HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/28/94 COUNCIL
APPROVED
OCT 19.199
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 28, 1994
#0023
#0037
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 28, 1994, at 5:30 P.M.,
with Council President Sherril Huff-Menees presiding. Council
members present were Morrie Dawkins, Bob Winters, John Law, David
Farr, A1 Colvin, Carlos Montgomery, and Richard Neville. Absent
was Council member Lon Overson. Also present were. City Attorney
Ian Sievers and City Clerk Kathleen McCluskey.
The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council
President Huff-Menees and Invocation given by Reverend John Maloney
of Abundant Life Foursquare Church.
President Huff-Menees announced Agenda Item 9A Public Hearing On
Cable Rate Approval For TCI Cablevision Of Washington has been
taken off the Agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Minutes of Meeting - September 7, 1994
#AB94-202
M/S/C/U(Neville/Colvin) to approve the Consent Agenda as presented.
CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS
Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required
by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified
as required by RCW 42.24.090, have been recorded on a listing that
had been made available to the Council.
M/S/C/U(Colvin/Neville) on September 28, 1994, the Council does
approve for payment those vouchers included and further described
as follows: 178597, 178598, 178595 through 178598, and 178622
through 178872 in the total amount of $581,033.19.
President Huff-Menees made the following announcements:
(1) City Council Study Session - Monday, October 3, 6:00 - 8:30
P.M., in the Council Conference Room.
(2) City Council Executive Session - Wednesday, October 5, 5:00 -
5:20 P.M., Topic - Labor Negotiations.
COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
Mr. Fare announced he will hold a District #6 Neighborhood meeting
on October 18, 7:00 P.M., at Room 206, Bremerton High School. The
subject of this meeting will revisit citizens concerns identified
at the meeting held at Mary Sump's residence, low income or reduced
bus fares for people living in West Bremerton to travel to East
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 2 of 28
Bremerton to take advantage of recreational opportunities. In order
to answer questions on the issues listed, the following individuals
will be in attendance: Mayor Horton, Dick Hayes, Kitsap Transit,
and a representative from the Parks and Recreation Department. The
meeting format will also allow for input and/or concerns from the
public. He has asked Mary Sump to assist him with this meeting and
expects a good turn out.
Mr. Law announced the next District #3 Neighborhood meeting will be
held October 18, 7:00 P.M., at the Senior Center. The program for
that meeting will be announced soon. He was pleased to announce
the former Commander of the USS Sacramento and USS Ranger - Walter
Davis has just become a Vice Admiral and will be commanding the
Navy's Space Program. He extended his congratulations to Vice
Admiral Davis and wished his family well.
Mr. Montgomery reported on Tuesday, September 27, he attended the.
Neighborhood Network Information meeting in East Bremerton. One of
the subjects discussed at that meeting was the "Manette Bridge".
The issue of the bridge was presented by'Randy Witt, City Engineer
and D. W. Moberg, Construction Engineer, Washington State
Department Of Transportation. He announced he will hold a District
#8 Neighborhood meeting in his home on October 6, 7:00 P.M.., (605
N. Cambrian Avenue/373-1300).
Mr. Dawkins noted the State Engineer stated the
rebuilding/relocation of the Manette Bridge would most likely be
coming up in approximately 10 years. The State encouraged those
using the bridge to become part of the first line of defense if
they want the bridge to stay in its present location. A lot of
environmental concerns are coming up over the next five years as
they approach funding of such a project, which is funded at the
State level. He encouraged people using the Manette Bridge to come
out to the public meetings that will be held on this issue.
Mr. Colvin reported he enjoyed the Council Retreat Study Session
held at Gold Mountain on Saturday, September 24. He thanked
Councilman Law for organizing the meeting with Mr. Green,
Washington State Ferry Systems. He felt the discussion with Mr.
Green will be fruitful. He noted a citizen recently inquired about
whether it is the adjacent property owner or the City who is
responsible for the clean up on sidewalks. He received a very
thorough reply from Leila Mill of the Attorney's Office on that
question, however, he could not recall if his earlier inquiry was
in writing or verbal. He did ask the City Attorney to review Mrs.
Mill's response and would now like the City Attorney to give his
opinion on the earlier response. Ian Seivers, City Attorney,
stated the response given by Mrs. Mills, and published in Mr.
Colvin's newsletter, is correct. The only problem with that
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 3 of 28
opinion was that it only addresses clean up of hazards and defects
on sidewalks and refers to that section of the Bremerton Municipal
Code (B.M.C.) There are other sections of the B.M.C. that also
address clean up in terns of litter on sidewalks and right-of-way
and vegetation encroaching on sidewalks from adjacent properties.
The important point is that the principal or rule that is discussed
in Mr. Colvin's newsletter gives the same for both of those types
of problems on sidewalks. Vegetation is fairly easily tracked to
the adjacent property and in the area of litter, it would have to
be shown that it was generated from the adjacent property prior to
the City making them responsible for clean up. Mr. Colvin asked
Mr. Sievers if he felt there was a need to put out any additional
information on that point? Mr. 8ievers stated no, but if Mr.
Colvin wished he could discuss the other two areas of owner and
City responsibility. Mr. Colvin thanked Andy Parypa for his
diligent research into this matter. He brought to Council's
attention the fact that the City of Port Angeles puts out a city-
wide newsletter that provides a better way to communicate with
their citizens. It was his hope that some day Bremerton could
provide their citizens with a newsletter.
District i will hold its next Neighborhood Coalition meeting on
November 10, 7:00 P.M., at the Sheridan Park and Recreation Center.
He intends to invite the newly elected candidates to meet the
citizens of District #1.
Mr. Winters stated it was good to be back and he was very happy
that the School Teachers' strike is over. He felt everyone should
applaud the Administration, teachers and the School board for
coming together and creating a solution to go back to work. He
also thanked the teachers and parents who artended the previous
City Council meeting to explain their position. He also enjoyed
the City Council Retreat and was pleased that there is a positive
attitude about downtown development. Lastly, he is looking forward
to working on his first City "budget".
Mrs. Huff-Menees stated she was also pleased that children are back
in school and wished them all well in terms of their working
relationship and mending the breach that occurred in that process.
She was pleased to announce District 7 will be holding a District
meeting on October 20 and the Agenda for that meeting is still
being finalized. In response to questions raised by Mr. Rickabaugh
at a previous Council meeting, a letter from Bill McKinney,
Forester, was read into the record addressing why the public is not
allowed to hunt, fish or do other recreation type activities on.
City's watershed land.
MAYOR'8 REPORT
Mayor Pro Tem Bob Winters read the following Proclamation:
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 4 of 28
(1) Proclaiming October 1, 1994, as COLONEL MICHAEL D. BROWNELL
DAY.
PUBLIC RECOGNITION
Andy ParVDa thanked Mr. Colvin for bringing up the discussion on
the responsible party for cleaning up sidewalks. He strongly
recommended better communication within the City. He felt Mrs.
Mills provided Mr. Colvin with an answer to the questioned asked of
her that included the word "grease", so she referenced B.M.C.
Chapter 11.10 - hazardous conditions on sidewalks. He agreed that
Mrs. Mills response was correct. The remaining part has nothing to
do with the Supreme Court rulings, which she also gave an opinion
response. However, for several days he has tried to get across to
Mr. Colvin that he misunderstood the District #1 newsletter article
and had several other people read it and they also felt the
abutting property owners did not have any responsiblity for
cleaning up sidewalks. Since the newsletter was distributed to
more than the constituents of District #1, he felt B.M.C. Chapter
6.28 should be published in the next edition. He quoted the
following from that B.M.C. Chapter: "the owner or occupant of the
abutting property must clean up the street and must not sweep it in
the gutter". B.M.C. Chapter 11.16 plainly states that any
overhanging limbs, plants or any parts thereof accumulated on the
street must be cleaned up by the abutting landowner. He believes
leaves are a portion thereof of trees and should be swept up by the
abutting property owner, if the tree is on private property.
Gordy Byrd asked if there was a City ordinance.requiring house
numbers be posted on residences so they can be visible to the
public and 911 emergency responses? Ian Sievers, City Attorney,
state he would have to review the B.M.C. to see if it was included.
Mr Byrd noted there have been instances where emergency responses
have had difficulty finding the correct address.
Ellzabeth Bus11 asked if she understood that the abutting property
owner has to clean up trash on sidewalks? And, if so, what about
what the wind blows down, such as leaves and such? Mr. Winters
responded that he personally sweeps the sidewalks in front of his
business prior to opening. He also picks up any litter he might
see on Pacific Avenue near his business and put it in the garbage
can.
Shannon Cook stated she was glad the teachers' strike was over.
She announced the Westside Baptist Church will be holding an Open
House on October 1, 9:45 A.M. She extended a "get well" wish to
her grandmother.
Mark Christianson, Seattle, asked the City to extend a thank you on
behalf of he and his family to Naval Command of Puget Sound for
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 5 of 28
their sensitivity this past summer and the many summers before in
its activities in regard to the berthing and laying of anchors of
ships when they have been unable to dock in Bremerton. In
particular, in regards to the contingency plans for their embarking
point at inner bay, the Supply Facility at Harbor Island and their
fueling depot at Everett, in keeping these and other Navy
properties zealously and as well unimproved that allow Indian
Tribes such as the'Duwammish and Snohomish to land on those shores
and pursue their traditional hunting grounds. He thanked the
Department Of Navy and Corps as well to continuing their policy in
the incarceration of fighting men at sea or failing all else
Leavenworth, Kansas rather than anywhere else as some officials
might suggest. He thanked the City Council for their courtesy,
which is their tradition and consideration for the regions,
communities and people.
Roy McInnis stated in response to Mr. Byrd's question about house
numbers being posted so they are visible to the public, he had
personal experience with such a problem and the City does have a
specific ordinance addressing that issue. After listening to
President Huff-Menees read the letter from the City's Forester
concerning the watershed and allowing hunting, he wasn't sure the
letter actually stated why hunting was not allowed. President
Huff-Menees reread a portion of the letter that specifically
addressed "no hunting" on watershed property. Mr. McInnis
acknowledged that the information was in the letter and he had just
not heard that specific point.
7A - BID AWARD RECOMMENDATION FOR WHEELCHAIR LIFT - SOUND ELEVATOR,
#AB94-203
Call for bids were prepared, advertised, distributed, and received
in accordance with accepted call for bid procedures for one (1)
wheelchair lift to accommodate disabled persons' access to
Municipal Court, City Attorney, and Public Defender services on the
second floor of City Hall. This accommodation is mandated by the
City's ADA compliance efforts. Funding for this project is by a
Grant that reimburses City after project completion.
Two bids were received and recorded as follows:
Allstate Elevator
Sound Elevator
$16,850.00
$12,755.00
Peggy Lessor, Risk Manager, explained that during the discussion on
this issue at the Fiscal and Budget Committee and Operations
Committee, she was asked to contact a user of the lift that would
be installed by the low bidder, if the award was granted to that
firm. She contacted Clairmont University in California where such
lifts are installed in their Library and several dormitories.
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 6 of 28
Their experience has been favorable although they wanted the City
to know that the lifts are rarely used to transport people, but
they are tested regularly and do work properly. As discussed in
the Committee meetings, the City does not expect its lift to be
used very much. Representatives of the University also wanted
Council to know that their discussion included the same discussion
Council heard about the Garaventer Lift and Carrier Lift. They
decided to use the Carrier Lift and do not regret that decision.
Gordy Byrd questioned what was meant by "Sound Elevator" and
whether or not it was voiced controlled? President Huff-Menees
explained Sound Elevator is a company name.
Dave Tout, Allstate Elevators, stated he was the other bidder and
has personal concerns about the type of elevator that is being
recommended. The basic differences between the two lifts has to do
with the cable and gears being enclosed on his product and it being
"exposed" on the Carrier brand. He views this exposed mechanism as
a problem and open to vandalism. He also pointed out the electric
motor on the Carrier lift is also exposed and felt that also
presented a safety issue. He also questioned the safety for
someone trying to open up and enter the Carrier lift from a
wheelchair. He acknowledged the fact that the installed lift will
probably not be used on a regular basis unless at some point the
City hires a disabled person who would work on the second floor of
City Hall. The subject lift will require an attendant and if
someone uses the lift on a more frequent basis, that could present
a problem.
Roy McInnis questioned if anyone on City staff was familiar enough
with the lifts to make a decision on whether or not this bid should
be accepted now? He did not want the City making a mistake by
acting on something that they were not sure was the best product
for the specific need. President Huff-Menees stated Mr. McInnis's
question was a valid concern and asked Mrs. Lessor to address the
investigation undertaken by the Public Works Department. Mrs.
Lessor explained staff has been reviewing the lifts for a number of
months and actually went out to bid a couple of times trying to
obtain the equipment that would be the most satisfactory for the
required use. Once they received the last set of bids, the Public
Works Department reviewed them. She and a representative from the
Public Works Department did go out and review the competing
product. It is their recommendation that the product offered by
Sound Elevator is more than adequate to meet the City's needs.
Mr. Law emphasized two people from the Public Works Department, who
he respects for their electronic and electrical expertise and good
common sense, participated in the Fiscal and Budget meeting where
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 7 of 28
this item was discussed. He felt comfortable with the
recommendation considering the input given during the Committee
discussion. He did question if Mr. Tout's lift required 220 or 110
power? Mr. Tout responded 220. Mr. Law noted to install Mr.
Tout's lift would require the additional cost of rewiring and the
lowest bidder's product only requires 110 volts. Mr. Tout stated
he did not believe it would cost that much more to run a 220 line
to the designated area. Mr. Law stated his only other observations
is that while we may have an individual come to work for the City
as a regular employee, he would expect they would have the
expertise to handle any available equipment. But, most importantly
this product will be used when an attendant is present. He urged
Council to accept the lowest bidder.
Mr. Neville asked Mrs. Lessor if she knew the length of service of
the lifts installed at Clairmont University? Mrs. Lessor stated
the lifts have been in place 2-3 years. Mr. Neville stated one of
the questions and concerns seem to be on the sensor and the Carrier
Lift proposal states they will provide a sensor on the seat at no
charge. He asked Mrs. Lessor if she will actively pursue the
sensor issue if the lowest bid is awarded and will the City opt for
a five year warranty? Mrs. Lessor stated yes she will pursue the
sensor issue and she had not checked on the cost of a 5-year
warranty. Once the approval to award the bid is given, she will
follow up on the warranty issue. Mr. Neville asked if Mrs. Lessor
read the warranties on both products and did she find any
substantial difference between the two? Mrs. Lesser stated she did
read the warranties and both met the specifications identified in
the bid documents. Mr. Neville asked if the collapsible seat, seat
belts and arm rests would be included as well as a platform
security lock, which was a standard feature on the Garaventer Lift?
Mrs. Lessor stated whoever is awarded the bid will be held to the
specifications within the bid. Mr. Neville asked if the Garaventer
model was used to base the elevator worthiness for the bids in the
technical specifications sent out? Mrs. Lessor explained when the
City went out for bid they used the specifications that the City
had in its possession for the Garaventer Lift. Staff was familiar
with that product and werelooking for a competitive product and
that was why the specs were drawn up as they were. They knew of a
product that would meet City needs and were trying to determine if
there was a competitor, and the City was successful in finding one.
Mr. Colvin stated he also heard the discussion during the Fiscal
and Budget Committee meeting, however, experience has shown that
something that is cheap is not always the best. He asked if there
would be an.auxiliary power pack in the unit in the event there was
a power outage? Mr. Tout explained neither lift has a battery
backup, however, that could be provided as an option. Mr. Neville
pointed out the specifications identify a manual wheel mechanism is
#1827
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 8 of 28
provided for use in the event of a power outage. Mr. Colvin asked
Mrs. Lessor if she had personally viewed the operation of the
Carrier Lift? Mrs. Lessor stated no, that was the main reason for
her contacting a user of the Carrier Lift product. There are no
Carrier Lift units installed in Washington where the City could
gain access... there is one installed in a "secret" Boeing
building. City staff members did look at the competitors product
and she had hoped that she would be "wowed" by their product, which
would make the decision easier, however, she was not and that made
the least expensive model more attractive. It was her feeling that
if the Carrier Lifts could survive a college dormitory use it could
survive City Hall. Mr. Colvin asked Mr. Tout if he had his product
in operation within the area. Mr. Tout stated yes, the City viewed
a lift installed at Keyport, which is a similar model to what they
proposed for the City. He.also has 10-20 such elevators installed
in the Seattle area. He noted the standard warranty on his product
and the Carrier Lift is 1-year. His firm offers a 5-year warranty
at no cost. Mr. Colvin asked if Mr. Tout's firmhad service people
within the area? Mr. Tout stated yes. Mr. Colvin asked if the
firm offering Carrier Lifts also had service people in the area?
Mrs. Lessor stated yes. Mr. Tout stated Sound Elevator is an
excellent company and the City will be given good service, however,
where his concerns come in is with the "Carrier" product. Mr.
Colvin asked Mr. Tout if he was aware the Carrier Lift had proved
deficient anywhere else? Mr. Tout stated he is aware there is one
installed at Boeing and he expects it runs as designed, however,
his concern centers on the safety features when the unit is not
being used. He is aware that the Carrier manufacturer will charge
for the optional 5-year warranty. His firm does not charge a fee
for a 5-year warrant if a maintenance agreement is included with
purchase of the lift.
Mr. Dawkins stated during the committee discussion he asked how
many times per year will the elevator be used. Mrs. Lessor stated
the estimate she gave at that time was at a maximum the lift would
be used three times per year, which they expect is a high estimate.
He acknowledged that the lift is something the City has needed for
a long time.
M/S/C/(Dawkins/Law) to award contract to provide a wheelchair lift
for City Hall as to specifications and low bid received in
compliance with specifications to Sound Elevator in the amount of
$12,755.00, plus sales tax.
Vote on motion:
Motion carried.
In Favor:
Abstain:
Neville, Farr, Law, Huff-Menees,
Montgomery, Dawkins, Winters
Colvin
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 9 of 28
7B - BREMERTON FERRY TERMINAL TO VICINITY OF ~ORST - CONTRACT
AMENDMENT NO. 3 WITH PARAMETRIX, INC., #AB94-204
The original contract between the City of Bremerton and Parametrix
was signed in October, 1990 to prepare a Draft and Final
Environmental Impact Statement, Design Report, Right-of-Way plans,
Plans and Specifications, and Contract Administration in the amount
of $2,274,050. Amendment No. 1, signed in May, 1990, added traffic
analysis work in the downtown area at an increased cost of $8,100.
Amendment No. 2 was signed in December, 1992, which added several
technical revisions and reduced the cost to the overall project by
$52,084, for a total project cost of $2,230,066.
Since execution of Amendment No. 2, several changes to regulations,
procedures, and technical interpretations have occurred that have
affected the analyses and reporting in several technical areas, as
well as overall management of the project. The attached contract
amendment details the changes to the scope of work to address these
issues and move forward with the project. The contract amendment
and proposed funding participation was discussed and approved by
the Project Executive Steering Committee at the meeting of
September 22, 1994 (meeting minutes attached).
The action before the City Council is approval of Contract
Amendment No. 3 to the Gorst Vicinity to Bremerton Ferry Terminal
Environmental and Engineering Professional Services Agreement in
the amount of $149,660 for a total contract amount of $2,379,326.
Randy Witt, City Engineer, directed Council's attention to the
Scope Of Work Revision Cost Summary. As mentioned above, several
regulatory changes have come about and affect how the City handles
transportation projects such as one the magnitude of the Gorst to
Bremerton project. One change required that all documents be
prepared in metric, which required the City to go back and change
every measurement in all documents.
The NEPA/404 process changed through a memorandum of understanding
between the Army Corps of Engineers and Federal Highway
Administration, by taking the Federal Highway Administration out of
the lead role and put the Corps Of Engineers in the lead role.
That change required the City to then work with the Corps to make
sure the process the City had gone through was adequate for them.
Last week a letter was received from the Corps stating the City's
process was acceptable and specified what they wanted to see in the
environmental document.
The Major Investment Analysis is a process that looks back to make
sure the planning process on these project involve a lot of
community and regulatory input. The City was very fortunate that
such involvement had been included, but the City must adjust the
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 10 of 28
E.I.S. (Environmental Impact
efforts.
Statement) to reflect
the City's
The following three items are not regulatory changes, but need
subtle "tweaking": SEC.106/Historic, Noise Study and Air Quality
evaluation and modeling.
.Lastly, the project has gone on longer because of the above and an
adjustment needs to be made to Project Administration.
Gordv Byrd asked if the Bremerton Ferry Terminal would be moved to
the vicinity of Gorst? Mr. Witt stated no, this is a highway
improvement project that starts at the railroad bridge just outside
of Gorst and goes all the way into the Bremerton Ferry Terminal.
Mr. Farr noted the documentation provided states the impact on non-
passage would be that changes required to complete the EIS, if not
funded, could not be completed and therefore the project would come
to a halt. Mr. Witt stated Mr. Farr was correct and they have gone
through a lot of effort to make sure that what is proposed,
particularly in the area of major investment analysis, how air
quality is being handled, changing measurement to metric, meets the
new requirements. Mr. Farr questioned if he understood correctly
that the proposed change order would be at no cost to the City?
Mr. Witt pointed out the City of Bremerton is responsible for
$37,500 of the total $150,000 cost, as is Kitsap County, the
Washington State Highway Department and Kitsap Transit. Mr. Farr
referenced a statement in the document that stated: "Gary Demich
suggested that the $150,000 of WSDOT funds earmarked for design be
used for this purpose. This would allow all four entities to
allocate their $37,500 in the 1995 budget cycle and to the project
design phase". Mr. Witt explained the Highway Department has
funding available to use by the end of their biennium. So, what is
being considered is to use WSDOT's $150,000 that is earmarked for
something that is not being done yet, and the four entities will
pay back their share to cover future needs.
Mr. Law asked if there were other City projects that would have to
meet the "metric" measurement requirement? Mr. Witt stated he
believed the other projects that need to have metric measurement
can be changed at no additional costs to the City.
Mr. Dawkins asked when this project gets underway what impact will
it have as far as traffic delays between Bremerton and Gorst? Mr.
Witt stated that issue could be discussed when the draft
Environmental Statement is brought out in late December/early
January. He believed it will be essential, under either
alternatives, to keep the existing traffic lanes open to the extent
possible and reduce lanes in the non-peak direction. One of the
#2616
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 11 of 28
traffic flow alternatives, especially in the Gorst area, is going
up over the hill (Sherman Heights), which he believes will have
less construction impacts. Mr. Dawkins asked if one-way streets in
Bremerton be part of that discussion? Mr. Witt stated yes, the
Environmental document breaks the project into three phases and two
that address one-way streets have the traffic on Burwell on a four
lane street or creating a one-way couplet.
Mr. Montgomery asked when will the next public meeting be held on
this project? Mr. Witt stated the next public meeting is scheduled
for October 19, 5:30 P.M. at Kitsap Transit facilities. The
discussion at that meeting will be on an isolated issue associated
with the park at the intersection of Hwy. 3 and 304.
Mr. Winters stated during the committee discussion on this issue it
was mentioned that there might be some confusion over the Callow
CSO project taking place along with this project. He questioned
the timing of the Callow Avenue CSO Project and this project? Mr.
Witt explained the Callow Avenue CSO project involves constructing
a large diameter pipe and outfall in the area of this project and
the goal is to get that built before the Gorst to Bremerton project
happens. He emphasized the most pressing issue right now is the
Naval expansion area and how that integrates with the project, so
the first construction on Callow will take place summer of 1995.
Mr. Neville questioned if this was the first Major Metropolitan
Investment Study taking place within the State? Mr. Wltt stated he
was not sure if this was the first, but it isdefinitely one of
several being done. The City had already completed a lot of the
requirements through the process with the Executive Steering
Committee outreaching to the community, which complied with the
Investment Analysis work. Some other major projects within the
State have to go backwards and do the things that the City has
already done. Mr. Neville asked if that was one of the primary
reasons why the project has taken 18 months longer than first
estimated. Mr. Witt stated that has been the hold up for the last
year along with the Corps Of Engineering issues and getting them on
board. Mr. Neville stated it was his understanding that it is
driven by public involvement.
M/S/C/U(Colvin/Winters) to authorize and direct the Mayor to
execute the attached Contract Amendment No. 3 to the Vicinity Gorst
to Bremerton Ferry Terminal Environmental and Engineering,
Professional Services Agreement with Parametrix in the amount of
$149,660.
7C - CALLOW AVENUE BASIN CSOREDUCTION PROJECT ENGINEERING REPORT -
APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH KCM, INC., FOR
VALUE ENGINEERING SERVICES, #AB94-205
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 12 of 28
A professional services agreement has been negotiated with KCM,
Inc. to provide a value engineering analysis of the Callow Avenue
Basin CSO Reduction Project Engineering Report and CSO Reduction
Plan. The value engineering analysis of the Engineering Report and
Reduction Plan will review, evaluate, and critique the assumptions,
data, methods, and proposed actions in the reports. The value
engineering will provide a report with conclusions and
recommendations. KCM, Inc. was selected from four firms which
submitted proposals and statements of qualifications for this
project. They are qualified to' perform the value engineering
analysis. The amount of the professional services agreement is
$36,370. The action before the City Council is approval of the
agreement.
Randy Witt, City Engineer, stated this is the City's second Value
Engineering Study within one year. It has been determined that
this is a valuable process and urged Council's approval.
Gordy Byrd asked if a survey of people will be taken of those
traveling on Callow Avenue? Mr. Witt explained the Callow Avenue
CSO project is a combined sewer overflow reduction project and what
is proposed is to separate sewers and stormwater so that the
overflows will be reduced to one per year. The Value Engineering
Study provides an opportunity to review the reports that have been
generated as a result of the studies on how to best and most cost
effectively reduce the combined sewer overflows and critique them
for ways to improve them and make suggestions for improvement.
Mr. Neville questioned the percentage of savings brought about by
a Value Engineering Study on a project? Mr. Witt stated most
statistics show a 20% savings, which is often in the design phase.
He reminded everyone that this proposal is at the "report" stage.
He believes it will be beneficial to the City to look at the report
prior to launching into a design. Mr. Neville stated the
supporting documentation states that two City officials will be
present at the Value Engineering Study. He questioned if those
individuals have been chosen? Mr. Witt stated since this project
is addressing the Callow Avenue Basin specifically, the Inspector
for the project will participate along with the City's Lead Foreman
from maintenance.
Mr. Farr asked if KCM has someone on staff that is certified as a
Value Engineer? Mr. Witt stated yes, Don Stafford is the person
the City has selected as a certified Value Engineer and he has
experience teaching Value Engineering courses and is well respected
in that field. The City has been very happy with Mr. Stafford's
work and leadership on the Wastewater Treatment Plan Odor Control
project's Value Engineering Study~
#3005
TAPE #1236
City.Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 13 of 28
M/S/C/U(Farr/Winters) to authorize and direct the Mayor to execute
the attached professional services agreement with KCM, Inc. in the
amount of $36,370, to provide Value Engineering Services on the
Callow Avenue Basin CSO Reduction Project Engineering Report and
the CSO Reduction Plan.
7D - KITSAP LAKE ROAD NW SEWER EXTENSION ULID - CONSTRUCTION BIDS,
#AB94-206
Bids for construction of the Kitsap Lake Road NW Sewer Extension
ULID Project were open on July 25, 1994. The following four bids
were received for this project:
Active Construction
King Construction
Paps & Sons
Stan Palmer Construction
$690,393.16
$663,779.40
$737,296.05
$527,982.02
The engineer's estimate for this project was $578,302.00. The low
bidder, Stan Palmer Construction, claimed a bid error.
Documentation supporting the bid error was submitted by Stan Palmer
Construction and reviewed by engineering staff and the City
Attorney. The City Attorney concluded that the low bidder should-
be allowed to rescind his bid as requested. The second low bid,
from King Construction, results in an approximate ULID assessment
of $6,200. The estimated per lot assessment at the time the ULID
was formed, was $4,200. All members of the ULID were invited to a
meeting held on August 23, 1994 to discuss the bid results. One-
third of the ULID parcels were represented at the meeting. Half of
those attending the meeting supported re-bidding the project after
a review was conducted to determine possible cost savings to the
project. The other half would like the ULID dissolved. Based on
the corrected bid of Stan Palmer Construction, a potential cost
savings of approximately $700 per lot is possible by re-bidding the
project. This cost savings cannot be guaranteed. Staff would
review this project thoroughly and re-bid in January 1995 when the
bidding climate is best.
Randy Witt, City Engineer, stated the summary statement covered the
issue and his recommendation is to re-bid the project in January of
1995.
Public comment - none.
Mr. Neville questioned if he understood correction that by going
back and redoing this one more time it will take approximately 100
man hours to do the reviewing and rebidding of the project? Mr.
Witt stated Mr. Neville is correct and it is his intent to review
the project. The previous bidders were asked what they thought
could be done differently to lower the bid and City staff came up
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 14 of 28
with some ideas that need following up. In addition, there is a
certain amount of time to preparing the documents for bidding. Mr.
Neville asked if that amount of time equated to $2,650.00 in order
to save the Kitsap Lake residents $700.00? The original cost
estimation was $4,200 per resident and possibly going up to $5,500
per assessed value, however, the City's share also keeps going up
Mr. Witt explained the City's share was not increasing since that
amount is limited to $300,000 for the entire project.
Mr. Law raised the point that at one meeting 1/2 of the residents
within the ULID District were against the higher assessment against
their properties. He questioned what happens if the assessment is
set at $5,500 per person whereas it was initially projected at
$4,200? And, will it automatically go into effect if Council votes
yes or do the people have recourse after they once signed the
petition? Mr. Witt stated when the new bids are received he
intends to take them to the residents involved in the ULID and
share with them what the bid and what the potential assessment fee.
The next step will be to bring the recommended bid to Council and
at that point he expected people to share their opinion on the
assessment amount. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated as Mr. Witt
stated, the amount is not exact until the contract is closed out,
but the right to defeat the ULID has passed and the property owners
will be assessed on the benefit to the properties based on the
final assessment roll at the end of the project. The residents
involved do not have the power to defeat with a protest at this
point.
Mr. Winters emphasized the low bidder did have a legitimate reason
for backing out of the bid and that'is why it is going back out for
rebidding. He feels strongly that rebidding the project is to the
City's advantage as well as the taxpayers to possibly save money.
Mr. Dawkins posed a scenario that the new bids came back even
higher...he questioned what would happen to Kitsap Lake if this
project is not completed? Mr. Witt stated he understands that the
Health District is concerned about septic fields in that area and
he could not speak to what the Health District might do. He
believes the people living in that area feel sewers are important
and that is the risk when rejecting bids. Rebidding is somewhat of
a risk, however, he feels rebidding in January will bring in lower
bids, but there is no guarantee.
Mr. Colvin questioned the amount of assessment to each property
owner? Mr. Witt stated if the second lowest bid was accepted, the
estimated assessment would be $6,200 per lot. Mr. Dawkins asked if
that amount is paid out over a period of time? Mr. Witt stated
yes, the City Treasurer has the discretion as to how the funds are
paid back to the City.
TAPE #1236
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 15 of 28
TAPE #1237
Mr. Sievers explained the City Council sets the pay back through an
Ordinance and it can be as short as five years if the amount is not
that high or 10 years if the amount is higher. Mr. Colvim
questioned the usual time frame for repayment of assessments? Mr.
Witt stated the City Treasurer likes to keep the pay back in the
3-8 year range, which may be subject to what the community would
like. Mr. Law added he believed it would depend on bond situation
at the time.
#0032
M/S/C/U(Winters/Colvin) to reject all bids for the KitsapLake Road
NWSewer Extension Project and authorize release of Contractors bid
bonds.
8A - RESOLUTION NO. 2481, L.I.D. #326 4TH STREET, SET PUBLIC
HEARING DATE FOR FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL, #AB94-207
At the City Council meeting on May 26, 1993, Ordinance No. 4419 was
passed establishing L.I.D. #326 for 4th Street from Washington to
Pacific. The project has been completed and the final assessment
roll has been prepared. The action before the City Council is a
resolution setting October 19, 1994 as the hearing on the final
assessment roll.
Randy Witt, City Engineer, stated the L.I.D. project is complete
and the next step is to set a hearing date to set the assessment
roll so the assessments can be made to the property owners.
Gordy Byrd requested the definition of a L.I.D. and a U.L.I.D..
Mr. Witt explained a L.I.D. is a Local Improvement District and the
property owners pay their fair share of the cost. A U.L.I.D. is a
Utility Local Improvement District and Utility Bonds may be used
for financing.
#0116
M/S/C/U(Law/Farr) to adopt Resolution No. 2481, setting October 19,
1994 as the hearing on the final assessment roll for L.I.D. #326.
9B - PUBLIC HEARING ON COMPREHENSIVE PLANAMENDMENTWERNER ROAD/IDA
STREET LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO INDUSTRIAL/BUSIMESS PARK,
RESOLUTION NO. 2482, #AB94-209
A. Through the Comprehensive Plan, the City assigns general land-
use planning designations to all lands within the City and to
fringe areas outside the City. Specific land-uses are
permitted by zoning which implements the Comprehensive Plan..
B. The City cannot provide sewer/water utility service to lands
outside the City unless these lands are in compliance with the
City's Comprehensive Land-Use Plan.
C. The City Council acts on recommendations received by the
Planning Commission.
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 16 of 28
Don Pratt, Director Of Community Development, explained the
decision before Council is whether or not to amend the City's
Comprehensive Plan Use Plan Map. Preliminarily, the decision is a
legislative policy action that would be undertaken by Resolution
and is different from a Zoning Map amendment, which is done in a
quasi-jurisdictional manner and accomplished by Ordinance.
The City's Land Use Plan Map is a policy document that generally
establishes land uses in the City and is not a specific parcel map.
The Comprehensive Plan Map looks at neighborhoods not'specific
parcels. Because it looks at neighborhoods and not specific
parcels, the Comprehensive Plan Map extends outside the City
boundaries because some neighborhoods cover both in and outside the
City. The Comprehensive Plan Map also covers area that are outside
the City to some distance, but are likely to be incorporated into
the City in the future and our plans make sense as we show how that
progression would occur. The item before Council at this time is
for a piece of property that lies outside the City and in the
County. A key item in this discussion is that the City's Utility
Ordinance adopted several years ago, requires that City sewer and
water services can only be delivered to projects that are in
conformance with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy or the
Comprehensive Plan Map. This ordinance reflects the fact that some
County projects that will need City sewer and water may be
incompatible with the City's Comprehensive Plan Map. The adoption
of this ordinance was probably brought about because of some
projects along Pine Road where there were multiple-family projects
being introduced in single family neighborhoods that were across
the street from a multi-family project.
The subject project covers the northwest quadrant of the
intersection of Werner Road and Ida and is covered by both the City
Comprehensive Plan and the County Comprehensive Plan Map. There is
a project proposed for the site that needs City sewer and water.
In order for the City to provide water and sewer services, the
Comprehensive Plan Map must reflect light manufacturing or
industrial use. Currently, the Comprehensive Plan Map shows low or
moderate density residential (15-30 units per acre) and reflects
the fact that the County has developed a project called Knollwood
in the area, which is a high density residential project. The
County's Comprehensive Plan allows urban and light manufacturing in
many areas of th~ County provided a Planned Unit Development is
used, and generally speaking the County's Comprehensive Plan Map,
at the time we adopted the City's, showed a residential designation
on that site. Subsequent to the City's adoption of the
Comprehensive Plan Map, the County approved and amended their
Comprehensive Plan to allow light manufacturing and industrial and
the City did not pick up that change. In order to reflect the
proposed use, the City would need to show Industrial or Business
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 17 of 28
Park, which is the City's plan designation for that area.
The following criteria for Comprehensive Plan map amendments must
be met:
(1) Adoption of the amendment will maintain consistency between the
different Plan elements, with the Plan map, and conformance between
the Plan Map and its implementing techniques. ( Mr. Pratt stated
generally speaking, it must make sense relative to all the other
pieces of the comprehensive Plan.)
(2) Adoption of the amendment will promote the overall goals and
policies of the plan and the interests of the entire community.
(Mr. Pratt stated the City's document is approximately 125 pages
stating all of those goals and policies.)
(3) The potential effect of the amendment of the natural, economic
and social environment of the City will be beneficial. (Mr. Pratt
stated all of those words are relatively soft and reflect the fact
that this is a policy decision and not a specific parcel decision.)
The Planning Commission heard this project on August 16, and the
draft minutes of that meeting are included in the Agenda
documentation. Since the Agenda Bill was submitted, the minutes
were adopted as presented by the Planning Commission. The
conclusions of the Planning Commission that encouraged them to
recommend approval of this amendment to Council are as follows:
(1) The North East of Werner Road from Ida Street west to the City
Limits is an area with many existing industrial/business park uses.
(2) The City's Plan within the City on the east end and west end of
Werner Road is Industrial/Business Park.
(3) The County has approved a Light Manufacturing use and applied
conditions that provide a development that is beneficial to the
natural environment including the economic and social elements of
the community.
(4) The proposal is consistent with many City of Bremerton plan
elements for land use, industrial development and the overview
element for economic diversification goals, policies and
objectives.
(5) The City's Plan Map requires amendment to bring implementing
techniques 'into conformance and to provide for the extension of
sewer services.
(6) The applicant has agreed to City conditions and the extension
of utilities is consistent with City Community Services Goals and
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 18 of 28
Policies.
(7) Two different plan amendments proposals were reviewed. The
proposal that would be most consistent with City policies would
provide for Industrial/Business Park use along the north side of
Werner Road from Ida Street west to the City Limits.
The Planning Commission's recommendation is that Council adopt
Resolution #2482. Mr. Pratt pointed out there is an alternative
motion, which would be to adopt the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
for the site only.
Gordy Byrd asked if the proposal was approved, would it mean all
the houses would be taken out and business built in their place?
Mr. Pratt explained the property covered by the amendment would
encourage the development of businesses. It would not "kick"
anyone out of there residences, however, someone would have to
offer to purchase them and the owner would have to agree to sell
them and then someone would build something on the site. The City
would not actually do anything on the site, but would allow
industrial uses if someone else wanted to develop the site.
John G~endem, Stanwood, stated he was somewhat confused as to the
location of the sewer in the subject area and who will be assessed
to cover cost of construction. Mr. Pratt explained there is no
sewer between the site and Werner Road and the exact location of
the sewer line has not yet been established. It is proposed that
either the City or the developer will build a sewer line along
Werner Road. As of this date, there has been no proposal to
develop a Local' Improvement District (LID) that would tax or
assess property owners along that route nor can it be proposed
without a public hearing or implemented without two thirds of the
property owners agreeing. Mr. ~endem asked how could sewers be
hooked up to the subject area without having sewer assessments?
Mr. Pratt stated someone would have to build the sewer. There have
been preliminary discussions that the developer and perhaps the
City would pay for the sewer line themselves. He displayed a
vicinity map of the subject area and stated for clarification that
the recommendation from the Planning Commission is to change the
designation on the area shown in "red" on the map, which would
exclude four parcels. Mr. Dawkins questioned if there were any
buildings currently in the "red" designated area? Mr. Pratt stated
yes, a mix of houses and businesses.
Ray McClure, 405 Ida Street, asked if the sewer is built will it
raise his taxes and if the proposed plant will be working on
nuclear projects, will there be nuclear materials on site? Mr.
Pratt stated whether or not taxes are raised on a piece of property
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 19 of 28
is not something he could speak to directly, but it is likely that
the Industrial designation and the potential for industrial
development in that neighborhood will represent a higher priced
property than residential property. And, because property taxes
are based on market values, the adjoining property owners will
probably find their taxes increased if their land can be sold for
industrial uses. He did not want to mislead anyone, but that is
generally what happens. That would also mean that a property
owner's land is worth more if they want to sell it. Secondly, what
the City Council is considering at this time is what the potential
uses could be. The light industrial and business park uses include
manufacturing, research and development and those types of
activities that could occur in the area designated in "red" and
receive sewer service. There is a specific project for one site
located on the corner and that project is a Westinghouse Defense
Contractor. He does not know whether or not nuclear materials would
be present on the site, however, Westinghouse would not be allowed
to operate with nuclear materials unless they met the standards of
the Department Of Defense and State Environmental Standards.
Kitsap County will be issuing permits for any facility constructed
for Westinghouse.
Bill SchouruD, developer- 6185 Tracyton Blvd., stated Westinghouse
Electric Corporation that will be locating on the subject site is
not operating in the nuclear field, but rather an electronics field
and their specialty is in intelligence ,gathering devices, both
above and below water. They do defense work and plan on expanding
into the private field of helping people find things under the sea.
Westinghouse will have a TOP SECRET classification for the site and
there have been newspaper articles about a ship at Bangor that is
attached to Westinghouse, however, he has no personal knowledge
that is a fact. In pursuing this development, the Bremerton/Kitsap
County Health District has been dealt with and the lease agreements
about hazardous waste claim very little hazardous waste material
would be present. The material they have that is of any hazardous
use is from cleaning electrodes and electronic equipment.
Duane Motberg asked why four parcels (shown shaded in "green") are
excluded from this proposal? Mr. Pratt stated he did not know. He
was not present at the Planning Commission meeting and the minutes
adopted by the Commission do not reflect why they were excluded or
why they were presented that way. President Huff-Menees stated
she would follow up with a response to Mr. Morberg's question if he
would provide his address.
Elizabeth Banks, owner of two parcels that were not included in the
subject area, questioned why she has not been approached even once
about being included in the subject area. She has tried to obtain
information about the proposed project and when she talked with
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 20 of 28
Larry Hall, Mr. Schourup's Attorney, she was highly insulted when
he offered her a price that was completely unacceptable. She did
not like the idea of someone taking her money and not including her
in the subject area. She also called and found out Westinghouse
reports to Sunnyvale, California. She made a call to that area,
however, as of this date she had not had a response.
She also called the Marine Division of Westinghouse in Baltimore,
Maryland, but that whole division has been terminated. She did not
like the fact that she has not been treated humanly, decently, or
with any respect. Mr. Winters asked Mrs. Banks if she ever noticed
any Public Notices posted on a telephone pole near the subject
site? Ms. Banks stated yes she did. Mr. Winters stated it was his
· understanding that a public notice is sent out announcing a public
hearing at Planning Commission meetings. Ms. Banks stated she had
attended previous Planning Commission meetings, however, she
believed issues were a "done deal" before the hearing is held and
her attending those meetings to give input are a waste of her time.
Unidentified property owner stated he would back up Ms. Banks
comments in that they were not notified prior to the Planning
Commission meeting and he only learnedabout the project last week.
He was also treated in the same manner by Mr. Hall as Mrs. Baker
described. He has attended various Planning Commission hearings,
however, no one called him or sent him notice on the Westinghouse
proposal and he is located directly across the street from the
site. Mr. Winters asked Mr. Pratt to explain the notification
process used by his department. Mr. Colvin asked Mr. Pratt if the
City had the responsiblity to notify the surrounding property
owners? Mr. Pratt stated the City does give notice, but are not
legally obliged to give notice. Notice was given on this project
through posting the property along with a mailing to residents
within 300 feet of the site. Because this is a policy and the size
of area varies, the 300 foot mailing may have been around the
applicant site on the corner and not the full neighborhood site.
Also, it is not unusual that the mailing may go to old incorrect
addresses or banks that may be a co-owner on a parcel. He
apologized to those who didn't receive letters of notification.
There have been numerous public hearing about this site that have
occurred in the Kitsap County process and he was not knowledgeable
of their notification process. Mr. Colvin questioned if any
request to change zoning of the subject area is under Kitsap
County's jurisdiction? Mr. Pratt stated yes. Mr. Colvin again
asked why the four parcels were excluded from the area designated
in "red"? Mr. Pratt again stated he did not know. Mr. Colvin
questioned if the sewer line is constructed will property values go
up? Mr. Pratt stated it was reasonable to expect they would go up.
Mr. Colvin stated he felt such was unfair. and would possibly force
some long time homeowners out of their homes.
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 21 of 28
Mr. McClure stated at the Planning Commission meeting he indicated
he was neither for nor against the Westinghouse project. At that
time, he asked that his property be excluded from the designated
"red" area.
Tom Ponischil, 5418 31st Avenue S., Seattle, WA 98108, asked if the
proposal was set as that shown in the "red" area or could it be
modified? Mr. Pratt stated the proposal can be modified by the
City Council. Mr. Ponischil proposed that the four parcels that
were excluded be included in the Industrial/Business Park zoning
designation so their properties have a better value, but possibly
freeze them to a residential tax as opposed to a commercial tax.
Duane Motberg stated he would like to see the three parcels
previously excluded be included, or at least be asked to be
included. He noted that Mr. McClure, who owns one of the excluded
parcels, did ask the Planning Commission to be excluded. He did
not think it was fair to not include a property adjacent to an
industrial designated site or even be asked whether or not they
want to be included. Mr. Pratt stated whether or not someone's
property is included in the "red" shaded area does not have a
direct bearing on whether property values will be increased by the
Assessor or that taxes will be increased. When viewing properties,
the Tax Assessor looks around at surrounding uses and asks
themselves whether or not that property can be developed in a
similar manner. If the answer is yes, regardless of whether that
site is in or out of the "red" shaded area, the value will
probably reflect what is next door. It is'not a science and there
is no direct link between the Comprehensive Plan designation or
zoning and taxation today in Washington State. We are all guessing
that property values will go up or down, but there is no direct
linkage that he or anyone else could assure the surrounding
property owners will happen.
Debra Chard stated she became aware of the Public Notice announcing
this hearing when she and her family were taking a drive in the
vicinity of the subject site one day. At that time, the subject
site was a beautiful piece of property, but one week later it was
totally clear cut. This happened prior to the issue coming before
the City and construction had already been started. Westinghouse
has been under discussion for two years behind the public's back
and all of a sudden it is driven out into the County so that one
day in the future it can be annexed into the City. She believes
the citizens of Bremerton are going to have to fund the cost of the
sewer services to the site and she does not feel that is fair. She
felt the citizens had already funded to much of the City's problems
and she will continue saying "we can't afford it any more", and she
will speak out on any issue where the City is fronting the cost.
She emphasized no one approached the public about this issue. Once
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 22 of 28
Westinghouse is located on the site, they will own 76% of the area,
which allows them to be annexed into the City without having to ask
anyone else within the designated area. It upset her that when
Westinghouse was looking at the possibility of using the Penneys
Building for their location, supposedly Don Pratt was responsible
for insisting that small retail shops be provided in the front of
a high national security company that would bring in 6 million
dollars of revenue into the downtown area. She emphasized the
importance of bringing such businesses downtown and not encouraging
them to locate out in the County. She wanted to alert the
residents that this is a scam and the citizens of Bremerton will
end up paying for it.
Mr. McClure questioned the amount of parking on site for 80-200
employees? Mr. Pratt explained Kitsap County is processing the
building permit for this project. He has reviewed a parking plan
that indicates there are 90 parking spaces plus two truck loading
slots.
John Gjendem pointed out another property in the general vicinity
that was zoned industrial and not included in the "red" 'shaded
area. He also pointed out a nearby warehouse that was recently
opened and he did not know what sewer that facility was hookup to.
He noted United Van Lines and Sears are located in that general
area and questioned what sewer were they hooked into?
Mr. Schourup gave a brief history of the site: the property was
rezoned Light Manufacturing around 1982 and was zoned for mini-
warehouses 65,000 sg. ft. in size. In 1990 he came on the scene
with the subject site and proposed a down zone and amended PUD to
38,500 ft.. He received approval after a couple of years and
several hearings. He currently has several properties in the
County and City that have building permits because when people come
to town they usually don't plan very far ahead and expect to find
a lot of empty buildings. He owns several warehouses in Bremerton
and finding available space is very tight. Westinghouse came to
him because he had a free standing building that was all approved,
and it was a fluke that he happened to design a building that was
38,500 feet, which fit their needs. The only building that is
available that could park the amount of people in the Westinghouse
project would be potentially the Pennys Building, however, they
could not get approval from the Defense Department for that
building to meet the secrecy requirements. Westinghouse actually
came to him through Earl Smith, Director of the Economic
Development Council. He believes that the Westinghouse facility
will be primarily for government contracting, however, about 25% of
their work is in the private sector. He emphasized this project
did not just happen over night and in order to get the down zone
approved, he needed a Water and sewer availability letter, which he
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 23 of 28
received from Bill Duffy, former Utilities Director for the City,
regarding this project. Mr. Pratt brought it to his attention that
when you have utilities you like to have the Comprehensive Plan of
the City meet the zoning of the County property, which brought them
to the point of applying for the Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Charles Cash-stated he has owned property at the corner of Werner
and Ida for over 10 years and the County and City have sent him
numerous notifications that this site has been approved for mini-
warehousing as well as other activities going on within that
specific area.
Earl Smith, President of the Economic Development Council of Kitsap
County, stated he has been associated with this project since the
beginning. This type of project is exactly the kind of project
needed to diversify from the Department of Defense. It turns out
that Westinghouse is looking at bringing some of their corporate
people here also. He thanked Mayor Horton for taking a pro-active
leadership role in getting the project to the point where it is
now. He has no doubt that this meets everything needed for the
City's Comprehensive Plan and it is the kind of marketing needed to
draw in industrial and commercial space within the City because a
person is coming in that has national recognition and will help
create the living wage jobs we need to create. He emphasized it
was stated earlier that the City and/or developer would pay for the
sewer and that the people living along the road will not have to
pay the cost. From his previous experience with the U.S. Navy, he
feels strongly that there will be no nuclear waste within the
Westinghouse facility. There is no doubt in his mind that the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will clear up any issues
relating to hazardous waste. He suggested that the City ask that
the issue of nuclear materials/hazardous waste be specifically
addressed in the EIS.
Mr. Colvln stated the City needs this type of industry, however,
the individuals in the audience who spoke. on this issue are
concerned about the possibility of being forced to move out of
their homes and relocated and having to pay for the City's sewer.
Mr. Smith explained when an Economic Evaluation is done in the EIS,
the people that live there will be looked at from what the economic
impact on them will be and if there is an economic impact
Westinghouse will have to pay for it. He felt it was up to the
Council to insure that the economic impact they come up with what
meets the needs of the people. Mr. Colvin pointed out the subject
site is actually in the County and the City cannot be blamed for
locating the facility on that site. He questioned when did Mr.
Duffy agree to provide sewer services? Mr. 8chourup commented that
happened in 1992.
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 24 of 28
Spencer Homing, former City Councilman for District #8, stated
even though he is a developer, he has no financial interest in this
project other than he is present because he feels this is
absolutely imperative and positive for Bremerton and Kitsap County.
The idea of locating the project in the Pennys Building is history
and if this proposal doesn't pass, the project will probably end up
at Bangor and the City/County would not benefit from the property
taxes. Westinghouse wants to locate on the site and we want them
there. An important point is talking about values - when values
are determined if your home is "x" number of dollars and the land
isa certain dollar figure also it is the bottom line (total) that
you are taxed on. Just the very change to "commercial" as a
property designation only may bring about a less tax value than if
a residential structure was on the site. However, in the long run
the value is certainly there and it will go up and the sale would
be consummated at a much higher value. No one would be taxed out
of their home unless they had a very low value home and the
commercial property would be worth a great deal more. This is as
positive as it looks and latecomers hooking up to the sewer line
will share in the cost of the sewer, not the rate payers. He
emphasized the business aspect provides for high paying jobs for
high value people, who will have money to spend in our community.
When the site is annexed into the City, the City will receive
offsetting property tax values. If you would drive up Werner Road
today, you would know this is the right thing to do because it is
the direction it is going...no longer single family homes and those
still there will be rewarded in the future. Having sat on the City
Council for so many years, one thing that he'noticed did happen was
occasionally Council let little glitches (things they were not sure
about) make the decision either negative or even worse than that
delayed a week or two. He urged Council to not let that happen,
this decision must be made at this time. The lender is not willing
to standby, so a decision must belmade now. He stressed there are
community ramifications - the City is working with the County and
they will benefit as well. Mr. Colvin thanked Mr. Horning for his
positive remarks and felt the people now had a better understanding
of the issue. He doubted there was anyone who opposes such a
project coming near the City. He did ascertain that another
concern of the people, who own the four excluded parcels, is will
they have to pay latecomer fees and sewage rates. Mr. Homing
explained that if they choose to hook up to the City's service they
will pay City sewer rates and hook up fees. And, he perceives that
those currently excluded from the "red" shaded area would like to
be include.
Ms. Banks identified a parcel of land that belongs to her nieces
and nephews, but they don't know anything about what is being
proposed.
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 25 of 28
Mr. Law questioned for clarification if he is correct in that the
County zoned the subject area commercial many years ago and the
City is not involved in changing the zoning? Mr. Pratt stated Mr.
Law is correct, there were several zoning action on the specific
parcel at the corner of Werner and Ida that allowed commercial uses
to be developed there and the City is playing catch up with County
land uses. Mr. Law stated he believed this gets lost in
translation - the City is not changing the zoning and all the
Council is doing is concurring the zoning designation that has been
set by the County.
Mr. Dawkins asked to have the new Pendergast Regional Park area
pointed out on the map. He emphasized when all of the ball and
soccer fields open up at the Pendergast Regional Park traffic will
be greatly impacted both day and evening hours and the lighted
fields will also impact the surrounding area.
Mr. Neville stated his understanding of this proposal is that
Council is being asked to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Kitsap County already designated the area as Light Manufacturing
and the City's plan west of Werner Road is already designated as
Industrial/Business Park and the City's Land Use Elements Land Use
categories stated: "that the Industrial/Business Park area
classification include lands that are suitable for a variety of
industrial and/or office land uses. Lands considered for future
industrial development or under developed land along major
arterials and can be easily linked to .the City's water and
sanitation systems". The proposal is consistent with many of the
City's plan elements for plan use already and the overview elements
for economic diversification goals, policies and objectives; and
applicant has already agreed to the City's conditions for the
upgrading of utilities. He sees nothing against the proposal and
that it is in complete agreement with the long term Comprehensive
Plan of Bremerton.
Mr. Farr stated he is reminded that in the past the City has been
accused of being short sighted and Council actions reflect that and
has suffered because of it. He felt a "no" vote on this proposal
would definitely be short. sighted and a classic example of
"shooting ourselves in our foot". Even if the property were to
remain in the County, just the economic impact of bringing in that
many jobs adjacent to the City and the tax revenue that would be
generated from them shopping in Bremerton would have a positive
impact. To decide anything other than approval would be
ridiculous. The only question he has is whether or not the property
owners in the shaded. "green" area want to be included in the
change to the Comprehensive Plan Map and would it be difficult to
added them into the proposal? Mr. Pratt stated Council has a range
of options before them...they can approve as small an area as the
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 26 of 28
site where the Westinghouse facility will be located or as large an
area as to include the whole block that would include those parcels
currently in the "green" shaded area, or anything in between. The
staff report and environmental reviews covered those ranges. He
noted the City is currently developing a new Comprehensive Plan to
meet the Growth Management Act and will be concluded and hopefully
adopted by the end of the year. If Council does not take such
action at this hearing, they could take into consideration that
area and make subsequent changes prior to the next adoption, if
there is lack of clear agreement at this time.
Mr. Colvin stated he felt that the people who owned the four
excluded parcels from the subject area did not get the
consideration for proper notification that they deserved. He is
fully in support of the proposed development of the subject area.
Mr. Winters stated he was shocked and curious why the four parcels
were excluded. He agreed that this is an "approval" issue and
greatly needed. He hoped that in the future there could be better
communication with the public on land use issues that affect them.
He agreed with Mr. Dawkins that the subject area will be "lite up"
once the Pendergast Regional Park project is completed and in
operation.
Mr. Montgomery stated one of the things Mr. Smith brought out is
that Kitsap County and the City of Bremerton are very shy of
industrial areas. The Werner Road corridor has been included in
many different discussions as having industrial value and with all
the arterial roads, power, lights, sewers, etc., it is ideal to
develop the whole area as industrial. He sees this proposal as a
win-win situation and the City should not turn their backs on it.
President Huff-Menees stated she concurred with all the comments
made during this presentation and believes this meets the criteria
as the Planning Commission found for amendment of the Comprehensive
Plan and should be approved.
Mr. Farr asked if Mr. Pratt had an estimated update for the next
updating of the Comprehensive Plan Map? And, would the property
owners of the parcels that were excluded be contacted about having
their site included in the future Comprehensive Plan Map amendment?
Mr. Pratt stated depending on the action taken by Council at this
hearing, it would be relatively easy to make a change to the plan
that is currently undergoing review. It is relatively easy for his
department to send a letter to the people who were excluded or even
call them and ask them what their would like. Mr.. Farr questioned
the time frame for such action? Mr. Pratt stated that would need
#2779
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 27 of 28
to be done within the next four weeks. Mr. Farr asked the
concerned parties if they would speak to whether or not that
approach is acceptable to them. Mr. Pratt stated he deeply regrets
that people feel excluded in any way. President Huff-Menees asked
those property owners in the audience that do not live in the City
or County to please provide Mr. Pratt with their names and
addresses so they can receive proper notification in the future.
Mr. Law asked Mr. Pratt to provide the correct language to use to
describe the area shown in "red". Mr. Pratt stated the motion
would be to move approval of Resolution #2482, which includes the
Map that will be made a part of' the Resolution, which is the
recommendation from the Planning Commission. Mr. Winters pointed
out Mr. Pratt's recommended motion excluded the four parcel and he
believed the intent was to include them.
Esther McClure questioned for clarification what the Council was
voting on as she understood Council was just voting on water/sewer
and not rezoning.? President Huff-Menees explained Council is
voting on a Comprehensive Plan amendment. Mr. Pratt explained in
order to use a person's property for a particular land use, the
property must first of all show up on the Comprehensive Plan, which
is a broad general use category and one of several broad uses is
commercial, residential, high density residential and industrial.
Then, each specific parcel of property, prior to a building be
constructed, must have specific zoning..light industrial, heavy
industrial, single family residential, multi-family residential,
etc. What the City Council is proposing to do at this time is to
amend the broad use categories and not the zoning. The zoning is
in the hands of Kitsap County and he was not sure of the zoning
designation on Mr. and Mrs. McClure's property, but it means that
the zoning could someday be changed to an industrial type of
zoning, but until then the property cannot be used for industrial
use. The door has been opened to change zoning, but you have not
yet changed the zoning. There has been no discussion of sewer and
water and that will probably occur in 1-2 weeks.
M/S/C/U(Winters/Colvin) approve Resolution No. 2482, amending the
Bremerton Comprehensive Plan Map for a specific area generally
located as the NW Quadrant of the intersection of Werner Road and
Ida Streets west to the City limits, including the entire area
identified (including the"green" shaded area). (Note: Mr. Pratt
asked that the minutes reflect that the designation within the
Resolution and attached Map will be corrected).
TAPE #1237
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
September 28, 1994
Page 28 of 28
With no further business meeting adjourned at 8:44 P.M.
KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, ~ity Clerk
SHERRI S u dent
City of Bremerton
KLM/SH-M/me
cc: Normal Distribution
File/Vault