUI~TIONS
Downtown Waterfront Environment:
1. Downtown Waterfront Environment:
Public access shall be provided in accordance with the adopted Downtown Waterfront
Urban Renewal Plan.
2. Downtown Waterfront/Upland:
Permitted: Water-dependent uses; water-related uses; water-enjoyment uses,
as defined herein, which may include museums, restaurants, and mixed-use
commercial.
3. Downtown Waterfront/Marine Environment:
a. Permitted: Water-dependent uses; water-related uses.
Permitted subject to Conditional Use Permit: Over-water restaurants;
aquariums; floating maritime museums (e.g. ships open to the public for
tours); other water-enjoyment uses, as defined herein: PROVIDED,
Approval of such uses is contingent upon compliance with the following
criteria:
1)
The use provides an opportunity for a substantial number of people to
enjoy the waterfront area. For restaurants and aquariums, access to
and on the seaward-side of the structure shall be provided for
patrons and the public.
2)
Large ships open to the public for tours should be located north of
Burwell Street, to prevent degradation of views from the downtown
business core.
3)
Restaurants and aquariums shall not exceed seventy-five (75) feet in
width, and not exceed twenty-five (25) feet in height, measured
from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM).
4) All structures shall be designed to be attractive and unobtrusive.
5)
The structures shall be built on pilings or float. Landfill waterward of
the OHWM is not allowed.
6) The use is compatible with water-dependent uses of the area.
Evaluation of compatibility will consider:
26
'70
a) Demands for the site by water-dependent uses (e.g. ferry
terminal, foot ferry, shipyard);
b) The effect on the usefulness of adjacent areas for water-
dependent uses;
c) The probability of attracting additional desirable water-
dependent or undesirable non-water-dependent uses;
d)
Subsidies or other help offered by the developer to support
nearby water-dependent uses.
The project is consistent with these requirements, including provisions for enhanced public
recreational opportunities and physical public access to the shoreline in accordance with the
adopted Downtown Waterfront Urban Renewal Plan.
Criteria for Action: Approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must be based
upon compliance with criteria from the following documents:
The State Shoreline Management Act (SMA): The Shoreline Management
Substantial Development process, including public notification and a 20-day
review period, have been processed in conformity with the requirements of the
State Shoreline Management Act.
In general, shoreline permits are reviewed by the City using the same
procedures used for zoning permit applications when a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit is required. The permit application will be reviewed and
approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Bremerton City Council
with final approval for shoreline conditional use approved by the Washington
State Department of Ecology.
Construction of the proposed project is not authorized until twenty days have
lapsed fi.om the date of final decision by the Department of Ecology, or until
any appeal procedures have been completed.
Applicable Use/Activity Goals, Policies And Regulations:
Development necessary to undertake and complete the PUD are subject Bremerton
Shoreline Master Program's goals, policies and regulations pertaining to the following uses
and activities:
· Marine Bluff Review, p. 4-4
· Public Access, p.4-7
27
Signs, p. 4-15
· View Protection, p. 4-21
· Commercial Development, p. 5-7
· RecreationalDevelopment, p.5-18
· ResidentialDevelopment, p.5-20
· Utilities, p. 5-27
· Water Access and Moorage Facilities, p. 5-29
· Shore Modification, p. 6-2
· Bulkheads and Seawalls, p. 6-17
Grading and Drainage, p. 6-28
View protection:
Proposed buildings within the PUD will exceed 35 feet above the average grade level. The
buildings within the Master Plan will be designed to comply with Downtown Waterfront Urban
Renewal Plan 0DWURP) policies that require the maintenance of view corridors within the
downtown waterfront redevelopment area. The plan provides for view corridors which are
consistent with the DWURP's view corridor requirements.
Conditional Use:
Floating breakwaters and floating maritime museums are permitted as a Shoreline Conditional
Use permit.
WAC 173-14-140 Review criteria for conditional use permits states that conditional uses may
be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
1. That the proposed use is consistent with policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the policies of the
Bremerton Shoreline Master Program;
2. That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of the shorelines;
3. That the proposed use of the site and design of the project is compatible with other
permitted uses within the area;
4. The proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects to the shoreline environment
in which it is to be located;
5. That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
In addition, when considering the application, consideration must be given to the
cumulative impact of additional requests for similar actions in the area.3
3In other words, if comparable developments were permitted by CUP in the area where
similar circumstances exist, the total of the developments must also be consistent with the
SMA and must not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
28
Relocating an existing breakwater and developing facilities for a floating maritime museum is
consistent with the criteria necessary for granting a conditional use.
SEPA: Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act:
A mitigated environmental threshold determination of non-significance (MDNS) was issued by
the Responsible Official on December 4, 1996 for this project.
The City of Bremerton determined that the project as proposed, as mitigated under City, State,
and Federal laws, and as subject to the agreed upon mitigation, will not have a probable
significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement was not
required under RCW 43.21C.
This decision was made after the review of: an expanded environmental checklist and technical
reports prepared for the PUD; the City of Bremerton Downtown Waterfront Urban Renewal
Plan (DWURP) FEIS; the Bremerton Ferry Terminal FEIS; and other information on file with
the City of Bremerton. The DWURP FEIS and the discussion of impacts and mitigation in the
areas of soils and topography, water quality and fisheries habitat, transportation and parking,
utilities, aesthetics and views, and economics were incorporated by reference into this threshold
determination.
Mitigation:
The following were the conditions of mitigation which should be carried over to the PUD
approval:
1. Earth: Implement a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan (TESCP)as
approved by the City. Minimize exposed soil during construction.; construct truck tire
cleaning areas; cover dump beds as required by state law; cover stockpiled earth and
exposed cuts; route runoff`to temporary sedimentation ponds; employ best management
practices to control erosion; construct a concrete truck wash-down area; periodically
sweep the streets with street sweepers; and phase construction, to minimize exposed areas.
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.
Comply with Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA) Regulation 1,
Section 9.15 requiring reasonable precautions to avoid dust emissions. Implement
proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) traffic, transit, and pedestrian improvements
to improve circulation.
3. Surface, Ground, and RunoffWater Impacts: Locate existing surface parking areas
underground and partially cover the Bremerton Transportation Center (BTC) car waiting
areas. Install and maintain oil/water separators as required by City stormwater regulation.
29
Implement: WA_ ST Department of Wildlife's Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)
conditions; U.S. Army C orp of Engineer's Section 10 conditions; applicable local, state,
and federal water quality guidelines. Use concrete marina floats; use concrete or steel
pilings instead of creosote wood pilings; construct interconnecting replacement First St.
bulkhead in the dry.
4. Plants: Use landscaping plants or similar measures to provide replacement vegetation on
the site. Incorporate street and public space landscaping into project as proposed.
5. Wildlife: Remove existing First St. Dock and approximately 120 creosote timber pilings
wh/ch covers 12,600 square feet of intertidal area. Remove existing First St. fill which
covers intertidal area. Remove 45 creosote timber pilings that support the Wheelhouse
deck. Implement HPA and Corps Section 10 conditions.
6. Ener~: Conform with applicable City and State energy code requirements. Create new
pedestrian facilities as proposed to reduce auto energy use. Implement one-way couplet
street system, and other circulation improvements to increase transportation efficiencies
and lower energy use.
7. Environmental Heath: Property or business owners to comply with applicable local, state,
or federal law regulating the storage, handling, or use of hazardous materials.
8. Noise: Properly size and maintain equipment mufflers, engine intake silencers, engine
enclosures; mm offidling equipment; restrict noisy operations from 6:30 A.M. to 9:00
P.M. unless special circumstances approved by construction manager. Construct BTC as
proposed which serves as noise barrier between terminal and waterfront park. Place Wash.
Ave. below grade to reduce traffic noise in Washington Ave. pedestrian plaza.
9. Land, Shoreline Use, Housing: Create approximately 79 additional housing units than
exist. Create new commercial and redevelop commercial space as proposed. Provide
business relocation assistance as required by state law.
10. Land Use Planning: Incorporate uses -- retail, parking, office, entertainment, transit as
permitted under zoning. Preserve views to Sinclair Inlet in conformance with Downtown
Waterfront Urban Renewal Plan (DWURP). Create: Washington. Ave. plaza; open space
adjacent to Waterfront Park; and linear waterfront Pathway-Park. Relocate marina as
recognized in the City's DWURP Design Element.
11. Aesthetics: Create view corridors through waterfront and along Bur,veil St. as proposed
to preserve views. Create linear waterfront pathway as proposed to view Sinclair Inlet and
other natural attractions. Conform to City zoning with regards to height and bulk as
applied through PUD process. Comply with City's Design Review standards. Place
current waterfront parking below the surface as proposed.
12. Light and Glare: Design lights within BTC and relocated marina so as to not create off-
shore glare. Obtain United States Coast Guard (USCG) approval of marina entrance
marking lights.
13. Recreation: Create Second St. pedestrian walkway. Create new linear Waterfront
Pathway-Park (esplanade) from Waterfront Park to Fifth St. and create lateral access
points to the existing Waterfront Park and new Pathway-Park. Create a new public plaza
at Washington. Ave. and Second St. and expand Waterfront Park. Provide alternative
siting for WycoffPark as approved by Puget Sound naval Shipyard (PSNS) and City Parks
Dept.
30
14. Cultural and Archeolo¢cal: Notify State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) if
archeological resources are identified during construction.
15. Transportation: Separate pedestrian, transit, and auto traffic as proposed to enhance traffic
safety. Convert Burwell St./Pacific Avenue intersection eastbound and westbound
combined through/left mm lanes to left turn mm-only lanes and convert eastbound and
westbound fight turn only lanes to combined through/right turn lanes to provide additional
capacity and improve operations to an acceptable level of service. Coordinate BTC
construction staging plan with WA ST Department Of Transportation, City, Port of
Bremerton, and Kitsap Transit. Coordinate construction traffic routing plan with City and
Kitsap Transit.
16. Public Services: Provide fire protection systems for buildings according to Uniform Fire
Code requirements. Upgrade existing stormwater and water lines serving the project site
as required by City's Public Works Director. Coordinate replacement of utility services
with Puget Power, WA Natural Gas, US West, and City to minimize disruptions.
CONCLUSIONS
Comprehensive Plan:
The PUD and associated applications are consistent with the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan.
Zoning/DWURP:
The PUD and associated applications comply with the provisions of the Bremerton Zoning
Ordinance and Downtown Waterfront Urban Renewal Plan.
Shoreline:
Uses and development adjacent to the shoreline are consistent with the Bremerton Shoreline
Mater Program and meet the minimum criteria for granting conditional uses for a floating
maritime museum/historic ship and relocation of the floating breakwater pier.
Rezone:
The proposed zoning of the portion of PSNS to IG to be used for development of the
Bremerton Transportation Center meets the criteria for granting the zoning change.
R-O-W:
The proposed rights of way to be vacated along with the proposed areas for dedication meet
the criteria necessary for granting the vacations
RECOMMENDATION
The Bremerton Planning Commission recommends APPROVAL of all applications subject to
the following conditions:
31
MODEL MOTIONS
BE IT RESOLVED, it is hereby the opinion and consensus of the Bremerton
Planning Commission, after considering oral and written comments, that the Planned
Unit Development for "Sinclair Landing" and its associated applications should be
approved by the Bremerton City Council subject to the following conditions of
mitigation:
Mitigation:
1. Earth: Implement a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan (TESCP)as
approved by the City. Minimize exposed soil during construction.; construct truck tire
cleaning areas; cover dump beds as required by state law; cover stockpiled earth and
exposed cuts; route runoff`to temporary sedimentation ponds; employ best management
practices to control erosion; construct a concrete truck wash-down area; periodically
sweep the streets with street sweepers; and phase construction, to minimize exposed areas.
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.
Comply with Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA) Regulation 1,
Section 9.15 requiring reasonable precautions to avoid dust emissions. Implement
proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) traffic, transit, and pedestrian improvements
to improve circulation.
3. Surface, Ground, and Runoff`Water Impacts: Locate existing surface parking areas
underground and partially cover the Bremerton Transportation Center (BTC) car waiting
areas. Install and maintain oil/water separators as required by City stormwater regulation.
Implement: WA. ST Department of Wildlife's Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)
conditions; U.S. Army Corp of Engineer's Section 10 conditions; applicable local, state,
and federal water quality guidelines. Use concrete marina floats; use concrete or steel
pilings instead of creosote wood pilings; construct interconnecting replacement First St.
bulkhead in the dry.
4. Plants: Use landscaping plants or similar measures to provide replacement vegetation on
the site. Incorporate street and public space landscaping into project as proposed.
5. Wildlife: Remove existing First St. Dock and approximately 120 creosote timber pilings
which covers 12,600 square feet of intertidal area. Remove existing First St. fill which
covers intertidal area. Remove 45 creosote timber pilings that support the Wheelhouse
deck. Implement I-IPA and Corps Section 10 conditions.
6. Energy: Conform with applicable City and State energy code requirements. Create new
pedestrian facilities as proposed to reduce auto energy use. Implement one-way couplet
street system, and other circulation improvements to increase transportation efficiencies
and lower energy use.
7. Environmental Heath: Property or business owners to comply with applicable local, state,
or federal law regulating the storage, handling, or use of hazardous materials.
32
7(2
8. Noise: Properly size and maintain equipment mufflers, engine intake silencers, engine
enclosures; turn off.idling equipment; restrict noisy operations from 6:30 A.M. to 9:00
P.M. unless special circumstances approved by construction manager. Construct BTC as
proposed which serves as noise barrier between terminal and waterfront park. Place Wash.
Ave. below grade to reduce traffic noise in Washington Ave. pedestrian plaza.
Land, Shoreline Use, Housing: Create approximately 79 additional housing units than
exist. Create new commercial and redevelop commercial space as proposed. Provide
business relocation assistance as required by state law.
10. Land Use Planning: Incorporate uses -- retail, parking, office, entertainment, transit as
permitted under zoning. Preserve views to Sinclair Inlet in conformance with Downtown
Waterfront Urban Renewal Plan (DWURP). Create: Washington. Ave. plaza; open space
adjacent to Waterfront Park; and linear waterfront Pathway-Park. Relocate marina as
recognized in the City's DWLrRP Design Element.
11. Aesthetics: Create view corridors through waterfront and along Burwell St. as proposed
to preserve views. Create linear waterfi'ont pathway as proposed to view Sinclair Inlet and
other natural attractions. Conform to City zoning with regards to height and bulk as
applied through PUD process. Comply with City's Design Review standards required by
the DWURP. Place current waterfront parking below the surface as proposed.
12. Light and Glare: Design lights within BTC and relocated marina so as to not create off-
shore glare. Obtain United States Coast Guard (USCG) approval of marina entrance
marking lights.
13. Recreation: Create Second St. pedestrian walkway. Create new linear Waterfront
Pathway-Park (esplanade) fi-om Waterfront Park to Fifth St. and create lateral access
points to the existing Waterfront Park and new Pathway-Park. Create a new public plaza
at Washington. Ave. and Second St. and expand Waterfront Park. Provide alternative
siting for WycoffPark as approved by Puget Sound naval Shipyard (PSNS) and City Parks
Dept.
14. Cultural and Archeolo~ical: Notify State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) if
archeological resources are identified during construction. Provide Public Art in
compliance with DWURP requirements.
15. Transportation: Separate pedestrian, transit, and auto traffic as proposed to enhance traffic
safety. Convert Burwell St./Pacific Avenue intersection eastbound and westbound
combined through/left turn lanes to left turn turn-only lanes and convert eastbound and
westbound right turn only lanes to combined through/fight turn lanes to provide additional
capacity and improve operations to an acceptable level of service. Coordinate BTC
construction staging plan with WA ST Department Of Transportation, City, Port of
Bremertort, and Kitsap Transit. Coordinate construction traffic routing plan with City, and
Kitsap Transit. Vacate and dedicate rights of-way as described in rights of-way vacation
application. Compensate the City as required by State and City laws for vacated rights of-
way.
16. Public Services: Provide fire protection systems for buildings according to Uniform Fire
Code requirements. Upgrade existing stormwater and water lines serving the project site
as required by City's Public Works Director. Coordinate replacement of utility services
with Puget Power, WA Natural Gas, US West, and City to minimize disruptions.
33
'77
17. Scope of approval: This approval recognizes the preliminary ,conceptual and phased
nature of the project. As allowed by the zoning ordinance: a) The ultimate development
with specific uses and sites may change at the time of the Final PUD application(s); b)
Final PUD approval(s) shall be subject to the Final PUD approval criteria of the zoning
ordinance. Final PUD application(s) shall require signature(s) from all affected property
owners signifying their acceptance of the plan and application(s). This prelim/nary PUD
approval does not mandate participation by any or all property owners within the
boundaries of the PUD, allowing any or all property owners to utilize their property in
conformance with zoning regulations.
Laurence Stone, Chairman
Bremerton Planning Commission
Date
Executive Secretary
34
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
UNAPPROVED DRAFT
January 21, 1997
Chairman Stone announced and called the meeting to order.
The Secretary called the roll: Those present were Boyd, Robinson, Olsen, Stone. Absent
were: Adams, Hancock, Dingfietd.
Chairman Stone asked Donald Pratt to discuss the agenda.
Donald Pratt stated that the Sinclair Landing Project should not be a Public Hearing and should
be moved as Neighborhood Meeting under New Business. Also requested that New Business be
moved to the third item of business. Commissioner Boyd moved for approval with the
suggested changes. Seconded by Commissioner Olsen. Question called: Boyd, yes;
Robinson, yes; Olsen, yes; Stone, yes. Motion passes.
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING-SINCLAIR LANDING
Donald Pratt, asked the appearance of fairness questions. No responses. Also stated that the
meeting tonight was strictly iaformational and not part of the formal, legal process of approving
or disapproving of a permit. That decision will be made during a public hearing in front of the
City Council in the future.
Jack Allingham, presented the staff report. This is a Planned Unit Development Application
for the Sinclair Landing project. The Applicant is the Howard S. Wright Company.
Applications applied for to date of Planned Unit Development (PUD), Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use, Site Plan Review, Right of Way Vacation, and
Zoning Map Amendment. The project proposes approximately 18 new buildings with the
proposed uses of offices, retail stores, cinemas, residential, hotel units, museum, and parking
garages. The developments will have over 500,000 square feet of retail, over 58,000 square feet
of restaurant use, over 249,000 square feet of office use, 99 hotel rooms, 142 residential units
and parking for over 2,900 vehicles. They also propose a floating historic ship, public plaza's,
waterfront esplanade and reconfiguration of the existing marina. Another strong component of
the project is to redevelop the Bremerton Ferry Terminal into the Bremerton Transportation
Center. It will have a commuter retail building, the terminal itself, a passenger only terminal,
a passenger only waiting area, and float. The site is bordered by Sinclair inlet, PSNS on the
South, Pacific Avenue out to Park Avenue on the East, and 4th Street up to 5th Street on the
North. The PUD process is designed to be a multi step process, beginning with
PAGE ~1-
a conceptual review, progresses onto a neighborhood meeting, which was held in 1996, and
tonight we are having a public meeting before the Planning Commission, and then this request
Mil go onto the City Council. The PUD process is to get a preliminary approval prior to a final
design approval. Planning Staff feels that all of the criteria have been met and recommend
approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report.
Craig Norsen, Vice President of Howard S. Wright stated that they are part of the team that
has been working on this project for about 1 1/2 years. The project is a Public/Private
Partnership. A PUD allows for a major redevelopment in downtown Bremerton. Stated the area
of the project as well as the potential uses. Stated this plan may be modified or changed along
the process.
David Hewitt, Architect from Hewitt/Isley, stated that the architecture goal was to provide
an activity center were people could live, visit, shop, as well as a transportation center. Showed
two sketches illustrating ideas. The goal is to build on with the existing theme of the buildings
and amplify what we already have.
Jeff Peacock, Parametrix, stated that their goal regarding transportation was to create a
seamless as possible system. Reviewed the four elements: vehicular traffic, non-motorist traffic,
marine traffic, and the transit system.
Mary McClure, Sinclair Landing, stated that this is a very complex project and needs
everyone working together--no one entity could do it alone. Reviewed the entities involved in
the Sinclair Landing. The key roll of the SLA is to do coordination with all of the players as
well as with the State, EDC, Schools, Neighborhood Groups, PSNS, etc.
Commissioner Boyd, asked if there is a covered walkway from the parking structure to the foot
ferry and was concerned about the transportation issues in downtown Seattle.
Craig Norsen responded yes there would be covered walkways. David Hewitt responded that
Seattle is currently working on their transportation issues.
Commissioner Olsen asked for clarification on the parking numbers. Craig Norsen clarified
the numbers.
Commissioner Robinson had concerns regarding the length of the projected timelines.
Craig Norsen responded that large elements will be moving ahead rather quickly.
Transportation Center is scheduled to begin this July.
Elizabeth Buhi, resident, questioned if there were provisions for the handicapped.
The
PAGE -2-
Craig Norsen responded yes.
Ward Yohey, resident, stated that he was pleased and excited with the project.
Connie Ray, from KITZ, concerned about the need for better and prompt ferry service.
Mary McClure, responded that the SLA is working very closely with the ferry system and their
attitudes toward Bremerton.
Lon Overson, responded that there is a meeting with regard to the Ferry System on January
27th, 1997 at 6:30PM.
Charlie Brown, feels that the SLA has done a great job getting all of the entities together.
Concerned about the public financing of the underground parking garage and if parking meters
will be put back in.
Donald Pratt, stated that if there were not enough parking revenues to pay back the bonds, then
the County's Block Grant would be used to make the payments. There is no plan to bring back
parking meters.
Lou Weir, stated his concern that while we are in this planning process, the property owners
still need to be able to rent their buildings and the tenants need to be intbrmed as to what is
going on with the process and how long they are going to be able to operate. Also, everyone
needs to be careful about what is being said regarding the process.
Mary McClure, stated that the SLA is sensitive to the issue.
Cliff Deitz, would like to see more condo's built so that there will be a bigger base of people
downtown. Supports the project.
Anna Laurie, feels that the Pacific Avenue traffic pattern is unnecessarily complicated, and is
concerned that the project will reflect too much of the past and we should be looking more to
the future.
Joe Mentor, stated he has seen many projects come and go in the past. Has concerns about the
project coming together because of the lack of developers. Feels the PUD should just be for a
limited time so that if this project does not go, then some other developers can come in. Stated
that block grant dollars are only to be used for housing.
Donald Pratt, stated that the waterfront area is slum and blighted and therefore block grant
dollars are eligible. The City Council has the ability to limit the "fife" of the PUD.
PAGE -3-
Charlie Brown, asked if the PUD includes the marina.
Donald Pratt, stated that the Marine configuration is not part of the application at tads point.
Donella Wilts, concerned about how the commuters w/il be affected during construction.
Craig Norsen, stated that during construction they intend to maintain the transportation and
encourage the use of Kitsap Transit.
William Jeb, concerned about the Navy expansion and the related parking that goes with the
expansion.
Craig Norsen, said the Navy is very interested in the revitalization of Bremerton. The Navy
is taking steps to improve its parking.
Connie Ray, stated that the McWilliams park-n-ride is full. If you are asking people to use
these lots, they need to be expanded and improved.
Craig Norsen, said that Kitsap Transit is aggressive in its 'long range planning and expansion
of these lots.
Michael Lane, asked what happens to City Hall? What is the height of the buildings? Square
feet of office space? Do we have any pre-leases? Any group targeted? Status of the options
team? Agree with not enough information given to tenants and landlords. What happens to my
building?
Craig Norsen, stated that there have been some discussions regarding relocating City Hall or
improving its current building. The building next door is included in the plan--no intention to
change the building other than a remodel. The parking lot behind the building has the potential
for some type of development. The square footage is approximately 150,000 square feet of
office space. The height is 6 stories. There have been only informal d/scussions regarding
leases at this point. Good interest in retail, office, and restaurant. No particular groups have
been targeted.
Dick Main, questioned the provisions for handicapped individuals accessing the ferry?
Craig Norsen, indicated that the terminal will be handicap accessible.
Commissioner Boyd questioned if the ferry system has a design for the terminal?
Craig Norsen, responded that he has had input into the design.
Lynn Johnson, stated his concern w/th safety issues in the area.
PAGE -4-
8.9-
Camilla Dirks, had a concern about the ferry traffic back-up during the summer with
construction going on.
Craig Norsen, stated that the holding area for ferry traffic will be increased.
The Neighborhood meeting was concluded.
Approval of the December 17, 1996 minutes. Approved as presented.
Director's Report
Donald Pratt and the Commissioners discussed the function of the Planning Commission with
regard to Rule 12.
Donald Pratt reported on the storm related issues and complimented the staff under the direction
of Mayor Horton on how well everyone responded. Job well dote!
Also reported that the City is in the process of setting up a studio in City Hall. This could be
used for announcing new permits, etc. This would be shown 2-3 times each week on Channel
12.
There will be a Planning workshop at Given's this Saturday.
Next regular meeting will be February 18, 1997. Also, there may be a meeting on February 4th-
-Donald Pratt will check it out and notify the Commission.
Donald Pratt mentioned that both Stone and Boyd's terms expire this year. Both indicated
they would be interested in being reappointed.
Chairman Stone pointed out that he had read that seconds to motion are not required in
governmental bodies. Need to look further at tiffs issue.
Meeting Adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Mdrdlyn $gai4oel ....
Approved:
Larry Stone, ~hairman
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING
Bremerton Planning Commission
FEBRUARY 4, 1997
Meeting called to order at 6:00 p.m.
Roll call:
Present: Boyd, Olsen, Stone, Robinson. Donna Adams arrived at 6:10.
Absent: Dingfield (for reasons of appearance of fairness issues),
Hancock.
Call to Order.
Approval of the Aqenda: Remove Public Hearing as Item IV; replace with Call to
the Public.
Call to the Public.
Review/Approval of January 21, 1997 minutes.
second. Unanimous approval.
Olsen moved to approve, Boyd
Old Business. None.
New Business:
applications.
Planning Commission discussion of Sinclair Landing Project
Issues:
Acceptance by property owners within the PUD area: The commission
recognized that the applicant Howard S. Wright, Inc. does not own all of
the property within the PUD and that each property owner may or may not
choose to be party to the plan. It was determined that approval of the
plan did not mandate participation from all property owners, nor did it
restrict the use of property to the plan. As the plan develops in phases,
each property owner could develop in a manner allowed by zoning until the
next phase which includes their property is proposed. The final PUD will
require all affected property owners within the phase to provide written
approval and acceptance of the plan prior to city approval.
Phasing and timing: The preliminary plan should have an expiration date.
The zoning ordinance allow 2 years between preliminary approval and final
pud approval. The two year schedule may be too rigorous to allow a
realistic construction schedule for a project of this scale. Perhaps the
City should utilize a development agreement to allow the flexibility
necessary to set time limits for development, but allow for a realistic
design and construction.
Parkinq: The preliminary plan shows proposed uses and parking areas. It
was not clear how the parking would relate to the uses, particularly the
hotel. Final PUD approval needs to be reviewed for functional convenient
parking.
Scope of approval: Planning Staff proposed condition No. 17 which
addresses the issues regarding phasing and acceptance by affected property
owners.
Motion: Olsen moved to adopt motion with conditions; Boyd seconded. Unanimous
approval.
The next regular meeting will be February 18, 1997.
Meeting adjourned at 7:37 p.m.
Larry Stone
Chairman
Date
Don Pratt
Executive Secretary
Date
HALF
SIZE
NOT
~ONSTRUCTIOI~
~J lll~illJ
MI.O1
Z
I INNER AND CUTER HAR~C'R LINES ARE
AS ADJACENT PROPERTY LINES SINCE THESE
GOUtlOAR1ES OEP, NE HARBOR LE~SE AREAS.
3 A~ERACE WATER 0E~TH AROUN0 ~CTI~IT'F : 40'
4. ExISTiNG PERMITS: ARM~ CORPS N&TtCN'61~E
PER~I~ 3 ~SSUED AUGUS~ ~4.
5. SEE NO~ES SHEET FOR EROS~ON CON~ROL
6 ~.V. KALAKALA SHO~N IN PHANtOm. IF INCLUDED
TO BE REL~ATEO NORTH
FLOA[
APPROX ll.000 SO FT
NEW S~EL
G~OWAY 18xlS0'
-- ~' STORM 0RAIN
il
UPLAND
DEVELOP~.IEN T
(TYRICAL)
NEW PASSENGER ~ oD
FERRY TERI~IN AL
SINCLAIR INLET
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
SNCLAIR I_AN D~NG
Pt_.~INED UI~T DE~LC~.~CT AND
MLLW
RECONFIGURED MHW
MARINA. 6 YRS OLI MHHW I
(NO EXPANSION)
. ou'm?D._HbRB-D-? L'-UI~"F- ---"--
RELOCATED BREAK___?~Z6R NK:FvES 133' NE
ABO~F~--DeC"~ STRUCTURES REMO~D. 6 'FRS OLO
0 150' 300' 450' 600' go0'
SCALE: 1" = 300'
SINCLAIR LANDING
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND
IBREMERTON TRANSPORTATION CENTER
BREMERTON~ WABHINQTOH
FLETCHER WRIGHT, INC, 1
SINCLAIR LANDING (~ FLETCHER W.,e.m. ,NC.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND ..~.,~u.,e~a,~a~,.~.
BRE~RTON TRANSPORTAT~N C~TER ~. ~ ~. ~
0
zz
NOT FOR
CONSTRUC~ON
M3.03
P.S.N.S.
LEGEND
HALF SIZE
EXISTING BUILDING AND
MARINA SITE PLAN
G1.01
LEGEND
NOTES:
RIGHT OF WAY INFORMA'
ASSESSORS MAPS AN~)
IS DERIVED FRoM CITY
CARDS.
EAST EDGE OF PACIFIC
itlillilllt
,
LEGEND
NOTES:
RUOHT OF WA Y INFORMA TI
/
/
//
//
IS DERIVED FROM
CARDS.
CITY
HALF
SIZE
:C3.02
DOWNTOWN.
WATERFRO
URBAN
RENEWAL
LAN
/
/
%% /! s
%%% i/t/
/
''''~ WAT£R/N~k~lm Sm !///1 ALT. 1-B
~ "\ ......mt
\ j..-' · Exhibit "D"
, ~J LAND/WATER USE PLAN
m~Ja~ ?roject Area
Mixed Cormnercial/
Resident£al/Tourist
Waterfront/CBD
Transition Area
Ferry Terminal
Linear Park/Pathway
Page 15
DOWNTOWN
WATERFRONT
URBAN
RENEWAL
PLAN ~
CITY
l/
ALT. 1-B
Exhibit "E"
DESIGN CONCEPTS
.~ Ferry Terminal Area
' Pathway/Linear Park
''--''~ Interior Parking/Service
(Surface or Structure)
] public View Platforms
Open/Undeveloped (Bluffs)
"~ Pedestrian Access
~ Ferry Traffic
· viewpoint (panoramic views)
Page 16