HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/18/89 TAPE t653 UNAPPROVED DP. AFT
CITY COUNCIL~ETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 18, 1989
The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton
was call~ to order in the City Council Chambers 239 4TH Street,
BremertOn, Washington, Wednesday, October 18 19~9 at 5:30 p.m.,
with Council President Spencer Homing presiding. Council members
present were Lon Overson, Lynn Horton, Morrie Dawkins, C.
"Tiny" Collins, A1 Colvin, Russ Johnson and Hank Waibel. Councilman
Shirley Marry Crutcher 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 Homing and Invocation was given by Reverend Talmage
Wilson of the Charleston Baptist Church.
CONS~TAGP~DA
A. Minutes of Meeting - September 27, 1989, #AB89-291
B. Minutes of Meeting - October 4, 1989, #AB89-292
1044 M/S/C/U(Waibel/Horton) to approve 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 which
has been made available to the council.
)057 M/S/C/U(Colvin/Dawkins) on October 18, 1989 the Council does
approve for payment those vouchers included and further described
as follows: 100322, 100329, 100381, 100630 through 100736 in the
total amount of $525,948.29, with the exception of Check #100775.
COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
Mr. Overson noted there continues to be a lot of development
activity on streets in the downtown area. He announced 1990 Budget
negotiations will commence in early November and he encouraged
Council members to study the budget document well in advance in
order to understand what the positions are and how the City goals
are supported that were passed earlier this year.
Mrs. Hgrton participated in a tour, this date, of the subject
property in the trade/purchase arrangement with Pope Resources, the
property being considered for the proposed sports complex as well
as Casad Dam. She noted how impressed she was of the dam and
watershed asset and believed the City can be very proud of both
the watershed and water program. In reference to the recent
earthquake in San Francisco, discussion was held during the Council
Operations Committee meeting to direct the Mayor to request the
Fire Chief to do a presentation on Bremerton's Earthquake Readiness
Program as well as some phone numbers the general public may call
so that they can prepare themselves, their families and their homes
in case this area experiences an earthquake. She encouraged
families to initiate drills within the home so family members are
prepared in the event something like this happens.
Mr. Waibel reminded everyone of the H.I.V. Aids Task Force meeting
Thursday, October 19, 1989, Cascade Natural Gas Company at 9:00
A.M. All of Kitsap County's State Senators and Representatives
will be attending this meeting. And, he reminded everyone of the
Candidate Forum sponsored by the Manette Neighborhood Association -
Thursday, October 19, 7:00 p.m. Mr. Waibel congratulated the
individuals in his neighborhood who put this program together.
Mr. Collins attended the Council Coalition dinner/meeting on
Tuesday, October 17, and noted he felt it was the best one held so
TAPE #683
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 2 of ~
far. The topic discussed was the reorganization of the Puget Sound
Council Of Governments and what to expect from it. He gained a
significant amount of information as to how the PSCOG works and he
feels Council should continue to support the PSCOG, even though the
reorganization is not what he would like to have. He urged his
fellow Council members to support continuation of the City'
participation in that body.
Mr. Dawkins noted he had served on the PSCOG board for five years
and he too hoped that City representatives to the current board
will provide good information on the reorganization and whether or
not the City should continue as a member. President Horning stated
it has been a particular success in Kitsap County but not as
successful in King County.
Mr. Colvin stated he attended the Mayor's reception at the Admiral
Theatre which proved to be very interesting. In reference to the
San Francisco earthquake, Mr. Colvin has a daughter who lives in
San Jose but it just so happened she was visiting Bremerton at the
time of the quake and was happy to learn that her home had not been
damaged, but some other homes in her neighborhood had not been as
lucky. Also, Mr. Colvin received a request from Mr. A1 Martin, who
resides at Pinewood Manor Senior Citizen Home, requesting
assistance in obtaining some flower bulbs to beautify the area
around Pinewood Manor. Since this was a very reasonable request
and a way to help beautify Bremerton, Mr. Colvin is going to try
and help Mr. Martin obtain his goal.
Mr. Johnson wished everyone in Bremerton a belated Happy Birthday
...other than KIRO News Radio the passing of Bremerton's birthday
(October 15) went unnoticed in Bremerton. He noted October 16 was
the 89th Birthday of the first Bremerton City Council meeting. The
year 2001 is not that far away at which Bremerton will be having
a Centennial and felt it was not too soon to have some type of fall
event keying in on Bremerton's anniversary or birthday.
Earthquakes are very much on everyone's mind right now and he
suggested that the two "Earthquake Preparedness" programs, directed
by Kay Baer on the Cable Access Channel, be replayed for public
information. He also attended the Council Coalition meeting and
feels the public needs to know that King County and Seattle do not
get along and have pulled out of participating in the PSCOG and
they make up a good majority of membership of that entity. A study
was conducted and it was determined to end the current PSCOG and
reorganize into something else. Out of that reorganization came:
(1) a recommendation that Kitsap County and Cities within Kitsap
County go down to one representative, however, our representatives
fought hard and retained two representative positions. Something
that bothers him even more than the County's small representation
is the fact that they become a State Legislature created
organization instead of a semi-voluntary and they have several
mandatory things which the City must go to them for, i.e., SEPA
reviews for any kind of transportation that involves inner County
transportation. He has some fears - are they just one more board
that the City has to go to when the City wants to do a major
transportation project. He expressed concern that the Subregional
Councils will go away as part of this reorganization and he hoped
something will be developed in place of it but it may not be
officially tied to PSCOG. The City of Glen Ellyn, Illinois, has
joined the Computer Bulletin Board System. In September the City
submitted two grant applications on solid waste to the Department
of Ecology and have been informed we did not receive the larger of
the two. However, the smaller grant application was inadvertently
lost by DOE and not included under their recent review. DOE has
indicated they are giving this situation a review to see what they
can do to some how compensate the City for this oversight.
Mr. Horning stated even if the Council of Governments format takes
TAPE #683
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 3 of 1~
the City/County out of that procedure the local entities will still
continue to work together as a community...county-wide on Board of
Health, Cencom and Kitsap Transit. And, with that opportunity there
will still be a forum to address other issues for input.
PUBLIC ~CO~NITION
Andy par~q)a, 1122 Hayward Avenue, announced the Manette
Neighborhood Association will sponsor a Mayoral Candidate Forum -
October 19, 1989, Manette Community Church. He also outlined
parking areas available in the surrounding neighborhood.
Nioma DaF, Madrona Point, expressed concern over the high cost of
sewer capital recovery charges. She related her last bill was
$82.68 with $24.20 water charge, capital recover $41.78 - this
seemed to her to be unfair and unrealistic. President Horning
questioned if Mrs. Day had talked with the Water Department? Mrs.
DaF stated yes, they explained how the amount was calculated and
she did understand that but she does not understand the high charge
for capital recovery.
Michele Holman, N. Lafayette, stated she understands if the City ·
is going to have a new sewer system someone has to pay for it.
However, she noted the inconsistent recovery charges and cited
instances where she had 1800 cu. ft. of water with a usage charge
of $8.55 and the next billing she had 1700 cu. ft. of water and
usage charge was $12.94. She could not understand why there
couldn't be some consistency in charging. How do citizens know the
charges are being done correctly? President Homing requested that
Merilynn Erhart, Council Legislative Assistant, assist Mrs. Day and
Ms. Holman in answering some of their concerns.
6A - P.~AL ESTATE PURCHASE/TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
BKEM~TON AND POPE RESOURCES, %AB89-278
Kathleen McCluske¥, City Clerk, stated this issue was before
Council on October 4 and was continued for two weeks for review.
The Trade involves 440 acres of Pope Resources land and 384 acres
of City property with a cash payment from the City, difference
between the appraised amounts and amount of $69,569.00
Bill Duff¥, Utilities Director, provided a map showing the
properties involved in the trade. He noted that additional
information had been provided to the Council in respect to the
City's Water Resources Study as well as Land Management Plan and
some of the reasons why it is beneficial for the Utility to acquire
these property to protect the watershed.
Del Knauss, 139 Olympic Avenue, questioned if Mr. Duffy conducted
a tour of the subject properties for Council members? President
Homing stated the tour was offered and Councilman Horton and he
did tour the properties...other Council members may have viewed the
properties separately.
Paul Schmidt, Manette, stressed the importance of checking the
value of the land around the sports complex, current estimate of
value and value it will be once the sports complex is in place and
once it is rezoned to residential.
Mr. Overson questioned if all the properties were within City
limits? Mr. Duff¥ stated the Lake Tahuya property is outside of
the City as well as the properties that Pope Resources currently
own. The property that is within the City limits is the Sherman
Heights property. Mr. Overson questioned if the City knows the
prospective new use of the properties being traded to Pope? Mr.
Duffy explained parcels in Sinclair Heights are being looked at to
being rezoned as there are some conditions in the contract for the
trade of properties that allow for that rezoning. Currently the
land is zoned for a public use (Forest Management) which is
TAPE 9683
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 4 of 14
unacceptable to Pope. They are interested seeing it zoned as
residential type property.
Mr. Colvin questioned who initiated the trade of properties? Mr.
Duffy explained the City initiated discussions with Pope in order
to fulfill some of the conditions set forth in the City's Land
Management Plan. The prime objective is to protect the City's
water resources around the Union River Reservoir. This is one of
several trades being discussed with Pope as the City is trying to
obtain additional property to the north east of the lake to further
protect the watershed. Mr. Colvin questioned should it be
determined by future development that land is worth a lot more -
what happens? Mr. Duffv stated this was discussed during the
Operations Committee meeting and the essence was that the appraisal
was done in the highest and best use and if the rezone of the
properties is higher than that stated in the appraisals then the
City would go back and take another look at the appraisals. Mr.
Sievers stated possibly Mr. Colvin was talking about long-term
appreciation based on what happens to the surrounding area - that
is not accounted for in this exchange. It will not be recaptured
in the future if it goes up in value, but the rezone is action
Council will see very soon and there will be a contingency included
so the City can come back and renegotiate the price if the value
is enhanced by the rezone. And, Mr. Sievers suggested adding the
following sentence to Section 3 of the contract: "Consideration
under Paragraph 4 shall be renegotiated, at the request of either
party, if the zoning assumptions of the Richards and Associates
appraisal are changed by the rezone process of Paragraph 26". If
the rezone down zones below the assumptions made in the appraisal,
one might assume Pope might come in and ask for renegotiation but
they do not have to. If there was an increased density through the
rezone process, he assumed the City could request a renegotiation.
Mr. Johnson pointed out the importance of obtaining properties to
protect the City's water resources considering that Federal Laws
on use of surface water require surface filtration unless the
governmental entity has control of all the runoff going into the
service water. Right now the City almost has total control,
however, if the City was mandated to provide a filtration system
it would cost the City as much as the cost of the new sewer plant
and that expense would be passed through to the consumer. As far
as the assessed valuation of the property, right now there is no
income or revenue received from the property, with the exception
of the liability, and if it is developed to a high intensity use
it would mean revenue for the City.
.077 M/S/(Johnson/Waibel) to approve the purchase/trade agreement
between the City of Bremerton and Pope Resources, Inc., for the
purchase of the Pope tract and trade of the Bremerton tract
together with the expenditure of $69,569.00 from the Utility's Land
Acquisition Fund subject to City Administrative Policies and
Procedures and the addition of the following sentence to Paragraph
3:"Consideration under Paragraph 4 shall be renegotiated, at the
request of either party, if the zoning assumptions of the Richards
and Associates appraisal are changed by the rezone process of
Paragraph 26".
.099 M/$/F(Overson/Dawkins) an amendment to the motion that there be an
even swap of properties and no cash exchange.
Mr. Waibel felt the amendment to the motion changed the substance
of the original motion and questioned if it should be a separate
motion? Kathleen McCluskey, City Clerk, stated because the motion
is to approve the trade at "x" dollars and the amendment is to
delete any dollar consideration it can be done as an amendment.
TAPE #683
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 5 of ~
Mr. Colvin questioned if Mr. Overson's amendment was to save the
City $69,570.007 Mr. Overson stated he was trying to reduce the
sewer/water payers' bills. Mr. Colvin requested Mr. Duffy's
opinion on this amendment. Mr. DuffF stated the City was the
initiator of the discussions to acquire the property and Pope has
gone along with the City's proposals - they obviously see value in
it.
President Hornina questioned if this amendment was approved could
Pope counter back or forget the whole thing? Mr. Duffy stated they
could forget the whole thing - the City is the one needing the
property.
~_~~ stated one of the conditions is the rezoning of the 225
acres and Pope Resources probably would not do anything with the
property for six months or more. He expressed concern if the City
puts in a sports complex the lighting may bring about some
objection by home owners who build close to such a complex. He
questioned what impact would lighting such as that have on a
residential area? Mr. Puffy stated the complex is being proposed
for placement on a 40 acre parcel and the City would retain the
rights to the 40 acres to the south of the sports complex. He
noted the lighting issue had been discussed previously and the
lighting at this point is undetermined as to height, etc., but he
indicated it might be possible to put a deed restriction in the
sale of the property. Mr. Sievers stated if the sports complex is
build, it will go through an Environment Review which would provide
Pope an opportunity to ask for mitigating conditions for glare, but
he did feel it might be good to let them exercise those
opportunities to speak out but also the City could preserve some
kind of restriction against suits for nuisance for glare on
abutting properties. So far this has not been included on the
deeds so it would become a new term of the agreement as well at
this point. President Homing questioned if Mr. Sievers would
include it in this agreement? Mr. Sievers stated yes, the City
would have to restrict the tracts being sold to Pope with that deed
restriction so they will be aware of it. Mr. Dawkins questioned
if the issue of "noise" should also be included? Mr. Duff¥ stated
he believed it would be subject to the City's Noise Ordinance. Mr.
Dully stated Pope Resources is well aware of the City's plan for
a sports complex in that area. He noted he was not as concerned
with the Pope property as he is to the properties to the north and
across Werner Road, which the City would not have control of.
President Homing questioned if wording would be included in the
trade relating to potential light and noise concerns? Mr. Sievers
stated it might be a little touchy upsetting the negotiations at
this point as well as price change and he felt the safest thing
would be to not try reducing the value of the property or
encumbering the property being exchanged at this point. He
believes the City is not tremendously at risk in allowing them to
go through the SEPA process getting what mitigation they can and
if it is permitted under some set of conditions then they would not
have legal grounds to sue the City on nuisance. Mr. Overson
pointed out all of this is highly conjecture and it is not known
what Pope Resources has in mind for that property.
Mr. Collins questioned what was the total dollar value of the total
land trade? Mr. Duffy stated one parcel is valued at $2,060,818
and the other is valued at $1,991,249. Mr. Collins questioned what
would it cost the City to develop that same property and building
sites? Mr. Dully stated he believed the City could not legally do
that - acting as our own developers and investing taxpayers money
into property development.
480 Vote on the Amendment:
In Favor: Overson
TAPE #683
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 6 of 14
Opposed: Waibel, Collins, Dawkins, Colvin, Johnson,
Horton, Homing
Motion Failed.
President Homing stated with the failure of the amendment to the
motion he would like to have lights and noise issues included in
the trade agreement. Mr. Sievers stated it is a zoning issue
initially and that will require SEPA review and even if it were
zoned for that type of building development or construction it
would also require SEPA review. It is safer to protect the City
with a deed restriction but since there will be the opportunity for
them to comment on a project the City is safer now against nuisance
suits. If the sports complex project goes forward first before
development on the adjacent parcel, those people who buy know what
the environmental impacts are and could not bring further action
against the City.
.562 M/S/C(Colvin/Dawkins) an amendment to the original motion to add
lights and noise deed restrictions.
Vote On Amendment:
In Favor: Collins, Dawkins, Colvin, Horton, Homing
Opposed: Johnson, Waibel, Overson
Motion passes.
Vote on original Motion as amended:
.592 M/S/C/U(Johnson/Waibel) to approve the purchase/trade agreement
between the City of Bremerton and Pope Resources, Inc., for the
purchase of the Pope tract and trade of the Bremerton tract
together with the expenditure of $69,569.00 from the Utility's Land
Acquisition Fund subject to City Administrative Policies and
Procedures and the addition of the following sentence to Paragraph
3:"Consideration ~nder Paragraph 4 shall be reneqotiated, at the
request of either part~, if the zoning assumptions of the Richard-
and Associates appraisal are changed bT the rezone process of
Paraaraph 26" and including noise and light deed restrictions.
Mr. Sievers stated he would assume those restrictions would only
apply to the parcel at the east, not the westerly parcels.
President Hornina stated only the parcel near Lake Tahuya would be
excluded.
6B - EXTENSION OF ANIMAL CONTROL CONTP. ACT - KEF: JACKSON PA~K,
~AB89-293
The City of Bremerton currently has a contract with the Navy to
supply Animal Control services to the Navy Housing area located at
Jackson Park. The attached contract outlines all requirements to
the City in providing this service for an annual fee of $9,000.
The current contract expires 9-30-89.
Mr. OveNson questioned if the contract amount covered the actual
cost of services for that area? Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated
he could not answer that due to his not knowing how many hours have
been put in over the past life of the existing contract. He could
not answer that but the Chief of Police stated there is adequate
staff to cover the needs of this contract and it has worked well
so far.
.599 M/S/C/U(Colvin/Waibel) to renew the City's contract with the Navy
for Animal Control services for Jackson Park at the current rate
of $9,000.00.
7A - ORDINANCE (FIRST RKADING) LEVYING PROPERTY TA~RS FOR
COLLECTION IN 1990, ~AB89-294
State law required that the City levy property taxes through
passage of an ordinance. The figures in the attached ordinance are
TAPE #683
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 7 of 1~
based on the preliminary assessment roll. They will be adjusted
upon acceptance of the final assessment roll by the County.
RiC~ Heg-a, City Treasurer, noted there was a correction to the
information provided and requested that the Assessed Valuation
changed to $844,473,214, the correct preliminary Assessed Valuation
for the City for the 1990 Property Tax. The ordinance, as
presented, reflects a Property Tax Levy for next year levied at
the limit imposed by what is commonly referred to as the 1064 levy
limit or the statutory limit on the increase that the City can
impose on its Property Tax levy rate. This reflects actually a
slightly larger than 6~ increase in the Property Tax rate from the
current year and the reason being the assessed valuation has
decreased slightly from the $849 million to $844 million - so
actual increase is just under 6.54 as it affects the tax rate.
Public Comment was invited - none received.
~r. Johnson questioned how much the City spends on Emergency
Medical per year? Mr. Hanna stated like so many cost accounting
problems the answer is subject to a wide variety of fluxuation
depending on how much of the total cost of the Fire Department is
included under Emergency Medical. When he was reviewing some cost
of service to some surrounding districts, the total cost of
operating the department on a strictly per call basis and if one
follows that train of logic approximately 3/4 of the aid calls made
by the Fire Department are aid calls rather than fire calls and the
total costs for Emergency Medical services would be in excess of
I 1/2 million dollars. Mr. Johnson noted that the 25 cents per
S1,000 only generates $200,000 per year.
Mr. Overson questioned if all of the figures showing cost amounts
were hard fixed figures? Mr. Hanna stated the Property Tax levy
would be limited to 1064 and if the Assessed Valuation were to
change the rate would likely change. New construction is not
included under the 1064 lid, so a new building permit would not
limit the rate and would reflect itself in revenue. Where as
existing structures, when they are revalued, would be subject to
the 6~ growth lid and would likely impact the rate. Mr. Overson
stated he thought the City was legally bound to the 106~
multiplier? Mr. Hanna stated the City is legally bound to the 106
rate increase but there are caveats within that - those caveats
include annexation and new construction. So, it becomes somewhat
more complex to arrive at that 106~ calculation than simply by
multiplying by 106~ of last years revenue figures.
Mr. Waibel questioned what is the basis for the reduction in the
assessed valuation...is it just that every house in Bremerton has
gotten less valuable? Mr. Hanna stated he did not have an answer.
Mr. Waibel noted the same thing happened last year and the County
was questioned which caused them to do some additional checking and
found they had made some errors and did increase the final assessed
valuation amount. Mr. Hanna stated he recalled that assessed
valuation did change and he expects this years to change as well -
this is a preliminary number that will be fine tuned later. He
noted he did not recall that an error was committed by the County
last year. Mr. Waibel noted the City had several annexation in
recent months and questioned why the assessed valuation was still
dropping. Mr. Hanna s~ated it was his understanding that the
recent annexations finalized later than the end of May of this year
would not be included in the 1990 Assessment Roll.
Mr. Daw~ins questioned if it wouldn't be advisable for the City to
have someone work with the County to make sure the assessed
valuations are done correctly? Mr. Hanna stated it would really
be to the County's advantage if Bremerton's assessment valuations
went up and he offered to make inquiries with the County relating
TAPE 9683
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 8 of 14
to this issue.
Mr. joh-aon questioned if the USS Turner Joy is taxable once it
becomes owned by a private organization? Mrs. Horton stated it
would fall under the "tax exempt" category.
:296 M/S/C/U(Waibel/Overson) to approve ordinance, on first reading,
levying Municipal Taxes against all the taxable property within the
City limits of Bremerton for the year 1989 and approving the
assessment roll made by the Assessor of Kitsap County, therefore
to be collected in the year 1990.
7B - ODINANCE (FIRST READING) NORTHNEST ENEKGY CODE, ~AB89-295
The City of Bremerton, in unison with Kitsap County and with other
cities in Kitsap County, has investigated the benefits of adoption
of the Northwest Energy Code (NWEC) as the standard for energy
conservation with regard to electric space conditioned buildings
within the City. Adoption of the Northwest Energy code will enable
effective use of energy within the City and benefit our citizens
overall while providing incentive payments to homeowners and
builders for the cost of upgrade to higher standards. The adoption
of the NWEC is part of a region-wide effort to conserve our energy
resources.
Richard ~,na, Building Official, stated energy conservation has
been in the limelight for several years. During the past decade
it has been realized, in the Northwest, we could no longer enjoy
an abundance of energy resources because of rapid growth. Studies
were conducted to determine what was the best method providing
energy resources for our future. As a result of these studies, it
was determined that energy conservation was the best method of
providing resources for future growth in our region. It was
further determined that paying incentives would be the best method
achieving energy conservation. Out of that, the Northwest Energy
Code was authored which set higher standards for energy
conservation, and this only applies to electric resistance heated
homes. Since the purpose of the study was to determine how best
to conserve our electric energy in the region, the Code was
authored to apply only to electric use. The Bonneville Power
Administration (BPA) offered incentives to those jurisdictions that
would adopt the Northwest Energy Code as the standard for energy
in their jurisdiction. Originally, these grants were rejected by
many jurisdictions because of problems that were perceived with the
Northwest Energy Code's original volume and BPA. Some of those
problems included: (1) record keeping that was necessary by the
jurisdictions to receive the incentive payments and to get such
payments to the builders; (2) some of the methods used in the
energy code were untested and some were felt to be actually
detrimental to the construction of the house; (3) many builders
felt because of the very strict requirements of the original
document that the incentives would not cover the cost of the
increased code requirements. Since the original documents was
published and over the past three years, things have changed with
the Code as well as politically. Many of the methods originally
felt were untested and detrimental to the building have been
revised or removed from the code. The code is now very comparable
to the existing Washington State Energy Code (WSEC) that the City
complies with. Record keeping that was required by BPA has been
streamlined because of complaints from jurisdictions.
Mr. Mumma was very close to this issue during the last Legislative
Session due to the fact that he serves on the Board of Directors
of the Washington Association Of Building Officials and acts as
their Energy Chairman. At that time, there was a bill introduced
in the House and Senate that would have required a mandatory
Northwest Energy Code equivalent Energy Code in the State of
Washington...initially very close to what is being presented at
TAPE #683
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 9 of i 4
this time and over a three year period would have been equal to the
Northwest Energy Code. The bill passed the House with no problem
but died in Committee on the Senate level. Those close to this
issue believe next year a Northwest Energy Code equivalent to the
State Energy Code will be passed into law, which will become
mandatory. If this happens, the incentive would be less than that
to have been paid by early adoption grants offered by BPA - which
is what he is presenting at this time. The proposed bill offered
last Session offered a 40 cent per square foot builder incentive
for houses up to 1800 sq. ft. If a house was built of 1801 sq. ft.
no incentive was paid - no incentive was paid for any portion of
the construction of the house. The reasoning was that a person who
could afford to build a 1800+ sq. ft. house could afford the
increased cost of the Energy Standards. There was no incentives
guaranteed by the proposed State Law that would pay for any
additional training of local jurisdiction, no guarantees for
repayment of costs for technical assistance to the public or for
technical assistance for the builders. Since this Legislation, Mr.
Mumma discussed with Kitsap County's Building Official the option
of adopting the Northwest Energy Code as the Energy Code Standard
in the City of Bremerton and Kitsap County. Puget Power, who is
part of this adoption process, voiced their desire to have the
County, as a region, adopt the Northwest Energy Code as a standard.
Discussions have been held with other Cities in Kitsap County - so
far all are in support of the proposal to adopt the Northwest
Energy Code as the standard. Discussion was held with the Kitsap
County Home Builders Association and they too support this action.
Mr.Mu~ discussed differences between the existing Washington
State Energy Code and the Northwest Energy Code. In both cases R-
38 attic insulation is required: Vaulted Ceiling Insulation - WSEC
requires R-30 and the NWEC requires R-38~ walls are the same on
both - R-19. Under the NWEC Advance Framing Techniques are
required and provides for less solid wood members are used (headers
are constructed - instead of being solid wood there is a piece of
insulation between them): the window requirement is increased from
a U=.60 in the WSEC to a more heat resistive window of U=.40~ door
- there was no standard in the WSEC and there is a standard
established in the NWEC; insulation for floors increased from R-
19 to R-30 (in some cases R-2§ is allowed if the floor joyce cannot
accept the R-30 insulation)~ there are other minor changes in below
grade wall installation and slab installation. The only additional
changes that he is aware of is a requirement that all houses built
with a concrete floor as their floor are required to have a four
inch gravel base under the concrete slab to mitigate radon gas.
There is a requirement that a bath fan be connected to the light
switch so that each time the light switch is turned on in the
bathroom the fan will provide ventilation for the house. And,
there is a requirement for a mechanical ventilation system in a
house that provides 10 cubic feet per minute of air into the
bedroom areas.
What will the City of Bremerton receive if the Northwest Energy
Code is adopted as an energy standard? First of all, the City
would receive a more efficient resistive electric heated home for
the citizens~ receive an incentive payment from the Bonneville
Administration for start up cost of adopting a new code and
implementing it: receive reimbursement for training of staff~
receive reimbursement for the cost of technical assistance to the
builders and public; receive incentives for the inspections that
are conducted under this energy code. The City could receive
$8,000 for start up costs and additional monies for technical
assistance, receive $125.00 for each inspection conducted and
receive a $50.00 payment if the City wishes to distribute checks
to the builders. The builders or home owners will receive $1,250
average for their part in implementing the NWEC.
TAPE %683
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 10 of 14
Mr. ~a stressed this is an opportunity for City staff receiving
funding/training for implementation of a code and he urged the
Council to approve the proposal as presented.
Public comment invited - none received.
Mr. Overson questioned if this would apply to new homes only? Mr.
M~a stated it applies to new homes that are electric resisted
heated and other buildings that are converted from other fuel
sources to electric resistive heat after the ordinance goes into
effect. Existing structures do not have to comply with this. Mr.
Overson noted as an owner of an older home it would be very
difficult for him to meet such standards if he were to change his
heating system to electric resistive. And, he questioned if he
built a log home would that meet those standards as proposed? Mr.
Mumma stated in most cases they can meet the standards and there
is an alternative approach to meeting the prescript requirements.
There are three paths, one a prescriptive path called "cookbook
method" that sets down wall/ceiling insulation, etc., then there
is a "component approach method" that allow trade offs. If it is
desired to have more windows than prescriptive path allows, then
possibly more insulation can be placed in the attic area or provide
more wall insulation to off set the heat loss. Mr. Overson
questioned if a mobile home would meet the requirements? Mr. Mumma
stated mobile homes do not fall under this code. They are built
and inspected under HUD requirements, not UBC or WSEC requirements.
Mrs. Horton questioned if Mr. Mumma had calculated what the total
increase to cost of building a home under the NWEC? Mr. ~a
stated he had calculated about a $600.00 increase to overall cost -
additional cost of window and insulation requirements.
Mr. Waibel questioned what was meant by electric resistant heated
building and electric space conditioned building - are these
similar? Mr. Mumma stated when dealing with a single family
residence they call it electric resistance heating because they are
dealing with electric furnaces and baseboard heaters. In
commercial applications the air conditioning units also fall under
these requirements so it is called space conditioning because it
is either heating or cooling.
Mr. Overson questioned if anyone has calculated a home built by the
Washington State Energy Code now and compared it to a home built
under the Northwest Energy Code, then over a years normal operation
determined how many dollars will be saved by going with the NWEC?
Mr. Mum~a stated he was sure it has been calculated but he did not
have those figures available but did have the information in his
office to be provided later. Mr. Overson questioned how many
kilowatt hours would he save for the other citizens? Mr. Mumma
stated he was not sure.
Mrs. HOFton questioned how long will the incentive program be
available? Mr. ~!mma stated currently they are guaranteeing them
through 1991. He added that the adoption of this code will only
take affect if the City receives the grants from Bonneville Power
Administration and this is written into the language of the
ordinance.
M/S/C/U(Waibel/Colvin) to approve ordinance, on first reading,
adopting the Northwest Energy Code as the standard for electric
space conditioned building in the City.
7C - OKDINANCE (FIRST READING) VACATING RIGHTS-OF-WAY WITHIN
BR~M~KTON GARDENS P.U.D., APPLICANT: JOHN STEPHANUS, ~AB89-296
On May 10, 1989, the Council approved the Bremerton Gardens right-
of-way vacations, subject to reservation of necessary easements for
utilities and payment of appropriate compensation. The proposed
TAPE %683
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 11 of 14
ordinance does not reserve pass through easements for utilities
since all utilities only serve the applicant's property. The
developer will take title to all utilities improvements within the
rights-of-way and a sewer pump station outside the right-of-way
serving the development.
As conditions to the project's Shoreline Permit, a public access
stairway will be constructed at the termination of East 16th Street
to the shoreline and a 12-foot public access easement was to be
deeded along the tidelands or top of the bank. To provide greater
utility for the street and access and to advance the Park Plan goal
for increased shoreline access, the developer will deed 3.3 acres
of tidelands within his project to the City for the $15,223.00
payment for the street vacation. The tidelands have been valued
at $17,250.00, but the developer will be credited with $2,332.00,
the value of the 12-foot access easement which will merge in the
new deed.
Ian Sigvers, City Attorney, stated usually the ordinance is
presented for passage when the public hearing occurred, however
this one was unusual because the City is taking a land exchange
instead of a cash compensation for the easement. He noted the
dollar figures do not match up exactly and the developer was not
thrilled about taking on the maintenance responsibilities for the
pump station, sewer lines and easements so he believes it is a fair
consideration. Also, the acquisition of the tidelands was included
as a goal in the Park Comprehensive Plan. Since the City did
require as part of the Shoreline Permit that the access stairway
be built at the end of 16th Street, this would add to the usability
of that since otherwise there would be limited land to walk upon
once the stairway was descended...this will provide a nice beach
walk.
~PE %684
PresideDt Hornina asked the "Appearance Of Fairness/Conflict of
Interest" question with Mr. Waibel stepping down and all remaining
Council members being seated.
Public comment was invited - none received.
Mr. Dawkins questioned if the City maintains the streets now in
that area? Mr. Sievers stated it is a responsibility of the Street
Department.
Mr. Ore,son stated he could not support the proposal - he did not
feel the three acres were worth the dollar value and expressed
concern over the amount of maintenance and liability it would bring
to the City.
Mr. Johnson noted Mr. Overson had a good logical point but in this
case he felt acquisition of the tidelands would be of more benefit
to the citizens and would require little if any maintenance.
Mrs. HQrton stated the City is currently responsible for the
maintenance and liability of rights-of-way in the development -
therefore are trading one liability and maintenance for another.
)211 M/S/C(Dawkins/Collins) to approve ordinance, on first reading,
vacating rights-of-way within Bremerton Gardens PUD.
Vote: In Favor: Horton, Collins, Dawkins, Colvin, Johnson
Horning
Opposed: Overson
7D - RESOLUTION %2276, RKF~RING PARKS PROTECTION ORDINANCE TO Bm
P~AC~D ON THE BALI~OT FOR THE FEBRUARY 6, 1990 ~LECTION, ~AB89-289
TAPE #684
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 12 of 14
Thi's item was heard by the City Council on October 11, 1989, and
tabled for further review for one week.
Jim ~rian, 621 Washington Avenue, representing Friends Of Parks
And Open Spaces Committee, stated they had an opportunity to have
discussions with the City Council on this matter. During Council
meeting of October 11 there was some discussion about whether or
not utility owned lands should be deleted from the ordinance. The
Committee agreed to delete the two Utility owned properties from
the original draft of the ordinance: (1) Otto Jarstad Park; ((2)
Gold Mountain Golf Course. They also revised new item %17 to have
it state: "SR-3 Park", instead of SR-3. During the Study Session,
on Monday, October 16, there was some concern expressed about
including a provision for other park lands to be added at a later
date, if so desired by the City Council. Based on the advise of
the City Attorney, an enabling clause was included under new
paragraph 2.1, reading: The City Council may, by a simple majority
of those present add any harks lands to the list above. Any
additions made bY the council would fall under the full provisions
of this ordinance".
Mr. Dully, Utilities Director, and several Council members
expressed concern relative to providing utility improvements on
parks property, if necessary. Mr. Adrian did not think this issue
was adequately addressed during the October 16 Study Session, but
the Committee feels paragraph 3.4 does address that issue. If a
corner of a piece of parks property is needed for a Utility asset
that would clearly not be a recreational use but would be a
significant change as allowable by this ordinance. It would
require that the Parks Board be advised of such action and a
findings of fact provided to the Council relative to that and
Council would then have to render a findings of fact concluding
that the significant change in use was for the best interest of the
community; and this would require a unanimous vote.
Paragraph 6 has been revised to read: This ordinance shall become
effective upon passage and certification of the ballot results by
the County Canvasing Board.
Mr. Adrian stated the Committee is not asking that Council take
action to approve the Resolution at this time as this proposal will
be reviewed by the Parks Board on Tuesday, October 24, 1989. It
is his understanding that the Parks Board will be coming before the
City Council at the October 25 City Council meeting with their
recommendation relating to sale of Roosevelt Field. Therefore, he
requested the City Council to continue this item for one week,
October 25, when both issues can be addressed.
Public comment invited - none received.
Mr. Collins questioned if "general election" was desired due to the
fact a "general election" is held every two years? Mr. Adrian
stated their intent was to provide some other options, such as a
special election, however, maybe the question should be referred
to the City Attorney. Mr. Collins suggested the wording "next
election". Mr. Adrian stated he had no object to that if the City
Attorney had no objection. Mr. Sievers stated that would be fine
and if desired a special election could be scheduled. Mr. Collins
questioned what would they do if a piece of property were proposed
for a 99- year lease? Mr. Adrian stated the City Charter would
exclude that possibility without going to the vote of the people
not allowing a contract or lease longer than 10 years. Mr. Collins
suggested adding the word lease in sections 3.3 and 3.4 as follows:
(3.3) "In case of a proposed sale, lease, the City Council .... ";and
(3.4) "In the case of significant change or lease, the City council
at a minimum shall .... ". Mr. Adrian felt this was a good
TAPE #684
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 13 of 14
suggestion. President Homing noted that in the event the lease
would be to one user to another he was concerned that it would be
too restrictive and be a handicap to enhancing properties. Mr.
Adria~ stated the way the ordinance would still read if the "and/or
lease" language was added would be that the Parks Board advisory
report would be provided relative to the proposed lease and as long
as it was not a significant change in use a unanimous vote would
not be needed.
Mr. Johnson questioned if the City were to lease some parks
property to someone who wanted to develop indoor/outdoor play
recreation facility for children between the ages of 3 - 12 what
would the City have to do? Mr. Adrian explained under the
provisions of this ordinance the City would go to the Parks Board
and they would probably come to the conclusion that use would be
an activity that compliments recreational use. Mr. Johnson stated
he agreed with Mr. Adrian but someone else might interpret that as
a "day care" facility. Many of the parks program, particularly in
the summer, are day care centers and he feels that is good. There
is a fine line but it could be operated by someone in the day care
business community - there may a place for such a function within
the City Parks programs or maybe dealing with the special
populations. Mr. Adrian stated it would be impossible to nail down
every scenario and that is why there is some subjectivity left for
elected official.
President Horninu requested that some thought be given to the
possibility there could be a lease that would be very beneficial
that may require s corner of parks property that would be taken for
exchange for a much bigger piece and he wanted to be sure that
possibility was available.
Mr. Dpw~ins questioned what happened on the issue of smaller parks,
like Rhode Vista Park, not being included? Mr. Adrian explained
that 1/2 of Rhode Vista Park is on State right-of-way and the City
has an agreement to maintain that space. The committee did provide
a new paragraph 2.1, which enables the Council to add any parks at
any time based on a simple majority of the Council.
Mr. Overson noted the approval to build a new sewer treatment plant
had a tremendous impact on the citizens and questioned if a
majority vote was required to approve it? Mr. Adrian stated it
required a majority vote and it was a unanimous vote. Mr. Overson
pointed out they, as a Council, did not give 11~ of the citizens
the right to veto the entire Council effort. As he remembers it was
also not placed before the vote of the people even though it is now
costing everyone in the City. Based on the complexity of the issue
- that is what a Council is for to learn the issue, understand
impacts, etc., and then make the right decision representing the
people. If all of the voters could be educated as to the
complexities and ramifications of decisions, there wouldn't be a
need for a Council. The unanimous vote gives one Council member
total veto power on potentially anything - that is more power than
11~ of the people of Bremerton should have. He believed if 60~ say
"let's do it" then let's do it. Mr. Adrian noted the converse of
that is if Council chooses to place this item on the ballot it can
be done by a 3 to 2 vote which is a simple majority and the
decision can then be made by 51~ of the people. Mr. Overson
pointed out then it becomes the problem of educating the people of
all the complexities, ramifications and every thing needed to make
an accurate decision plus the problem of presenting in a short
statement so it is understandable. Mr. Adrian stated the Committee
feels parks is such a sacred issue to the community and so critical
to the viability of the issue they should be treated special. If
the City were part of a Multiple Park District a unanimous vote
would be required and would not provide the option to go back to
the citizens as does the proposed ordinance.
TAPE 9684
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
October 18, 1989
Page 14 of 14
Mr. Naibel stated the State law does not require more than a
majority to pass a bond to build a secondary treatment plant. It
does require a unanimous vote of the same kind of board as the
Council for this kind of activity. The precedence is there and it
is reasonable. Under Paragraph 4 of the ordinance - Mr. Waibel
desired to ask the Parks Board that they make a recommendation on
whether or not they would recommend that the Council pass this
ordinance or establish a moratorium in exchange for eliminating
paragraph 4 from the ordinance, if agreeable to the Friends Of
Parks And Open Spaces
Mr. Johg$on suggested that maybe parks should titled "park", not
play field, etc.
Mr. A~r~an pointed out one additional change made by the Committee:
under Paragraph 3, first sentence, changing the word "asset" to
"lands"
~831 M/S/C/U(Waibel/Collins) to continue this item for one week so that
the Parks Board can review it and make a recommendation: and ask
them to look at the possibility of either the Council passing this
same ordinance to cover the period between now and the election or
place a moratorium on parks sales between now and the election in
exchange for removal of paragraph 4 of the proposed initiative
ordinance.
With no further business the meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
KATHLEEN~L. MCCLUSKEY, CI~CLERK
KLM/SH/me
cc: Normal Distribution
File/Vault