Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/22/95TAPE #1270 UNAPPROVED DRAFT COUNCIL APPROVED APR 12 1995 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MARCH 22, 1995 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, March 22, 1995, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President Sherril Huff-Menees presiding. Council members present were Bob Winters, A1 Colvin, Morrie Dawkins, Carlos Montgomery, John Law, Richard Neville, David Farr and Lon Overson. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and Deputy City Clerk Gil.Johnson. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Huff-Menees and Invocation given by Reverend Cleveland Williams of Ebenezer African Methodist Episcopal Church. CONSENT AGENDA - NONE #0090 CLAIMS/CHECK REGI8TERS 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 March 22, 1995, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 183125 and 183157 through 183286 in the amount of $425,862.90; and Regular Payroll for the period ending 3/15/95 in the amount of $583,114.70. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Colvin reported District #1 held a very good meeting on Thursday, March 16. The program for that meeting had to do with "Growth Management" and everyone is aware the City and Kitsap County have some disagreement over that issue. He is not as concerned over "who is right", but rather "what is right". He is concerned about the City or County spending public money to bring suit against each other. He hopes other means of settling differences can be found. He especially thanked Councilmen Law and Montgomery for attending his District meeting. Mr. Montgomery reported that a welcome street improvement has been made to the intersections of Wycoff Avenue and 6th Street and Callow Avenue and 6th Street. TAPE #1270 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 2 of 30 Mr. Law reported District #3 held their Neighborhood Meeting on Tuesday, March 21, with a good audience and interesting discussions. He thanked Councilmen A1 Colvin and Carlos Montgomery for attending that meeting. Mr. Farr announced some generous folks in the City are donating a piece of property to the City near the corner of 15th and Arvon Street, which will be turned into a park or play ground. He extended a special "thank you" to the land donors - National Spiritualist Association Of Churches and to Mary Sump, who was very instrumental in getting the search started for a "park" area for neighborhood children. Mr. Meville wished his wife a "Happy Birthday". Mr. Overson announced street improvements have been made at the corner of Chester and Gregory Way. He congratulated President Huff-Menees on her event that benefitted the Admiral Theater, which inspired considerable input and motivated The Sun to print an excellent article on the Admiral Theater. MAYOR'S REPORT - State Of The City Address Mayor Lynn Horton stated last year about this time she presented her target issues and goals for 1994, and that she would come back in one year to talk about how well those goals and objects were met. Overall, she felt the City had made progress even though there were some weak areas, but part of that had to do with some staffing shortages encountered this past year. She is pleased with the progress made this past year with the addition of four new department heads...Police Chief Du Fresne, Public Works and Utilities Director Gene Sampley, Jim Meith, Human Resources Manager and Director of Parks and Recreation Pat Harris. The City has been able to attract quality people to those positions. The City has also been doing some things that have not been done historically or for a long period of time, which may be new to some City employees and welcomed by them. Mayor Horton provided a "report card" type grading for the 1994 Target Issues (copy attached to Minutes). Following are the Mayor's 1995 TARGET ISSUES: TOP PRIORITIES MARKET BREMERTON: Develop marketing tools for reaching Bremerton residents, commercial redevelopment, multi-family & single family infill housing. - Develop a community newsletter TAPE #1270 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 3 of 30 - Adopt development incentives - streamline permitting process - Institutionalize customer service IMPROVE & STABILIZE WASTEWATER/STORMWATER FUNCTIONS: - Seek ways to cap or reduce 1996 10% rate increase - Complete Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrades - Analyze system for O/M improvements CONTINUE YOUTH AGENDA FOCUS: - Network with Youth Council & Youth Coordinating Council - Organize Youth Expo - Introduce G.R.E.A.T. Program - Continue D.A.R.E. Program INSTITUTIONALIZE COMMUNITY POLICING PHILOSOPHY: - Unveil Mobile Police Unit - Continue Safe Streets Program & Bicycle Patrol - Adopt zero tolerance policy for drugs HIGH PRIORITIES IMPLEMENT COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING STRATEGIES - First time home owner assistance - Expanded abatement program - Expanded housing rehabilitation program - implement rental rehabilitation program - Develop strategies for multi-family opportunities in downtown business core - Establish neighborhood target sites DEVELOP STREET MAINTENANCE PROGRAM - Increase non-arterial upgrades commensurate with '95 budget - Include alleys where used as local access COMPLETE ROOSEVELT FIELD REPLACEMENT PLAN - Begin implementation COMPLETE PENDERGAST REGIONAL PARK COMPLEX COMPLETE PHASES OF 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE EXPANSION - 1996 Opening UPDATE COMMUNITY DIVERSITY PLAN - Increase community outreach to increase field Of qualified applicants ESTABLISH REDEVELOPMENT TARGET SITES - Smith Cove TAPE #1270 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 4 of 30 - Sheridan Neighborhood (Harrison Hospital) - Charleston District - Downtown Waterfront - Werner Road/Auto Center MODERATE PRIORITIES ESTABLISH JOINT-USE AGREEMENT WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT DEVELOP EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM - Train & Implement Management - Implement K Prep throughout community PROVIDE PROACTIVE LEGAL SERVICES - Complete contract implementation - Focus on prevention DEVELOP EMPLOYEE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM - Implement customer service training - Develop employee handbook - Develop employee wellness program - Formulate Labor/Management Committees PROVIDE COMMUNITY OUTREACH TO REDUCE FIRE DEPARTMENT EMERGENCY INCIDENTS - Analyze service statistics - Develop outreach program PROVIDE LINKAGES WITH BUSINESS COMMUNITY - Auto Center, Callow, Downtown, Manette, Kitsap Way, Wheaton Way - Coordinate with Chamber Of Commerce DEVELOP FINANCIAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES - Develop long range financial planning model for General Fund 2000 GOALS FERRY UPGRADES - Two foot ferries - Upgrade car ferry service GORST CONNECTOR - Complete design and permitting - Property acquisition and construction TRANSPORTATION PLAZA - Modify to add foot ferry to basic footprint - Provide transit linkage Mayor Horton concluded her address stressing a great deal had been TAPE #1270 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 5 of 30 accomplished over the past year, but we still have a long way to go. Her goal is to provide the best service for the community as well as to find ways to increase the City's revenue base so we can do an even better job of providing those services. She is looking at expanding conunercial opportunities and multi-family facilities in appropriate areas, so that the City has a more well rounded tax base to provide services. She believes her staff has the expertise to meet the challenges and she is very proud of the work they have already accomplished. President Huff-Menees congratulated the Mayor and her staff on a year of many improvements for the City of Bremerton and we wish you the best on the 1995 Goals and Issues. PUBLIC RECOGNITION GordV Byrd commented that initially he was upset that no one attended his K-Prep meeting, however, he does appreciate the City Council. He also appreciated the City Fire Chief calling him ahead of time to let him know that he would not be able to attend that meeting. He brought up a concern about a downtown Bremerton business owner getting a parking ticket every time he parks in the downtown area. Lastly, he announced he is working as a volunteer in the Welfare Office. Peter Barter, resident near the City's sewer treatment plant, stated he is opposed to the City condemning property in that area. He felt the condemnation process was an underhanded way to grab people's property. He suggested the City fix the sewer treatment plant first and then give the people six months to see if the "smell" condition improved. After that period of time, if anyone still complains about the smell, the City could offer them an opportunity to sell their property. He did not believe it was fair to make people move off their property if they do not want to leave that area. He cited the positive aspects of the Navy's relocation program for both landowners and renters in the Montgomery/Callow area. Don Larson, Chairman of a Citizens Action Committee, announced an Earth Day Clean Up of Sinclair Inlet will be held April 22, 2:00 P.M., starting at the First Street Dock Mr. Larson shared concern with residents in the Anderson Hill watershed area that there was enough development in the Puget Sound region without taking over more watersheds with industrial development. He preferred having that watershed area developed into a park. Roy McInnis thanked the Bremerton/Kitsap County Visitor and Convention Bureau for the brochures they provided him, which he distributed through out the west. In doing that, he has received TAPE #1270 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 6 of 30 calls from people from several other states indicating they are interested in coming a couple days earlier to a planned convention so that they can do some sightseeing in our area. Del Knauss stated as a follow on to the Mayor's report, he would like to know the anticipated sewer rates for 1997, 1998, and 1999. He also felt a correction needed to be made to the item addressing "Completion of Pendergast Regional Park Complex"...he felt it should reflect "Phase I", not the entire park. He noted the City owns several homes, which they rent out to City employees. He believes a policy needs to be adopted to review those agreements on an annual basis. Currently, the City has a lake front home that is renting for $335.00 per month with $110.00 subsidy for taking care of the land, plus the taxpayers are paying for that tenant's sewer and water. Another concern is the need to keep a "running tab", bi-monthly or every six months, of what the City spends on consulting fees over the year. He reminded Council that the downtown waterfront property is Parks property intended to benefit the Roosevelt Replacement Fund and future Parks Department revenues. He questioned if that site is developed, will there be any future funds for parks development? He questioned if the City was proposing to hire another consultant to do another study on what should be developed on that waterfront property or is the existing study going to be used? Rick Taylor, residents of the area the City may consider condemnation process, stated at a public meeting recently, the Mayor stated the City would offer fair market value for the homes if condemnation was initiated. He questioned who determines what is a "fair market value"? Ian Sievers, City Attorney, explained the City has had a voluntary purchase program for some time and under that process the City will negotiate a fair market value and there is no forcing sale. If the City goes to a condemnation forced sale, the City does an appraisal, offers it to the owner and they have an opportunity to get their own appraised value. The basis for a Judge's decision is the fair market value of a property before the condemnation is awarded. Phil Drouin complimented the City Council on their hard work for City taxpayers. It does concern him that some City Council meetings do not start on the set time and suggested that the starting time be changed from 5:30 P.M. to 5:40 or 5:45 P.M.. He reminded everyone that he is an advocate for the poor, homeless and is a member of St. Vincent DePaul. It concerned him that the donations coming into St. Vincent DePaul are down as to quality and large in quantity. The cost of disposing of unusable items is constantly increasing, which takes away dollars that could be used to cover the needs of the poor. TAPE #1270 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 7 of 30 7A - WARREN FIELD -- KITSAP COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PROPERTY EXCHANGE, #AB95-053 In October 1993, neighbors living adjacent to Warren Field petitioned the City of Bremerton City Council and the Kitsap County Action Program (KCAP) with the request to postpone KCAP's construction of a proposed duplex for transitional housing on land they own adjacent to the Warren Avenue Playfield. The petitioners believed the property had greater value to the community if the building lot was kept as an informal parking area, instead of a building site for a duplex. Because of the neighbors' request, KCAP agreed to limit construction to the upper portion of their property, allowing the lower portion to remain as a parking area. This agreement by KCAP was contingent upon finding a comparable piece of property by the City of Bremerton. A comparably sized parcel (6.848 square feed) of undeveloped park property on the north side of llth Avenue meets KCAP necessary conditions for a property exchange. In August 1994, the Council requested staff to hold several neighborhood meetings to discuss the property exchange with local citizens affected by the exchange. Neighborhood concerns including construction of a new turnaround promised to the neighborhood in 1984 and improvements at the tennis courts. Rice Fergus Architects were asked to redesigned the proposed duplex entrance to include a turnaround at the end of Broadway. Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the property exchange and concurs with recommendation (9/27/94). Engineering Department has reviewed and approved the turnaround. Improvements to the tennis courts have been included in the 1995 budget. This will require a unanimous vote by City Council because of the Parks Protection Ordinance regarding the sale or exchange of City park property. Pat Harris, Director Parks and Recreation Department, briefly reviewed the history of this issue, which started over 17 months ago. Summer of 1994, the City Council asked that the Parks Department staff hold a series of meetings with the neighbors to discuss the exchange the use of that property with the suggestion that KCAP build on the north side of llth Avenue using a comparable size pierce of property. The neighbors had a number of concerns and City staff tried to answer them...one being the need for a turn-around for people who live on the street in the area of Broadway and they wanted to know the type of housing and controls KCAP would have for their tenants in that housing. Also, the neighbors wanted the City to preserve a large maple tree on the site, which has been done through KCAP's redesign process; and they wanted a commitment from the City and the Parks Department on TAPE #1270 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 8 of 30 upgrading the area, which has been included in the 1995 budget. Staff feels that overall the neighborhood concerns were considered, evaluated and many items they wanted will be forthcoming during 1995. KCAP is in the situation where they waited for the City to take action and find a site they could develop. He noted the duplex that was build by KCAP on the south side of llth Street is very attractive and an asset within that neighborhood. That same design will be constructed on the north side of llth Street. Mr. Harris pointed out that since the subject site is zoned Parks and Schools, it must be rezoned. Council's vote on the proposed exchange of property for comparable sized pieces of property will require an unanimous vote because of the Parks Protection Ordinance, which regulates the sale or exchange of park property. Cal Baines, Broadway Avenue, stated his concern is the amount of traffic on a "closed" street. Some traffic problems have been alleviated with a 2-hour parking restriction, which apparently will be changed to 1-hour parking. An existing apartment building located in the subject area is currently not filled to capacity, however, when it is there is parking for all tenants except for 8-9 vehicles that end up parked on the street. His neighborhood has been promised for years that a park would be developed on the subject site for the children in that area, but nothing has been done. The tennis courts use to be used a lot, however, as they deteriorated with lack of maintenance they were used very little. He prefers retaining the subject site for strictly park use. He also sympathizes with the residents near the PeeWee field and their need for additional parking. Phil Droun stated he is an advocate for the homeless and there is need for additional transitional housing and affordable housing. In good faith, KCAP purchased a site on the south side of llth Street for the purpose of building two duplexes. At the "llth hour" residents around the Warren Avenue play field complained about the parking (on privately owned property), being eliminated with the proposed project. The City failed to purchase that lot when it became available and KCAP moved on its purchase for their needs. Tina Baines, Broadway, expressed concern over the amount of traffic already using Broadway and any added traffic being a danger to children playing in that area. Pat Harris stated in response to the concerns about parking, the proposed duplex would have four on-site parking spots designed for the tenants, which would not create additional on-street parking. In reference to the condition of the tennis courts, the 1995 budget TAPE #1270 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 9 of 30 contains enough funding to put up new nets, reline the courts and repair the court surfaces. Corkie McCaren, Housing Supervisor for the Kitsap Community Action Program, commended Parks Department and Community Development staff and Councilman Neville for their diligent work with KCAP as a team to try and address all of the issues and concerns of all of the players in this project. She also gave a brief history of acquisition of property and the intended use at the Warren Avenue site. KCAP did attempt to purchase another piece of property, however, that was unsuccessful and they came back to the City's proposed site north of llth Street. At this point, they have been notified by their funding source (State Of Washington and HOME DOLLARS/Kitsap County Block Grant Funds), for the duplex project, that they are needing to identify a location and get site control or they are at risk of losing the money. They did not want to see $200,000 be returned due to their not finding a location for the proposed project. She wanted to allay any concerns that anyone in the neighborhood might have regarding their program and a good example of what they propose is the recently completed duplex on the south side of llth Street. Jim McGill, Broadway resident, questioned who will maintain the duplexes once they are built? Parking is a problem on Broadway and has been for many years. He believes the Parks Department means well, but feels it would be much nicer to have a small park constructed on the site. He is not in favor of the proposal, however, he does not have a solution for a better site for the KCAP duplex. Mr. Neville stated he has worked long and hard on this proposal and talked with many neighbors on both sides of llth Street. He sees everyone benefitting from this action...tennis courts will be cleaned and refurbished, the construction site will not take away from the recreation use of the tennis courts or cause the Maple tree to be removed and continued use of the parking area adjacent to the Warren Avenue PeeWee field will eliminate added traffic impact of parking on residents in that area. He sees the proposed duplex facility to be an real asset to the existing Broadway neighborhood and KCAP takes an active part in keeping their transitional housing in good repair. He sees this proposal as an opportunity to revitalize a neighborhood plus revitalize some park land. Mr. Overson stated he agreed with Mr. Neville and what is proposed is a win-win situation. The City erred sorely when it did not purchase adjacent property for parking at the PeeWee field. However, here is a opportunity to partly "get well" for our error TAPE #1270 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 10 of 30 and a chance to keep the park from becoming landlocked and upgrading the Broadway site. Mr. Law agreed that the parking situation at the Warren Avenue PeeWee field is worse than can be imagined and it does impact the residents in that neighborhood. He pointed out Mr. Neville has worked closely with the affected neighborhoods and he supports the proposal as presented. Mr. Montgomery stated he is opposed to giving away any park property unless it is to the benefit of the parks. However, after Mr. Neville's input and a tour of the two sites he could lend his support to this issue. Mr. Colvin stated his opposition to selling park property is on record, however, Mr. Neville and Mr. Montgomery convinced him that this proposal was worth his affirmative vote. He asked if the City was trading or selling park property? Mr. Harris explained the City is exchanging-trading a parcel that KCAP is the legal owner on the south side of llth Avenue for an equally sized parcel of property that is currently part of the parks, which is zoned Parks and Schools located on the north side of llth Street. The City's property is a vacant lot that is currently used for parking. He agreed with earlier comments that "parking" was not the best use for park land. Mr. Farr stated he attended the "Open House" at the KCAP duplex near the Warren Avenue PeeWee field and was very impressed with the structure, quality of work and the program. He also did not like to see park land being given away for other uses, however, this park land was not really recognizable as "park land" in its state or use. He also felt Mr. Harris has given his word that concerns of the Broadway neighborhood residents would be addressed in the manner outlined. He did not see traffic generated from two rental units adding significantly to traffic on Broadway. TAPE #1271 President Huff-Menees stated a questioned was raised by a member of the public regarding the maintenance issue of the housing projects. After viewing KCAP's duplex facility on the south side of llth Street, she feels KCAP has done a wonderful job of maintaining that building as well as interviewing and placing individuals in their facility. She is very supportive of transitional housing and felt it be would tragic for those funding dollars to go away unused. Mr. Winters asked if KCAP had to have a vacant lot to build a duplex? He was aware there were 4-5 properties for sale in the #0226 TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 11 of 30 general area, which might serve their needs? Corkie McCaren stated in terms of vacant lots, the primary criteria for KCAP was something that was affordable. KCAP's Board of Directors pointed out to them that KCAP already owns property and why was another piece being purchased to locate the proposed facility. They then had to find something that was zoned for a duplex, would accommodate the style that was affordable for them and they did not know the outcome of the piece of property they did own. In their search, they did not find any properties that met that criteria. Mr. Harris and his staff worked with the identified criteria 11/2 year ago as well as KCAP's search through two realtors, which resulted in not finding an acceptable location. Funding sources require that assessed value be paid and often times sellers want more than assessed value for their property. Mr. Colvin stated he was surprised there weren't more people at the City Council meeting opposing this proposal, which means to him that more people agree with the concept than disagree. Ms. McCaren noted a lot of effort was made to work with the affected neighborhoods. Kal Baines stated not everyone was aware this item was being addressed at this time and as a result of his finding out he contacted several of them and many are opposed to the project even to the point of signing a petition. Mr. Colvin asked Mr. Neville how the various neighbors responded to his discussion of this project? Mr. Neville stated the response from people he talked with was favorable if a turn-a-round was provided and the tennis courts refurbished. Mayor Lynn Hotton stated she had not spoken with any of the affected residents telling them this project was not going through. She did speak to residents about overtime parking in their neighborhood in conjunction with college students parking their vehicles in their area. Mr. Harris stated he believes one of the reasons there isn't tremendous opposition to this proposal is due to Councilman Neville having thoroughly discussed the proposal both individually and in groups of affected residents in the two neighborhoods. M/S/C/U(Neville/Farr) to approve the exchange of KCAP property for undeveloped park property. 7B - INTERDEPARTMENTAL LEASE AGREEMENT -- GOLD MOUNTAIN GOLF COURSE, #AB95-054 The Bremerton Parks & Recreation Department will begin construction of a new 180-acre eighteen hole golf course this spring. Combined with the existing golf course, 360 acres of Water Utility property will be utilized. The Parks & Recreation Department is required to equitably reimburse the public utility for the loss of timber sales revenue incurred by utilizing the property for recreation uses instead of forest management. The Parks & Recreation Department currently leases 180 acres for the existing golf course from Public #0429 TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 12 of 30 Works & Utilities for $1,000 per month. Bill McKinney, City Forester, was asked to survey the additional 180 acres and develop a calculation of lost timer revenue based on the estimated crop rotation and the number of board feet per acre. His estimate, based on a sixty year crop rotation is $38,165, rounded to $3,200 per month. This is the proposed monthly lease amount. The lease will be adjusted for inflation based on the local CPI. Public Works & Utilities and the Parks & Recreation Department have agreed to continue the current rental of $1,000 per month through March 31, 1997. The new lease rate of $3,200 per month would beginApril 1, 1997. Pat Harris, Parks and Recreation director, stated the City Attorney, Public Works Director, Bill McKinney, Forestry Manager and he put together an agreement that was equitable to the Public Works and Utility Department for the future loss of timber sales they would incur because of changing the use of the property to a recreation use from timber management. Mr. McKinney's calculation was based on a 60-year cycle of tree removal and the amount is amortized over that period of time. The City Treasurer also reviewed the agreement prior to coming to Council and he also felt it would withstand any test with the State Auditors. Public comment - none. Mr. Dawkins noted the Agenda Bill contained wording to the fact the operating lease cost would increase by $26,400 per year in 1997. He also pointed out the term of the lease is for 10 years, which will require a review prior to renewal. Mr. Overson stated it concerned him that the Water Utility, which is doing well financially, will take money away from the Parks Department, which has less funding available, to rent that space. It appears the presentation is accurate and legal and supportable. Mr. Law stated Mr. Overson is correct, however, the City is still looking at the golfing community being required to support the new course whereas the Water Utility is supported by everyone within the City. Mr. Farr stated it is only fair that the public be shielded from any possibility that the Water Utility ratepayers would be subsidizing the golf course and he is satisfied that it is laid out in accordance with the law. M/S/C/U(Farr/Montgomery) to approve a ten-year lease for the Gold Mountain Golf Course. 7C - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT -- CITY OFSHELTON, TRAFFIC SIGNAL #0540 TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 13 of 30 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, #AB95-055 The proposed contract is for the City of Bremerton Electronics Division of Public Works to maintain traffic signals in and for the City of Shelton. Electronics has been maintaining these signals for several years on a time and material basis. This is a three year contract with a six month cancellation and CPI clause. The City of Shelton currently has four intersections. Public comment - none. Mr. Winters raised a concern over the City of Bremerton being liable if someone was injured in an auto accident due to a malfunctioning traffic light. He asked if the City has enough insurance or coverage to protect the City from any liability in that circumstance? Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated he does not manage the Insurance Fund, however, that point was addressed by Peggy Lessor, Risk Manager, during discussion on this particular contract. It was the City's concern that they wanted the price charged for the maintenance work to include enough of a cushion to supplement the Risk Management Fund in the event of a lawsuit based on the City's negligence. The City is self-insured up to $100,000 and any claim less than that amount would have to come out of the Risk Management Fund and anything over that amount the City is covered by supplemental insurance. Mr. Colvin asked if the City would be any more liable than if City lights should fail? Mr. Sievers stated no, if there is injury to a third party it would be the same liability. Mr. Law stated this proposal was discussed extensively at Fiscal and the Budget Committee and their main concern was the liability issue. At that meeting, the Electronic Division Supervisory stated he was comfortable with the wording of the contract and the fact it was not a different exposure of liability than what they have with the City's traffic light program. Also brought up at that time was the fact this would include an informal suggestion that the City of Shelton consider training their own people for future maintenance work. He also pointed out the contract includes compensation for extra calls for service. He recommended approving the proposal as presented. M/S/C/U(Law/Montgomery) to approve contract. Mr. Winters announced the Kitsap Lake Neighborhood Association will meet on Thursday, April 23, 1995, 6:30 P.M., at the Cascade Natural Gas Building. The topic of discussion at that meeting will be Puget Power moving into the old Kitsap Lake Drive-In Theater. 8A - RESOLUTION NO. 2505, EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION PROCESSING FEES, #AB95-056 TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 14 of 30 As was discussed during the budget hearings, the costs of processing applications needs to be at least partially offset by an application processing fee. In addition, the resolution will enable the City to "pass through" the amount charged the City for testing services. This amount is consistent with what other cities are charging. The resolution also provides for waiver of the fees upon a declaration of financial inability to pay. Jim Meith, Human Resources Manager, emphasized what is proposed is consistent with what other cities have done for a number of years. They found other cities' cost ranged from $10.00 to a high of $25.00, with most in the $15.00 range. Their research also included looking at City costs in 1994, which came to approximately $29.00 per application processing. He emphasized there is a condition in the Resolution that provides for waiver of fees on a declaration of financial inability, which is done by simply signing a statement and without any financial checks by the City. It also provides for the pass through to the applicant those charges the City incur when a test is purchased from a testing organization and those charges may range from $7-10.00. Maryellen Babbitt, City resident and City employee, stated Article IX, Section 35(d) of the City Charter states: "the Commission among other things shall provide for the open, competitive and free examination as to the fitness; which may be limited to promotional examinations for an eligibility list from which vacancies shall be filled, for a period of probations before employment is made permanent; and for promotion on the basis of merit, experience and record". It als states in the Civil Service Rules: "That the Commission with the approval of the City Council shall make such rules and regulations for the conduct of its business and to enforce the purposes of this Article as shall be necessary and proper". Ms. Babbitt believes that statement in the City Charter clearly states examinations are free and "free" being just that. She has heard the issue raised that "free" means open to everyone, but she believes the words "open" and "competitive" clarifies that point. She also feels this issue comes under the purview of the Civil Service Commission. Several years ago, under another Civil Service Officer, this issue was brought before the Civil Service Commission and that Commission upheld the Charter and agreed to not charge fees. She did not know if this proposal had been brought back to the Civil Service Commission to be revisited. It has also been stated that the City needs to offset the cost of application processing. In the RCW's under Civil Service for City Policy, the RCW 41.12.189 indicates what the City is to provide for the Civil Service Commission and any assistance as necessary. That same RCW talks about the appropriation for expenses and that money coming from the General Fund. In RCW 41.12.190 it indicates that the City officers and employees will be enjoined to carry out the provisions TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 15 of 30 of the RCW. Within the past five years, many of the positions that City employees have applied for, when it comes to a promotion, have been open examinations (open meaning they were open to any member of the public). The statement here is that this application fee will be charged for non-promotional positions. That may be fine for Police and Fire because the only "open" position is for entry level since everything else is "promotional". However, is she to read into this that if a City employee applies for a position that would be a promotion in their classification they would have to pay the application fee? Under item #3 (a payment for the portion of the examination process), it states the intent is to charge an appropriate fee for reimbursement for part of the examination process. There again, it does not state for a promotion or non- promotion exam? She questioned will that fee be charged anyone or is the intent to charge for only non-promotional exams. Her third question relates to item #4 - "A declaration of financial inability to pay the examination fees shall excuse the imposition of the fees"...the Resolution talks about an examination application processing fee and a fee for part of the examination process, which she takes to mean other than the application fee. She questioned is it the intent that when you put in a Declaration Of Financial Inability To Pay you are going to be excused from paying either one of the fees? As she has learned, it can become expensive depending on the type of examination being given. The need to sign such a declaration would depend on whether she could afford a $15.00 application fee or whether or not she could afford a $100-400.00 examination fee. Mr. Meith stated in regards to the question about a test being "open", yes all applicants would be subject to the fee, and that would include City employees and would include employees having the right to sign a declaration to have that fee waived. If it was a promotional examination, which would be reserved exclusively for employees, would preclude anyone applying for that job from having to pay the fee. Addressing the question in regard to the application process and the fee for the pass through, if someone signed a waiver that they could not pay the application processing fee that would waive them from all fees associated with that particular process. If it was a situation where the person was able to pay the application processing fee and then subsequently found out the subsequent fee was such that they could not pay it, they would then sign a waiver at that time. Realistically, the only fees he foresees being passed through are those that he gave an example - firefighters or police where we are talking about a fee of $6.-10.00 per test, depending on the testing agency. He emphasized this fee structure would not apply to Assessment Centers due to the fact that those costs run in the area of $2-3,000 per session. The application process and whether there should be a charge for employees on an "open" examination was discussed when the Resolution was being developed. As mentioned during the Fiscal and Budget Committee meeting, an example was TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 16 of 30 given whereby a fee was charged for using the City's swimming pool and everyone was charged the same fee irregardless of who was using that service. He is looking at this as the same type of situation that if in fact an employee chooses to apply for an "open" eligibility list for an open register, they would fall under the same criteria as the general public. In regards to the Charter provision and the points Ms. Babbitt raised, he would defer to the City Attorney , who research that point. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated he provided an opinion on that point in 1994. The essence of his research was that like some other sentences in the Charter where there was an amendment wording was jammed in and created some very poor diction and syntaxes in some of the sentence in the Charter...this is not the only example. But, this section, prior to an amendment, read that the Civil Service would provide open and competitive examinations and the sole purpose of the amendment was to provide free examinations for promotional tests. If you read that sentence the simplest change would be to change the semicolon to a comma. When looking at the history of that amendment, "free" was intended to be only for promotional tests. The General Fund is suppose to support the Civil Service Commissions by State law just as the Municipal Court system is supported by that fund. It does have independencer however, it doesn't mean that Council cannot approve offsetting revenue measures such as the application fees. Mr. Melth stated in regard to the RCW sections - there are sections pertaining to Civil Service Commission as they pertain to fire and police and it basically says that the jurisdiction is required to pay up to .04% of one percent of the payroll for the positions covered by that provision of the chapter. That would only apply, in our situation, to police and fire employees covered by the Civil Service Commission because by State statute general employees are not covered, but are covered under the provisions of the City Charter. Revenue generated from the fees would not totally alleviate or relieve the General Fund from covering the cost and we more than support the Civil Service Commission to the amount required by State law. Mr. Law stated he is in favor of a charge for those applying for positions within the City and the City is 10 years behind the rest of the cities in the area. But, he believes the request was putting the "cart before the horse" in that this is something that must be approved by the Civil Service Commission. That point was discussed at the Fiscal and Budget Committee meeting and Mr. Meith stated he felt the Commission would give their approval. Mr. Law emphasized that at the time a motion is made, he will propose a caveat on the motion that this be done only with the approval of the Civil Service Commission because he believes that is under their responsibility. He also believes the charge is needed because there are some people who travel throughout the area just TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 17 of 30 taking tests, not that they would accept the position, but obtaining the training in taking the test. The offsetting cost will obviously not cover the total expense, but it will inhibit those that are not sincere. He asked for assurance, once again, of the definition when it states: "...the Commission among other things shall provide for open, competitive and examinations as to fitness..". He is assuming the word "fitness" means ,,qualifications". Mr. Sievers stated he thought Council could make that decision now and/or after the Civil Service Commission gave their approval. As to whether the Civil Service Commission approval is required, it was his opinion it was similar to a filing fee for filing an action in Superior Court, which is set by State statute, or other fees to offset Court revenues. He believes that as long as the fees are not so unreasonable that they interfere with the underlying purposes of Civil Service. He pointed out a waiver of fees is included for those who cannot pay the fee. It is his opinion that the City Council can undertake setting the fee responsiblity and would be only subject to challenge by the Civil Service Commission. Mr. Law stated he did not feel challenging the Civil Service Commission was appropriate. The other concern expressed earlier questioned how that would be handled if someone wanted to change their classification and take an exam if they are already an employee. He could understand circumstances where people would be apprehensive that their classification would have a cut or riff, and desire to get on another Register. He felt there should be some way to handle that situation. Mr. Meith stated Mr. Law was correct and as that point was discussed at Council Committee, the employee would have access to the same waiver as anyone else. Because of the way the Registers works, it would be very unlikely that a Register was opened at just the time someone was also being nervous or aware of receiving a notice of a layoff. A Register is good for two years and if within that two year period there was a layoff situation, no one could apply to get on that Register until it expired. He also felt it would be very rare if a Register happened to be expiring and the City was recruiting at the same time an employee was fearing a layoff notice. Mr. Law stated he was not comfortable with that aspect of the proposal and wanted something added that would give an employee a more secure feeling. The City has very dedicated employees and he felt they needed to have a sense that we are interested in them. Mr. Meith stated he shared Mr. Law's opinion of City employees. During discussions on that point, they followed along the line... "are we providing in essence a benefit that we aren't providing for the general population that want to apply for the job", and that was the reasoning behind it. Mr. Winters questioned who would receive the $15.00 fee and how would it be used? Mr. Meith stated the $15.00 fee will basically go toward offsetting the cost of running the Civil Service TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 18 of 30 operation. He pointed out most of the job openings are for Civil Service positions, but there are some non-Civil Service positions and the Resolution applies to those positions as well. Those revenues would also go toward the cost of providing tests. Mr. Overson stated he believes the fees collected would go to the General Fund and the City Council will say where they are to be spent. He questioned if Mr. Meith was proposing where the fees go as part of the presentation? Mr. Meith stated no. Mr. Colvin questioned when would the applicant pay for the application? Mr. Meith explained the fee would be collected at the time the application is turned in. Mr. Colvin asked Ms. Babbitt if he understood correctly that the City Charter states free and open exams will be given? Ms. Babbitt stated yes. Mr. Colvin asked if Council was being asked to make changes to the Charter without going through the proper procedures? Mr. Sievers stated no. Mr. Colvin stated he agreed with Mr. Law, however, he was not against a fee, but violating the Charter would be a flagrant act. Mr. Sievers explained the Charter is not being changed, rather interpreting a sentence in the Charter, which is inherently contradictory and ambiguous because it has three things that the Commission is to do...open, competitive and free examinations, then it has a qualifier "which may be limited to promotional examinations". The problem with that qualifier is figuring out which of the three or all of the three that limitation applies to. It cannot apply to open competitive examination, because you can't limit open and competitive examinations only through promotional tests. By State law it must be applied to all Civil Service tests and that is why the sentence is inherently ambiguous and that was why he provided an interpretation. We found that the amendment on free examinations, via an elections, only applied to promotional tests. Mr. Colvln pointed out that was a good reason to clarify the City Charter. Mr. Overson used the example of Professional Engineers obtaining a Professional Engineer License and asked if the City paid for that testing process? Mr. Meith stated no, it has not been past practice within the City of Bremerton. Usually, an oral exam is used, a rating of the applications by subject matter by subject matter experts and then an oral exam of those who get through the rating of the applications, which does not generate a direct out- of-pocket cost. Mr. Overson pointed out an Engineer must pay for a Professional Engineering License out of their own pocket. In his opinion, people going for those types of positions should pay for the exams. Mr. Farr stated in the presentations before the Operations Committee, Mr. Meith stated $15.00 was not enough to cover all costs and the real costs amount closer to $30.00. Mr. Meith stated t #1590 TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 19 of 30 the analysis information from the people who did the testing in 1994, came up with a cost of around $29+ per application, which was administrative costs for processing applications. Mr. Farr questioned the number of tests administered in 19947 Mr. Meith report approximately 20 with 1,200 applicants and he expects more in 1995 because he anticipates openings in the Police and Fire Departments. Mr. Farr asked if there was any way Mr. Meith could estimate how many tests were administered to City employees, who could possibly be looking at this being an opening for promotion opportunity? Mr. Meith stated that would be very difficult. He ventured to say of the 20 recruitment since his experience with the City, probably six of them were promotional only. Mr. Farr stated he reviewed Mr. Meith's cost comparisons with other cities, and he sees the $15.00 fee as reasonable, but he is concerned that whatever is approved is letter perfect to ensure that City employees are given every right that they have to free promotional opportunities. Mr. Meith stated he agreed with Mr. Farr. He believes the City is interpreting the Charter properly and as long as we exclude any promotional demands from the fee we are satisfying that interpretation. Mr. Farr stated he is talking about those the City employees feel that even though they are not listed as promotional exams afford them a promotional opportunity. He believes the small amount of money that could be saved would justify the exposure to things like litigation in the future. Mr. Neville questioned if Mr. Meith brought this proposal before the Civil Service Commission? Mr. Meith stated research on this issue was started in 1994, and he understood from discussions with the prior Civil Service Officer that it was discussed with the Civil Service Commission at that time. He personally discussed it with two members of the Commission and they have not voiced any objection. It has not been discussed in a formal manner with the two newest members that have been seated within the past two weeks. Mr. Neville questioned the number of people on the Civil Service Commission? Mr. Meith stated currently there are five members. Mr. Neville questioned the following statement on the Agenda sheet: "There will be no impact on the number of staff. Additional revenue will offset costs and impact on the General Fund". Mr. Meith stated that statement is correct. M/S/C(Law/Colvin) to approve Resolution No. 2505, fixing the charges to the public for employment application processing; with amendments: 1) that a City employee would not be charged for taking and entry exam in another classification and; 2) that this entire motion be subject to the approval of the majority of the Civil Service Commission. and 2) Vote on Motion: In Favor: Winters, Colvin, Dawkins, Farr, TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 20 of 30 Neville, Overson, Law Opposed: Montgomery, Huff-Menees Motion carried. 8B - RESOLUTION NO. 2506, AMENDING PARKS FEES ANDFOR FACILITY USE, AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2368, #AB95-057 The proposed resolution amending the schedule of park facility fees to allow waiver of base reservation fee for outdoor facilities for City co-sponsored activities or for groups contributing services, improvements, or financial support to the Bremerton Parks system within the last year. Pat. Harris, Parks and Recreation Direction, stated the original reservation fee was approved by the City Council in October of 1994, and the intent of the fee was to cover administrative and processing cost for the reservation. In addition, the Department is incurring charges for garbage collection, which was not charged in years past, therefore, it was felt that it was appropriate to charge a reasonable fee. In the spirit of cooperation with the many groups that contribute to the Parks Department, either through financial donations or labor/time in the Parks Department, it is suggested that an amendment be made as follows: "Community groups, which provide volunteer services or other in kind support to the City's Parks system should be exempt from the base reservation fee for outdoor facilities". Staff concurs with that amendment. Public comment - none. Mr. Colvin asked Mr. Harris to give an example of an exemption? Mr. Harris stated when the City co-sponsors an event with another organization/non-profit, that non-profit organization would not be charged a fee. Mr. Neville asked Mr. Harris who will have the final say whether or not a waiver is given? Mr. Harris explained his department is very aware of which groups participate. Mr. Dawkins asked if the large number of veterans groups that provide volunteer services to the City would be exempt from this fee? Mr. Harris stated yes, the fee would be waived for those groups. Mr. Colvin asked the City Attorney if wording should be included in the Resolution as to who would assess the charge? Ian 8ievers, City Attorney, stated if a waiver is signed or delegated within guidelines set by the Council it is appropriate for the Department to provide the administrative action. #1842 #1905 TAPE #1271 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 21 of 30 M/S/C/U(Neville/Farr) to approve Resolution No. Parks fees for facility use. 2506, amending 9A - ORDINANCE NO. 4510 (SECOND READING) AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF UNION AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET 8OUTH OF WERNER ROAD IN THE AUTO CENTER WAY AREA OF WEST BREMERTON; APPLICANT: CHARLES HASELWOOD, #AB95-051 Public comment - none. M/S/C/U(Dawkins/Colvin) to pass Ordinance No. 4510 on second reading, amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Bremerton forproperty located on the west side of Union Avenue approximately 300 feet south of Werner Road in the Auto Center Way area of West Bremerton, adopting the proposed REZONE from "SF-3" to "IG". 10B - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TO DISCUSS BREMERTON COMPREHENSIVE PLANAMENDMENTS -- LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTS, #AB95-052 Planning Commission Resolution No. 1995-1 proposes amendments to the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan to bring it into compliance with the Growth Management Act (GMA). The March 22, 1995 continued public hearing will focus on the Land Use and Transportation Elements of the Plan. Proposed revisions to your draft are attached as exhibits. The public hearing has been scheduled to provide another opportunity for interested citizens to comment directly to the City Council on these specific elements of the Plan. The City Council may wish to discuss these elements or ask questions of staff, but is not expected to take any action on these elements tonight. Ron Hough, Planning Manager, made the presentation on the following elements: LAND USE ELEMENT Mr. Law asked Mr. Hough to relate the fact that there is a difference between density and zoning. Mr. Hough explained the Comprehensive Plan is a little more general in zoning and is a 20- year general land use plan and zoning is the implementation tool to make the plan work. Zoning is a day-day development regulation. When something is shown on the Comprehensive Plan, such as Low Density Residential (LDR) we give it a density rating of 3-8 units per acre and there are 8 residential zoning districts within the City. So, after the plan is adopted, revisions will be made to the zoning as necessary to bring it into compliance. TAPE #1272 TAPE #1272 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 22 of 30 Jack Lefcoski, commended Ron Hough for the great job he did on the report, and the Comprehensive Plan is a good document. Joe Mentor, developer, stated he was referring to some property along Kitsap Way (near the Best Western Bayview Inn Hotel), that was initially zoned residential and commercial many years ago, then was returned to commercial-only zoning. He feels that the zoning should just be left as it is, commercial, rather than mixed-use. He also offered his opinion on the Bremerton School District Administration Bldg. on Montgomery Avenue, that the City should include the property in the commercial zone. Helen Havens, 3353 Anderson Hill Road, stated that neighbors and residents of Anderson Hill Road and Sunnyslope are very much concerned about the changes in the City's utility plan, and the implications for industrial growth in the wetlands, wildlife corridor, stream system, and forest. The residents want to see this area protected as a water and forest resource as it has been since 1915. She stated she does not understand what strategy is being implemented in this series of events, such as Mr. Ron Sciepko's option to buy the surplus 340 acres of remaining watershed, and his request for heavy industrial zoning for 70% of the watershed land. She was also concerned that the City's Critical Area Ordinance did not have enough "teeth" to protect the aquifer properly. She feels that citizens have not been privy to the strategies or included in the discussions that so profoundly affect their future. She also feels that her neighborhood is caught in the cross fire between the City, County, and State jurisdictional and legal disputes, and their "power struggles". Because the cumulative impact can be extremely grave, she believes that WAC 197.11,063(b) applies. She believes the City changed the plan at the last minute simply for economic interest, disregarding policy and citizen involvement. Her neighborhood would like to see a copy of the annexation and option agreement. She referenced Element "E", the Land Use Plan, on page 47 of the Council packet and raised the following questions: (1) who found this use more suitable? (2) why are the City's other industrial-use areas not suitable or adequate? (3) who needs this land for the requested use? She requests that the City "stop the train" and look where you are going first. She asked the City for three things: 1) an EIS study to be done on any surplusing, selling, or rezone of this property; 2) to listen to what you are being told by the people who already live in the vicinity, and to come and look at the'water shed, come to their meetings to seek out and enable public involvement and comment; and 3) review the City's own procedures and insist that they be followed. TAPE #1272 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 23 of 30 Dave Della,Rovers, Anderson Hill Road, has several concerns with this plan including the loss of open space, the impact on the aquifer and Sinclair Inlet, in increase in traffic on Anderson Hill Road, and the impact on the quality of life for those in the area. He feels rezoning of this property to industrial is not compatible with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. He doesn't feel that the Planning Department has explored other uses or options for the property. He feels the best use would be to keep this valuable public resource public, as a wildlife park or nature preserve. There are already enough industrial zoned areas in the City with space still available. He believes an EIS Study needs to be done to assess the full impact of this development on this property. Mike McCuddin Westford Avenue, South of the Anderson Creek Watershed, offered a review of what has been going on with this specific issue to help Council understand the ramifications of the proposal. He states that the residents are alarmed, and feel this issue is happening too fast, and has not been clearly thought through. He asked Council to look into this matter thoroughly. He discussed how the area has very steep hills, and if the land is disturbed there is the danger of mud slides during heavy rains, and erosion. Mr. McCuddin read numerous sections from the City of Bremerton Critical Lands Ordinance, which was prepared per a Growth Management Act requirement. He pointed out that the area in question is critical land, and the City has created an ordinance to protect areas. It made no sense for the City to build an industrial complex over one of the City's water resources. The proposal was not consistent with the Growth Management Act, and will cause significant adverse impact on the existing sensitive land. Industrial zoning is inappropriate for this area, and believes that a study should be done, including an EIS, prior to rezoning. He questioned how can the area be rezoned when the impact on the area is not yet known? He feels strongly that this proposal is a "recipe for environmental disaster". Mr. Montgomery asked Mr. McCuddin where he lives in relation to Anderson Creek? Mr. McCuddin pointed out on the map and stated on the other side of Old Clifton Road. Mr. Montgomer7 asked if Mr. McCuddin knows the owner of the land between Old Clifton Road and the watershed? Mr. McCuddin stated that land is owned by the McCormick Land Company, and their plan is to make' it residential, and create a satellite site for Olympic College. Mr. Montgomery asked Mr. McCuddin's opinion on the plans by McCormick Land Company for that site? Mr. McCuddin stated that they are going to need to be very careful when they begin to dig into this area to not cause TAPE #1272 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 24 of 30 environment damage and disturb the wetlands. He wasn't around when that particular proposal went through the public hearing process, otherwise he would have voiced his opinion. Mr. Montgome~wanted to clarify that the McCormick Land Company land close to the watershed property was not suitable for commercial use either, based on what Mr. McCuddin has stated so far. Mr. McOuddlm stated that the watershed flattens out a little and is not as dangerous as the area further down where it is much steeper. He is also assuming that an EIS study was done for the McCormick Land Company land, and in good faith. Mr. Oolvln wanted to clarify who determined that an EIS study was not necessary? Mr. McCud~in stated that a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance was published in the paper and the lead agency was listed as the City of Bremerton, as the proponent for this rezoning. Mr. Colvin also wanted to clarify other facts presented by Mr. McCuddin, where that information was received, and was the Department of Fisheries involved due to the salmon stream. Mr. McCuddin stated he received much of the background information on this proposal from Jack Allingham of the City of Bremerton Planning Department, and that the Department of Fisheries is aware of this plan, along with a representative of an Indian tribe, who is very concerned about this proposal. Susan Dew stated she owns property that borders Mr. Sciepko's 76 acres, which was recently annexed into the City and zoned Business Park, and the 340 acres zoned industrial. In earlier presentations, the area was called "Anderson Creek Business Park" even though it is zoned industrial. The designation "industrial" allows Mr. Sciepko to circumvent the Special Use Permit. This also allows him to put in whatever he wants without any public notification. Mr. Sciepko has verbally stated he wants business park type buildings on the subject site, and she is not disputing his intentions, however, she questioned what about the future if this land is ever sold to someone else? She also had concerns about a statement she read in the paper where the City of Bremerton claimed they would be able to provide 2 million gallons of water per day to a company that speculated about locating to the area. She was also concerned was concerned with the impact that would have on current residents and long range goals. She feels the City should be very careful in rezoning this area. Mr. Overson wanted to clarify that Council is not proposing a rezone at this time. This is a Comprehensive Plan proposed change. Certainly, there are parts of the land in question that are considered critical land, however, Council is talking about only a small piece of a very great big area. The process it takes to change the use of this property is very long and difficult, and full of lots of questions, study, and review. Assuming that goes TAPE #1272 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 25 of 30 through, he is sure everyone here on this issue will be back, but for now, the Council is here to protect the citizens' interests. Mr. Hough added the City has a requirement from the State that the City's zoning has to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Overson acknowledged that, but stated if future studies determine that this piece of land is not suitable for industrial park, then the Comprehensive Plan will be changed. Mr. Hough stated, or it could be that the City's Critical Areas Ordinance will determine that much of the site is not developable; and studies are forthcoming. Mr. Colvin asked Mr. Hough if the answers given to his questions earlier by Mr. McCuddin were valid answers regarding the environmental impact, and the study not being made? Mr. Hough stated he had no information regarding the environmental aspects of this property. The City has an Environmental SEPA Coordinator in the Planning Department, Jack Allingham, who does the review of the environmental checklist, and determines whether an EIS is required or not. Apparently, he determined that an EIS is not required, but a mitigated DNS is, which requires additional information. Mr. Colvin said this is a large area, and perhaps those critical areas can still be protected. Mr. Hough reiterated that the Critical Areas Ordinance would be applied, but as far as he knows there is no master plan for the site at this time, so they have no idea how the site would be developed. Mr. Hough passed out a 2-page letter that was submitted to the Bremerton City Council from Vic & M.M. Kaveny. Mr. Hough stated there were several issues to resolve, and requested direction from Council so his staff could prepare the final proposals for approval at the next City Council meeting - April 5, 1995. 1) Exhibit A, shows a correction to the City map in the area of the watershed and the utility lands. It does not change any proposals. There were no objections. 2) Mr. Hoskinson's proposal to change an area of "high-density residential" south of Burwell, (which extends from Burwell to First Street, and would include both sides of Montgomery Street, leading into the new gate at the shipyard), to "commercial general". Ms. Huff-Menees stated she required more information on this proposal before agreeing to it. Mr. Hough stated his staff could put together a more extensive report to present next week. 3) Joe Mentor's proposal for his property on Kitsap Way to keep the current zoning of "commercial general" rather than change it to "high density residential", which is what was proposed by Planning TAPE #1272 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 26 of 30 to allow the development of an apartment complex. However, Mr. Mentor is now planning to build offices on the first floor, so he would now prefer to keep the zoning "commercial general". 4) To include the Anderson Creek Corporate Campus proposal in the Land Use Element for a special study of this area. Mr. Dawklns commented that this is to ensure a quality development as well as a sensitivity to the neighbors, which is what the citizens were talking about earlier. Mr. Hough agreed that this is a unique area that required further analysis, to protect the environment and the neighbors. _~There were no objections. 5) Two proposals from Tim Arnold; the Olympic View Elementary School site at the corner of Sheridan &Wheaton Way, to change from "office" to "commercial general"; and to change a small patch of residential on the south side of Ivy on the East side of Wheaton Way, to "medium density residential", like the area that surrounds it. There were no objections. 6) A proposal to change the emergency measure of how we amend the Comprehensive Plan for annexations. There were no obiections. 7) The proposal to extend the Central Business District in the downtown area, by changing the zoning from "medium density residential" to "high density residential" west of Warren Avenue over to Chester, and from Burwell north to 6th Street (about a three block area). This proposal would be consistent with the Leland Study and the idea of encouraging residential growth in the periphery of the downtown area. There were no objections. Randy Witt, City Engineer, thanked the Council for the opportunity to present the TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT of the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan. He stated that it was almost a year ago that Council approved the contract with Parametrix to do this work. The proposal was put together in conjunction with the Citizens Advisory Committee, the Planning Commission, and Bremerton City Council members, and he feels they have a good plan to present. Due to the fact that almost everybody in the audience has already viewed the plan, only the framework of what the Transportation Plan contains will be presented to allow time for questions to focus on the areas of interest. John Putlie, Parametrix, Project Manager for the Transportation Element, passed out handouts that summarized the elements of the plan which stem from Federal, State, and Regional'legislation and policies that have changed the way we look at transportation, focusing more on multi-modal solutions such as transit, ferry service, bicycle improvements, etc. He focused primarily on the "Roadway Improvement" portion of the plan due to the late evening TAPE #1272 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 27 of 30 hour. The Transportation Element used the same process of forecasting 20 years into the future as was used by Ron Hough in the Land Use Element. It was found out very quickly that the existing Warren and Manette Bridges were going to be significantly over capacity, and this is one of the major deficiencies that was identified in the Cities system. Other fairly significant deficiencies were discovered in several corridors of the City. One of the central focuses of the Growth Management Act requirements, which this plan follows, is the "Level of Service" standards and concurrency. "Level of Service" essentially follows letter grades used in school ranging from "A" to "F", where "A" represents free-flowing, low traffic volumes, to "F" which represents full capacity conditions exemplified by stop-and-go traffic, and significant traffic congestion. The Growth Management Act requires the development of "Level of Service" standards for all of the arterial streets of the City, which is very important. Whenever one of the "Level of Service" standards are exceeded on a facility, a plan must be in place to find an improvement on that facility that would improve the "Level of Service" to meet the "Level of Service" standard within 6 years. If there is not a plan in place to improve a facility, then the City could not approve additional development that would add traffic to that corridor. The Citizens Advisory Committee worked very hard to keep this in mind. Once the deficiencies and the "Level of Service" standards, were identified, the focus was on road improvement options. A number of scenarios were tested, looking for alternatives, and ultimately three options/plans were developed. One of those scenarios was for a third, additional bridge to be built. RandV Witt, pointed out that there are no "impact fees" in the City's plan, which varies greatly from the County and a lot of other jurisdictions. The plan is pretty modest in a lot of improvements, but the model supports that the improvements shown are the improvements needed. Mr. Dawklns asked what was going to happen when we bring all this traffic in, from Gorst or wherever, and it comes into Burwell, will this cause problems? Mr. Wltt stated all of that could be brought up when the Gorst-Bremerton project is discussed and brought to Council for adoption, at a later date. He also pointed out that a draft EIS has been released for review, and there is a public hearing scheduled on April 25, 1995 to discuss it. Jack Lefcoski stated the County is recommending two new bridges. TAPE #1272 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 28 of 30 He also stated that he has had the Sinclair Bridge on his mind for 45 years. Every time there is a new Mayor in the City, the idea for a third bridge is passed on to the next Mayor, with no concrete proposal being developed. If 20,000 people do arrive here as projected, that will be approximately 5,000 - 6,000 new cars on the City streets. He feels very strongly that there is a need for a third bridge. He also pointed out the need to "count cars" with the same method as the County, or have the County change their method to be the same as the City. He also feels that if we do not begin plans for a third bridge now, we will simply be back here again in the near future. TAPE #1273 Mr.. Lefcoski talked about the various options of bridge placements.. end of Naval Avenue (bridge would turn out to be twice as long), end of Snyder across to Sheridan Road (little longer than Warren Avenue Bridge), County location...Tracyton to Rocky Point (he felt this had some promise, however, it could be very expensive). He urged Council to change the Comprehensive Plan to Scenario #6, change LOS 1.06 to 1.01. The MIS will take a couple of years to complete and that is a starting point with actual construction on a bridge not starting for 4-5 years.. Mr. Montgomery stated he was the member of the Citizens Advisory Committee who proposed that LOS F 1.06 be acceptable for the Wheaton Way corridor, and that a Major Investment Study (MIS) would be required at some future date with the state, county and city involvement. But at no time did he support a third bridge as the solution to a perceived traffic problem. He did support the MIS study which would determine if a problem exists, where this perceived traffic problem originates, its destination and a possible solution. He did not believe that the arbitrary building of a third bridge running north and south through the city of Bremerton will be the solution. The Parametrix Study points out that such an additional corridor would only lessen the traffic problem slightly. This so called traffic problem is only during the morning and evening rush hour period. The rest of the time there is only an occasional slow up of traffic on this corridor. As progress progresses, certain advantages and disadvantages occur, one being increased traffic congestion. Further more, the more roads you build the more you encourage vehicle traffic, especially single occupancy vehicles. One of the biggest problems is IN THE MINDS OF THE PEOPLE using this corridor. They, in my opinion, and that is'exactly what it is, my opinion, believe they should be able to travel this corridor at the same speed and time they did prior to the building up of the Wheaton Way corridor. #0346 TAPE #1273 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 29 of 30 It will be extremely costly to place a third bridge running north and south across Dyes Inlet. Not one street running north and south, west of the Warren Ave bridge and for that matter east either, is wide enough to provide four lanes of traffic without having to purchase the land on one or both sides of a street. In my opinion the main reason for the county to propose building a north south bridge across Dyes Inlet would be to act as a funnel to satisfy the county growth and provide little if any advantage for the City of Bremerton. From strictly a citizens non-engineering point of view, to run a bridge east to west north of the city would most likely be cheaper and provide more overall benefits than a north to south bridge, IF A THIRD BRIDGE IS REQUIRED AT ALL. The Riddell road is a possibility. It was suggested that the cost of the,bridge could be paid by making it a toll bridge. This then may require both the Warren and Manette bridges be tolled, and in my opinion, would be totally unacceptable to the citizens of Bremerton. If a study was made of every main street artery in King, Pierce and Kitsap County, the results would be that during rush hour traffic (going to work and returning from work) it would show that every main street artery was congested at a level as great as F 1.06 or greater. It would further reveal that to reduce the LOS to D would be so costly as to be prohibitive. He firmly believe that more emphasis needs to be place on rapid transit transportation, even if it means total subsidization. To encourage transit ridership, pedestrian activity and bicycle use and to promote growth in Urban Centers, the LOS standards for Urban Caners need to be set to reflect a higher tolerance of congestion than areas outside of the Centers. Building more roads and bridges means buying up taxable land and reducing the tax base for the city/county which in turns reduces the amount of money available to provide the services the citizens want unless taxes are raised, which is most likely totally unacceptable to the majority of the tax payers. Lets face it we are not going to get the American people out of their automobiles unless it gets to expensive to operate and a better alternative is provided, ie; cheaper rapid transportation. The citizens need to be fully informed as to the nature of the problem, the various solutions and the cost of providing the solution. Once they see the alternatives, then they will be better able to reach an intelligent conclusion and inform us how they want us to proceed. M/S/F(Overson/Colvin) to table this issue until next week. Vote on motion: In Favor: Colvin, Winters, Farr, Dawkins TAPE #1273 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 22, 1995 Page 30 of 30 Motion failed. Opposed: Overson, Neville, Law, Montgomery, Huff-Menees #0368 M/S/C/U(Overson/Montgomery) the hearing on the Comprehensive Plan be continued to March 29. With no further business meeting adjourned at 10:50 P.M. EEN L.KAT McCLUSK~Y, City Clerk City of Breme~'~' KLM/SH-M/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault President