Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/25/96TAPE #1411 COUNCIL APPROVED 0CT231996 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE8 SEPTEMBER 25, 1996 #0031 #0051 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, September 25, 1996, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President John Law presiding. Council members present were Bob Winters, Carlos Montgomery, Sherril Huff-Menees, David Farr, Richard Neville, Cecil McConnell, and A1 Colvin. Council member Lon Overson was absent. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and City Clerk Kathleen McCluskey. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council president Law and Invocation given Council member A1 Colvin. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting - August 28, 1996 #AB96-214 B. Confirmation of Jim Spencer as Interim #AB96-215 Director of Parks & Recreation M/S/C(Neville/MontgomerY) to approve Consent Agenda as presented. Vote on motion: In favor: Colvin, McConnell, Law, Neville, Farr, Huff-Menees, Montgomery Motion carried. Opposed: Winters 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 September 25, 1996, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: EFT 3882, 201827 through 202013 in the amount of $339,725.53; and Regular Payroll for the period ending 9-15-96. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORT8 Mr. Winters commented on the nice weather and reminded everyone to support local funding raising efforts. Mr. MontgomerY reported on Sunday he had the opportunity to view the salmon run at Gorst Creek and was surprised over the number of grandparents bringing their grandchildren to see the salmon TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 2 of 18 spawning. He attended the meeting sponsored by Mayor Horton and the Bremerton School District at Crownhill Elementary School, which was well attended. Mrs. Huff-Menees reminded residents of the Charleston neighborhood, local business owners and concerned citizens of the meeting to discuss the Charleston Neighborhood plan on October 3, 7:00 P.M., at the Bremerton School District Administration Office. Mr. Farr invited everyone to the grand opening and dedication of Arvon Park, 1512 Arvon Street, 3:00 P.M., on September 27, 1996. He noted the development of this park is an example of how concerned citizens can make a difference within the community. The park site was donated by the National Spiritualist Association of Churches, but was solicited by a neighborhood activities Mary Sump- He commended the Parks Department for their part in developing the park. Parking for this event is limited and alternate parking can be found on 15th Street. Mr. Colvin reported District #1 had a well attended Neighborhood meeting on September 19, where Mayor Horton and Sinclair Landing Association made excellent presentations. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Lynn Horton read a proclamation recognizing September 30 - October 4, 1996, as DISPUTE RESOLUTION WEEK. Mayor Horton thanked the Poggie Club for helping educate people on the fish runs at Gorst Creek; and she thanked the community for their excellent behavior when visiting the Gorst Creek area. Mayor Horton thanked the Bremerton School District Administration and Crownhill Elementary School for hosting the City/School forum. she also thanked those that attended that event bringing with them a good cross section of questions. Similar future events will be held in various schools throughout the City. In regard to the concerns raised about the "No Trespass" orders at Westpark, Police Chief Paul Du Frense will provide additional comments; however, the "No Trespass" issue is supported by the Housing Authority, residents of Westpark and the City Administration and Police Department. It is something that has come down from President Clinton as "one strike and your out," which means as long as someone is a law abiding citizen there would be no restriction on entering Westpark. If someone is not a law abiding citizen, they will have their access to Westpark restricted, which is what happened to several individuals, who spoke before Council at the September 18 Council meeting. The Housing Authority does have an appeal process and as such the TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 3 of 18 Housing Authority is the right body to resolve disputes over the "No Trespass" order. The City of Bremerton has no authority over the Housing Authority. Police Chief Paul Du Fresne stated his first response would be to Patricia Anderson, who raised a concern abut the "No Trespass" signs and what the Trespass Law states. He cited RCW 9A 52.080, Criminal Trespass In The Second Degree, which is a crime that is committed when someone goes on the premise of someone without their permission or after being warned not to; and it is misdemeanor charge. The Bremerton Housing Authority has the right to issue warnings to people, who are on their property without their permission, that they cannot return to Westpark. Those warnings center around people, who have been involved in criminal activities, drug sales or some other activity that Westpark residents do not want to be subjected to. Chief Du Frensne will be forwarding this information to Ms. Anderson. In regard to the concerns raised by Annette Taylor and Mark Miller, Ms. Taylor was a resident of Westpark because she was placed in Emergency Housing by Kitsap Community Action Program. Ms. Taylor would not otherwise qualify for residency at Westpark due to an outstanding bill owned when she resided in Westpark over a year ago. Sadly, Ms. Taylor is still in a situation where she needed some assistance and KCAP placed her in that emergency housing. While she was temporarily placed at Westpark, Mr. Miller, who is the father of two of Ms. Taylor's children, arrived in an intoxicated condition and assaulted her, resulting in her calling the Police for assistance. The Police arrived, confirmed Mr. Miller had assaulted Ms. Taylor and then took action to arrest him. Chief Du Frense talked with Mr. Miller after he was served a "No Trespass" notice, and he advised Chief Du Frensne that he had been before the Judge and was attempting to go through a 12-step program and improve his situation. Ms. Taylor was relocated by KCAP to another emergency housing location due to her problem with Mr. Miller. By moving Ms. Taylor out of Westpark, Mr. Miller will not be restricted from seeing his children. Information as to how to process a complaint against the Housing Authority was given to Mr. Miller. In response to concerns raised by Anthony Robinson and Maria DeVitto, they both alleged they were being harassed by the Police, which is simply not the case. When he investigated their allegations, he learned Mr. Robinson and Ms. DeVitto are both under order of eviction at Westpark because of criminal activity involving both of their residence. Mr. Robinson has been convicted and will be sentenced in October for conspiracy to sell crack cocaine and Ms. DeVitto's property was the property being used by Mr. Robinson's juvenile son for selling crack cocaine. Ms. DeVitto TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 4 of 18 complained that her telephone was being tapped, which it was not, although the conversations between Mr. Robinson, his son and the police when he was engaging in the drug transactions were properly recorded under a limited warrant authorized by the Superior Court of the State of Washington. This is an unfortunate situation and both Mr. Robinson and Ms. DeVitto were quite upset about being harassed by the Police, but the reality is they were engaged in activity that will not be tolerated in Westpark or in the City and people will be prosecuted for such actions. Unfortunately, Mr. Robinson's young son is now serving a sentence after a conviction for selling drugs. President Law thanked Chief Du Frense and his staff for researching all of the questions and accusations made at the September 18 City Council meeting. PUBLIC RECOGNITION ' Gordy Byrd apologized for a statement he may have made at the September 18 City Council meeting that hoodlum type people could be found at the Skill Center. He could not recall ever having made such a statement because he believes in sticking up for people. John Thomas, Bremerton resident, reported he and his daughter had fun the fish run at Gorst Creek. He found the TCI presentation during the September 18 Council meeting to be interesting. Approximately 3-4 months ago he enjoyed a dinner at a west Bremerton restaurant where he ran into a few TCI contractors, at which time he asked them when they would be working on Bremerton's system. Their response was "we're never going to get into Bremerton because Bremerton refuses to negotiate with them". Mr. Thomas believed just the opposite...that TCI refuses to negotiate with the City. He thanked Kathleen McCluskey for doing her job and 'very shortly his family will be a very satisfied non-TCI customer. Paul Thompson, Bremerton resident, stated he was representing three apartment complexes on 5th Street and requesting the City allow residential parking along the north side of 5th Street for those living in those apartments - He has paid $200-300 per month in parking tickets in front of his apartment. John Ryan, Bremerton resident, stated he was representing teens of Bremerton regarding the Teckno Dance on Callow that was closed down by the City because they had not obtained a proper license; however, three weeks prior that establishment was declared a private club. He wanted to know the reason why the City shut down the club. president Law stated someone would look into the matter and contact him. Mr. Ryan stated he was a member of the club and it was a way to keep teens off the street and out of trouble and felt this activity should be supported by the City. TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 5 of 18 Glenn Jarstad, Bremerton resident, talked about the successful salmon run in Gorst Creek. He too was amazed over the public's response to viewing this annual migration of fish. He commended the Poggie Club members for their help educating the public at the viewing site and the City employees for their being safety conscious in setting up barriers for walkways and parking. Doyle Detroit, Executive Director of Westsound Community Access TV, handed out copies of their new Users Handbook, which has been revised and broadened. As a result of those policies, there is now more political programming on TCI Channel 12 than ever before. Today, all of the certified candidates were invited to film a 30 minute program on October 3, 4, 5 and showing on October 12 for the first time. She encouraged Council members to think of ways to use the Access Channel in addition to their normal Council meeting being telecast. she wanted the City Council members and viewers know that they are working to improve the transmission of City Council meetings from the Council Chambers. 9A - PUBLIC HEARING ON APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING 8HORELINE PERMIT FOR PRIVATE RECREATIONAL DOCK AT 1542 MADRONA POINT DRIVE (DON HOLTZ), #AB96-221 After a public hearing conducted on May 25, 1996 and June 18, 1996, the Planning Commission overturned a decision by the Director of Community Development, denying a shoreline substantial development permit which would have allowed a private recreational dock to be constructed at 1542 Madrona Point Drive. This decision is being appealed by the proponents for the dock, Don Holtz and Lora Short, on the grounds stated in their written arguments received at the Council's office September 9, 1996. The City Council, when hearing an appeal, shall either: 1) Affirm the decision under review; 2) Reverse the decision under review; 3) Modify in whole or part the decision under review; or 4) Remand the matter back to the approving authority for further consideration. Such action shall be decided by a majority vote of the members present. That vote may be taken at the same or any subsequent meeting. President Law asked the "Appearance Of Fairness/Conflict Of Interest" question with all Council members being seated. president Law asked if anyone on the council did not review the record from the Planning Hearing? No one responded. He asked if any Council member had viewed the permit site since they reviewed the documentation in the Agenda packet? No one responded. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated this is a closed record hearing #1510 TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 6 of 18 based on information presented at the Planning Commission hearing. Council has reviewed those materials and according to Council's direction to exclude any new evidence, but limit their consideration to simply argument in writing at this stage, he made certain expunges from some of the arguments and exhibits submitted that he found not to be in the record before the Planning Commission- There is a portion of the record that will be presented in the form of slides, which will conclude the record. also, Council should have reviewed a late submittal that came in after the Agenda packet was produced, which he attached to his memorandum- Jack Allin~ham, Planner, stated this is an appeal of a Planning Commission action. The request is for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and the applicants are Don Holtz and Lora Short. The proposed project was for a private recreational dock to be constructed at 1542 Madrona Point Drive. The Director of Community Development approved the permit on March 28, 1996. Subsequent appeals were filed by Wayne Iverson, Kathy Gallagher, Susan and Bernard Holland, Maynard Hoffman and Sandra Verhelst. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on May 21 and continued to June 18, 1996. The slides shown to the City Council were shown during the Planning Commission hearing. M/S/C(Montgomery/McConnell) to sustain the Planning Commissions' findings and decision to deny the Shoreline Development Permit to develop a dock at 1542 Madrona Point. Mr. Meville stated having grown up in this area, he had spent considerable time on the water in the subject area. He noted Mr. Holt's own attorney commented on the impact of the project as follows: "near shore navigation will be somewhat impacted, usable water service will be reduced and visual impact of aesthetic quality of the existing shoreline will occur." He emphasized docks are fine in an appropriate area; however, he did not find that this channel was an appropriate area for a dock as that proposed by Mr. Holtz. The water access on this waterway is very unique to this area...a narrow entrance opening into a large bay that is heavily used for recreational uses. It is for that reason he will support the Planning Commission not to allow the dock in the subject area. Mr. Montgomer~ stated he too was very familiar with the waterway and the problems one might encounter during various tide levels. Adding any kind of a pier in that area would further restrict the passageway to the point it would be unsafe for anyone to travel through those waters. He felt it did not make good sense to put in an obstruction and let the City be liable for an accident waiting to happen. TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 7 of 18 Mr. Farr asked the City Attorney's opinion on Mr. Montgomery's comment that the City could be held liable in the event of an accident, if the City allowed the pier to be built? Ian Slevers, City Attorney, stated he did not think the fact the City does not enforce general state provision on speed that is appropriate for conditions under the public duty doctrine would create any liability whether this was approved or not. People are suppose to use an appropriate speed in these conditions whether there are other obstructions, other boats, docks, etc.. Mr. Winters quoted from the documentation (Agenda packet Page 175) under GOAL - "to assure that adequate water access and moorage facilities are available to the public and individuals, without adversely impacting the natural aesthetic qualities of the shoreline." He asked if anyone from the Department Of community Development, who actually wrote the City's Shoreline Master Program, actually visited the sites within the City in order to determine who is to rule what is "natural aesthetic quality to the shoreline?" Donald Pratt, Director of Community Development, stated in this case the permit is administratively approved over his signature and he originally found to approve the dock and was overturned by the Planning Commission. The Shoreline Master program contains several policies, which in some cases appear to be conflicting and can be used to make either side of the case for or against the dock. It was his responsiblity in the initial case to determine on which policy to place the most emphasis, which he did. But, the Planning Commission overturned that decision and found the emphasis should be placed on other policies. Mr. Winters stated there were some concerns in this document regarding tidelands and who has the right to put a piling out onto the shore and build. He asked if Mr. Holtz's proposal follow the State's recommendations and City standards? Mr. Pratt stated yes, with one relatively minor exception, which could have been changed. Mr. Holtz presented an application that Mr. Pratt initially believed could be approved, but the planning Commission disagreed with him because of their interpretation of the policy. From a structural standpoint with one exception the dock met the City's basis guidelines. Mr. Colvin raised the issue of the City being liable if the dock was approved. Mr. Sievers restated his position on any liability to the City and agreed with Mr. Colvin that anyone can bring a suit. Mr. Farr asked Mr. Pratt to give a brief history of the permit application. Mr. Pratt explained Mr. Holtz made an original submittal for a dock, which could have administratively been approved by him. Several meetings were held with Mr. Holtz where he was advised that the submittal he originally made was not approvable for several reasons: (1) not an adequate SEPA Checklist TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 8 of 18 and he was advised the City may require an Environmental Impact Statement unless he improved that Checklist. Mr. Holtz withdrew the Checklist and submitted a subsequent Checklist that provided further information agreed upon would be adequate to make the environmental review. (2) Mr. Holtz was told the design he prepared for the application was not adequate for approval, which he changed and brought in what he determined to be an approval dock on his reading of the Shoreline Master plan. He approved the proposal and notice was given. The approval was appealed and went before the Planning Commission. At the Planning Commission meeting on the appeal, there was an error made in the order of testimony and in order to correct that error the Planning Commission chair continued the meeting to a following date the next month, resulting in a portion being heard in May and a portion was held in June. In June, the Planning Commission voted to overturn his decision and the issue was subsequently appealed to the City Council. Mr. Farr asked what the next step would be if Council upheld the Planning Commissions' decision? Mr. Pratt stated if one of the parties felt there was a procedural error they could appeal it to Superior Court. Mr. Sievers stated there are new State guidelines for appeals of this kind of land use permits, some are procedural, constitutional issues not supported by substantial evidence and are appealable to Superior Court. Mr. Farr urged Council members to take their personal desires out and whether or not he would choose to run into a pier or moored float should not enter into the decision. He hoped this decision is made on strictly whether or not the applicant has a legal right to construct a pier in front of his property. Mr. Winters asked when this is a closed record hearing does it mean the public will not be heard outside what is in the public record? Mr. Sievers stated no oral argument or additional evidence will be submitted by the public according to Council's own rule. Mr.. Winters stated he was having trouble interpreting Mr. Pratt's comments about something being rate by criteria, but other things come into play that we must make a decision. He felt there was a contradiction between the City and the staff. But, if a person applies and is within the criteria to be approved, he tended to believe that was the right approach. After reading the documentation, he feels it is a neighborhood issue as well. Mr. Montgomez7 stated he was not basing his decision on his personal opinions, but rather the facts brought out by the Planning Commission. He pointed out the record states the dock will not be a joint use facility, which is one of the criteria, and it would add to all the proliferation of new docks consuming limited shorelines. He found the Planning Commissions' findings appropriate and according to the law. President Law pointed out that within the documentation the Holtz's expressed their TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 9 of 18 willingness to share the dock with other people. Mr. Montgomel~ stated there are many findings by the Planning Commission that do not support approving the dock. Mr. Colvin asked if there was anything to prevent other people from the subject area applying for a permit to build a dock? Mr. Pratt stated the Shoreline Program carries many policies, some of which in some particular application are conflicting and the question is which policy is emphasized for that particular application. After tonight, someone can apply for a dock and still expect to have an Administrative approval or denial. He will make a determination whether to approve or disapprove and which policy to emphasize and which'not to emphasize on the basis of Council's decision on this issue. Council's decision will be guiding future actions on how docks are approved in that area until the administration comes back with an amendment to the Shoreline Master Program that states docks shall only be a certain size. Mr. McConnell stated his approach was to read all of the testimony from the hearing and then made a tentative decision, which he then checked against the Planning Commissions' Findings Of Facts and Conclusions. He found he agreed with the Commissions' last four conclusions, i.e. impact on navigation, create a safety hazard in some cases, does not comply with State Shoreline Management Act or Bremerton's Shoreline Master Program. Mr. Neville rebutted Mr. Farr's comments in that he was not against all docks, but they do need to be looked at on a case-by-case basis, and take into consideration the long term affect they would have on a particular area. Mr. Winters rebutted Mr. Neville's 'comment based on his opinion that 80 percent of the documentation is about safe boating. He believes there is a self-enforcement problem on all the waterways of Kitsap County. Someone being reckless can hit a dock no matter how long or short. A lot of the concerns are about the safety and navigational hazard. President Law referenced Page 270 of the Agenda Packet and asked if that was a document prepared by the appellants? Mr. Sievers stated yes. president Law quoted from that page as follows: "because the dock achieves a usable depth of water, obstruction od navigable waters will only rarely occur." In his opinion, that shows there would be an exposure for someone getting hurt. That issue along with the adverse aesthetic impact on the area convinces him that the proposed dock would not be appropriate in that area. Vote on Motion: In Favor: Neville, McConnell, Colvin, Montgomery Law Opposed: Winters, Huff-Menees, Farr Motion carried. TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 10 of 18 7A - SCHOOL RESOURCE PROGRAM CONTRACT RENEWAL, #AB96-216 This is a renewal of the contract for school resource officer service with the Bremerton school district. This agreement pays half the salary for one officer (entry level) and provides for some additional overtime hours to enhance coverage to the district. Public comment - none. Mr. Winters stressed this program is vital to the communication between the Bremerton Police Department and School District in that there is an open line of understanding on how to deal with particular incidents where students and teachers have a communication program. He strongly supports approving this request. Mrs. Huff-Menees stated she also supports this proposal and one of the things she learned when the issue was discussed in committee is that we do not have an officer at Bremerton High School on a regular basis. When she inquired why not when other High Schools in Kitsap County do have law enforcement officials on site, she was told there has not been a need at Bremerton High School and one of the reasons for that is because of programs like this that teaches rules and regulations to the students prior to their getting to the High School. Mr. McConnell noted the contract will not exceed $37,000 and the School District will be paying half of that cost. Mr. Farr stated he had contact with a young person, who had contact with a resource Officer Fatt, and his response was Officer Fatt was Very professional, effective and appears to have a real rapport with the youth. Mr. Neville asked the City Clerk to read the seven issues listed on the Scope of Work in the contract: Kathleen McCluskey read as follows: 1. The Bremerton Police Department will provide a School resource Officer to assist faculty, staff, students, and families of Bremerton Junior High School and Mountain View Middle School. an Officer will be assigned to this duty full time. 2. The Bremerton Police Department will provide a part-time School Resource Officer to assist faculty, staff, students and families as needed in schools throughout the Bremerton School District. 3. The School Resource Officers along with Henry Mincey, Manager, Community resource Division, and Chief of the Bremerton Police Department, Paul Du Fresne, will work with the Bremerton School District and Building Administrators to provide a positive, safe #2765 TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page ll of 18 environment for students and employees. 4. The officers will work with individual students, small groups of students, and large groups of students to encourage positive behavioral choices. 5. The Bremerton Police Department Officials will work with the Bremerton School District Administration to plan and carry out inservices for staff which will help staff learn to identify safety risks and learn appropriate responses in unsafe situations. 6. The Bremerton Police Officers will at all times conduct themselves according to procedures laid out by Building Principals. 7. Bremerton Building administrators will work closely with the Police Officers and the Manager of the Community Resource Division to plan and implement specific activities designed to improve student behavioral choices at each site. All parties agree to meet together on a regularly scheduled basis. Police chief Paul Du Fresne pointed out this is the second year for the project, which has provided good connections with the schools and is a way to offset some General Fund expenses. M/S/C/U(Winters/McConnell) to approve signing of this contract. 7B -AMENDMENT #3 TO THE PROFES8IONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH ABEYTA & ASSOCIATES, #AB96-217 Since approval of Amendment No. 1, Ms. Abeyta has been the primary contract with all owners, agents, lawyers, etc. of properties in the area approved for condemnation around the WWTP. The scope of her responsibilities and time required in the acquisition process has increased significantly. At present, the project is approximately 70% complete and the amount of the agreement has been reached. An increase in the Professional Services Agreement with Abeyta & Associates to an amount not to exceed $60,000 is requested. Ms. Abeyta's role with this project will continue in the closing process and obtaining of title records for all transactions. Paul Lucas, Public Works and Utilities Department, stated he is the person directly responsible working with Ms. Abeyta. Some delays were encountered, one being the City trying to deal more directly with the people in the subject area rather than going to court to initiate the condemnation process at an earlier point of time. Another reason for the delay had to do with the city having to deal directly with an attorney for all transactions. Currently, Ms. Abeyta is involved in approximately 17 on going transactions and has been directly responsible for the closing of 38 transactions #3086 TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 12 of 18 accomplished this year. Public comment - none. Mr. Winters stated all along he has had some concerns about what has been going on in this particular project. He asked if it will be necessary to use condemnation for any of the remaining properties? Mr. Lucas stated yes, approximately 12. Mr. Neville stated during the committee discussion on this issue Mr. Lucas was asked to give an honest appraisal of the performance of Ms. Abeyta and he asked Mr. Lucas to share that data with the publiC. Mr. Lucas stated he communicates with Ms. Abeyta 3-4 times each week and discusses any on going transaction before making contact with the people in the subject area. ' Ms. Abeyta has met directly with Gene Sampley, Director of Public Works and Utilities, Mayor Horton, Ian Sievers, City Attorney and all of them are unanimous in their feelings that her performance has been well above what they expected. He stressed Ms. Abeyta has gone over and beyond the scope of her contract to provide assistance to the people within the zone to relocate. Mr. McConne11 stated he also has reservations about the condemnation portion; however, this proposal is not a part of the condemnation action. Mr. Winters asked if Ms. Abeyta is a licensed Real Estate Broker in the State of Washington? Mr. Lucas stated yes. Mr. Winters asked if Ms. Abeyta received a commission in the event she assists someone to relocate? Mr. Lucas stated no. Mr. McConnell pointed out the $60,000 figure is the total for the contract, not an additional increase. M/S/C(Montgomery/Huff-Menees) to approve an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement between the City and Abeyta & Associates for an amount not to exceed $60,000 and authorize the Mayor to execute the same, subject to City Administrative Policies and Procedures. Vote on motion: Motion carried. In Favor: Opposed: Neville, McConnell, Colvin, Montgomery, Huff-Menees, Farr, Law Winters 7C - TO APPROVE CONSULTANT CONTRACT WITH KATO & WARREN, INC., FOR CONSULTING A8SI8TANCE WITH THE CHARLESTON COMMUNITY PLAN (UNDER STATE PERF GRANT), #AB96-218 The City has been awarded a $40,000 State Planning and TAPE #1411 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 13 of 18 Environmental Assistance (PERF) grant to assist with preparation of the Charleston Community Plan. $30,000 is earmarked for consultant help with five components of the project: (1) EIS; (2) poster- brochure; (3) videotape; (4) regulations; (5) monitoring system. The City issued a Request for Proposals, which resulted in the submittal of proposals by five firms. Three were selected for interviews by an interview committee consisting of a Planning Commissioner, a Charleston District business owner, a Charleston area property owner, and city staff. The interview committee unanimously recommended that the contract be awarded to Kato & Warren, Inc. Don Pratt, Director of Community Development, stated there are and have been major changes in the Charleston neighborhood starting with the Gorst-Bremerton project, which significantly alters the southern portion of this neighborhood. Secondly, Puget Sound Naval shipyard has completed construction of some residential quarters adjacent to the neighborhood. Lastly, the new Safeway Store is a very positive impact on the neighborhood. As this project goes along, there will be changes and initiatives as to how we do neighborhood planning. It is hoped this project will be a product of regulatory reform. If we do this planning project the way it is envisioned and if the environmental work is done the way the State has funded it and the way this contract is proposed to the council, anyone building a project in this neighborhood that conforms with the plan would not have to go through the State Environmental Policy Act process. Secondly, it is a relatively strong feeling TAPE #1412 that frequently too much money is put into the technical planning, and not enough into the communications effort. With this plan, a 'lot of money was put into the communications effort, at the expense of good technical planning. There will now be a new effort to communicate with the neighborhood and business owners about what is in the plan. Second, a video tape will be used to help show the neighbors what is envisioned for the future, and help show people intending to do projects how they want the project done. The first neighborhood meeting to get this project kicked off is scheduled for October 3, 7:00 P.M., at the Bremerton School District Administration Building, located at the corner of Burwell & Montgomery. The public is invited and encouraged to attend. Public comment - none. Mr. Winters commended Mr. Pratt and his department for this program. From his discussions with business owners and citizens from that area, they will welcome this chance to participate and have some input. He also looks forward to attending the meeting. Mr. Farr asked for an elaboration of item 12, ,,Regulation Review" #0230 TAPE #1412 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 14 of 18 found on page 46. Mr. Pratt stated the "Regulation Review" refers to two things: 1) Once the department comes up with a concept of what kind of development they want to occur in that neighborhood, they will look at what kinds of things can be put in place to deliver what they envision (like set-backs, uses, heights, and other development standards); and 2) Ways to cut out regulations that are impediments to getting things done, such as set-backs in some neighborhoods do not deliver a "folksy" neighborhood feel like is envisioned, so it will be considered to move some front porches closer to the street in a particular neighborhood. Mr. Farr asked if these can be proposed as chan~es to both the building code and zoning code; and would they be unique to this particular area? Mr. Pratt'answered probably just to the zoning code, and you could possibly see specific standards applicable only to this "sub-area" or neighborhood, and nowhere else in the City..These changes would certainly still be in the general theme of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. McConne11 asked if these changes would be brought before Council? Mr. Pratt stated any changes to the zoning code and Comprehensive Plan must come before Council. Mr. McConnell asked what criteria was used to interview the five firms submitting proposals? Mr. Pratt stated first of all, whether or not the firm responded to the actual proposal narrowed the selection to three. Pricing was a factor, such as would they deliver the basic product desired, plus include some extras. They looked at technical experience, and for a "fit", including the attitude and demeanor of the consulting firm. M/S/C/U(Huff-Menees/Colvin) to approve contract with Kato & Warren, Inc. 7D - REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND 8ALE AGREEMENT FOR 1708 PARK AVENUE, #AB96-219 The property proposed for purchase is an undeveloped parcel located immediately adjacent to the City's wastewater pump station CE-1. This is the primary pump station within the wastewater system. This property is desired to provide a site for future construction of additional pump station failure and can be used as storage to reduce combined sewer overflows. The storage would be located below ground and allow the area to be used by the public. The property has an area of 0.13 acres. The assessed value of the property is $55,000. It is recommended that Council approve the attached Real Estate Purchase Agreement to allow acquisition of this property. Paul Lucas, Public Works & Utilities, stated the primary use of this property is to build an underground "vault" to accommodate any overflows from the current pump station CE-1. The capacity of the tank is estimated to be 125,000 gallons. The cost of the project #0352 #0384 #0417 TAPE #1412 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 15 of 18 will come out of Wastewater & Utility funds, and no exact date for construction has been set. This additional pump station will give the City a lot of leeway should alarms fail, and an overflow occurs. Public comment - none. Mr. Farr asked how long does it take to fill the maximum capacity of the 125,000 gallon storage tank? Mr. Lucas stated 8,000 gallons are pumped per minute, so approximately 20 minutes, which is more than enough time to get to the treatment plant if an alarm sounds. He assumes there will also be an alarm on the upper limit of the storage tank. Mr. McConnell noted the data states they would pay any delinquent property taxes and questioned is an amount known? Mr. Lucas responded there is none right now. Mr. Neville finds this unique, in that it seems to be a "win-win" situation. The City can put in a tank to handle any overflow, so that it will not go into the Narrows, and from the tank, it will go back to the sewer system and treatment plant. In addition, because this will all take place underground, it will allow an additional use for the property. M/S/C/U(Neville/Montgomery) to approve the Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement with Mr. Paul Brons for property commonly known as 1708 Park Avenue, and authorize the Mayor to execute the same. 8A - ORDINANCE NO. 4571 DISTRICT, #AB96-210 Public comment - none. (SECOND READING) REORGANIZING HEALTH M/S/C/U(Colvin/Montgomery) to pass Ordinance No. 4571 on second reading, reorganizing the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health District. 8B - ORDINANCE NO. 4572 (SECOND READING) ADOPTING THE HARRISON DISTRICT PLANAS AN AMENDMENT TO THE BREMERTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, #AB96-213 Public comment - none. M/S/C/U(Colvin/Montgomery) to pass Ordinance No. 4572 on second reading, adopting the Harrison District Plan as an Amendment to the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan. 8C - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) AMENDING B.M.C. CHAPTER 2.88, DISABILITY ACTION COMMITTEE, #AN96-220 There is a need to revise the terminology used in the current Chapter and give greater flexibility in selecting members for the TAPE #1412 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 16 of 18 committee. Also, the requirement to meet once a month has proved unrealistic. These changes are recommended by the Disability Action Committee. Jim Meith, Director of Human Resources, stated four of seven members of the current Disability Action Committee met two months ago, which was their first meeting in approximately two years. An attempt is now being made to revive this committee, which is why they are requesting these amendments. Public comment - none. Mr. Neville asked if they were attempting to increase membership? Mr. Meith stated membership will stay where at 7 members. The proposed ordinance is just proposing the flexibility to be able to fill all 7 positions. There are currently four members taking part, but they have had problems getting additional members. Several people have expressed interest, but unfortunately live just outside the City limits. This is one area they would like some flexibility. Mr. Neville thanked Mr. Meith for the work put into this endeavor because he feels it is a very important committee and should be taken seriously. He encouraged citizens to contact the Mayor's office for an application, if they are interested in participating on this committee. Mr. Farr asked for clarification on the changes made to the number of meetings to be held. Mr. Meith stated the requested change is to meet quarterly, rather than monthly. Mr. McConnell asked what criteria is used to find a qualified candidate? Mr. Meith stated basically, anyone who is interested in the subject matter of the committee, but ideally, someone who has a vocational interest. Present committee members are people who are either involved in a professional career, or working with the disabled community in some aspect. A candidate also must have the willingness to put in the time. Mr. McConnell questioned if it was so difficult to find committee members, shouldn't the committee be reduced from 7 to 5 members? Mr. Meith stated the committee discussed that possibility, but decided with the added flexibility they could keep it at 7. Also, with 7 members, you may actually only get 5 at any given meeting because not all members can always make every meeting. Mr. McConnell noted the previous ordinance only allowed 2 representatives of advocacy groups, who could live outside the City limits, while this proposal would be extending it to all 7 members of this committee. In his thinking, if you can not find 7 or 5 people to serve on a committee of this apparent importance, #0709 TAPE #1412 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 17 of 18 especially when it would benefit them, maybe it is not as important as it is made out to be. He just finds it strange that not enough people can be found from inside the City to serve on this committee. Mr. Meith stated their first preference and priority is for people living in the City. However, there is an example right now of a person interested in being on the committee, who works at Olympic College in the disability program, but actually lives just outside the City limits. He is an excellent candidate, but could not be considered for the committee under the present constrictions. Mr. MoConnell stated he still did not understand why there weren't enough Bremerton residents who had the same level of interest. Mayor Hotton reminded Council this is a minority population, probably less than 15% for all of Kitsap County. If people in advocacy roles are added, that bumps the number up a little bit, but there is still a very small, limited range of people interested. Mrs. Huff-Menees concurred with the comments made earlier by Mr. Neville on this issue, and also appreciates the fact that this item is being brought to the Council's attention. She is willing to accept the changes recommended by the committee, and would be very grateful to any resident living outside the City, who would be willing to give of their time because the City could only benefit from such a relationship. M/S/C/U(Huff-Menees/Farr) to approve ordinance on first reading, reorganizing the Disability Action Committee, which will assist the City of Bremerton's implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Mr. Colvin pointed out the proposed ordinance states that members may reside outside the City, if solicitation procedures fail to find qualified candidates in the City, so he could support the proposal as presented. President Law thanked the TV camera crew for their services: Nadine Price, Erin Daniels, and Rob Luke. TAPE #1412 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 25, 1996 Page 18 of 18 With no further business meeting adjourned at 7:38 P.M. ~J~THL~.EN~2~NL~YCL , City Clerk J~E. LAW, Council President City of Bremerton KLM/JL/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault