Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/17/88TAPE #521 UNAPPROVED D~ FEB #0020 #0055 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 17, 1988 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4th Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, February 17, 1988 at 5:30 p.m. with Council Vice President Lon Overson presiding. Council members present were Spencer Homing, Morris Dawkins, Shirley Marry Crutcher, ' C. R. "Tiny" Co//ins, Lon Overson and Lynn Hotton. Councilmen Hank Waibel and A1 Colvin were absent. Also present were City Attorney ian Sievers and City Clerk Kathleen McCluskey. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council Vice President Lon Overson and Invocation was given by Reverend Win Swanson, Associate Pastor of the Church Of'The Nazarene. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meetlng Held February 10, 1988, #AB88-043 M/S/C/U(Dawklns/Crutcher) to approve Consent Agenda as presented. Mr. Johnson restated for clarification the comment he made at the February 3 Council meeting relating to stop sign placement at Price.Rd., and. Harlow: "KitSap County has indicated they will place a ~our-waV stop sign at Price and Hatlow Drive once the development is in" .... none are in place at the current time. CLAIMS/WARRANTS REGISTER Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by ROW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090, have been recorded on a listinglwhich has been ma~e available to the Council. M/S/C/U(Crutcher/Horton) on February 17, 1988 the Council does approve for payment;those vouchers included and further described as follows: Warrant Nos. 34340, 34346 through 34452 in the total amount of $425,435.26. / COUNCIL MEMBER REPORT Mr. Johnson expressed his pleasure of being back in the' Pacific Northwest after spending two weeks in Washington, D.C., and stated his appreciation to staff members who contacted him in D.C., on upcoming and future issues. On the issue of the Kitsap Boat Ramp...there is concern within the Kitsap Lake neighborhood that only a large parking lo~ (considered by some to be too large) is coming out of Phase I. Also, they were concerned with walkways through the wet/ands and hopefully through Phase II the walkways will be developed. Lastly, Mr. Johnson expressed his concern regarding the vacant City Auditor position noting the critical point is to look at the Audit function as established now and to realize it has been in place only a ~ew years; and that during the transition of hiring a new Auditor the intent of the Charter provision be followed and keep the reputation growing, as it has been, with other audit agencies on the State and federal levels. TAPE #521 Clty Councll Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 17, 1988 Page 2 of 14 Mr. Dawklns reported he met wlth Jlm Brontolt and had the opportunity to revlew the sample tape made of a Council meeting and noted it turned out qulte well. Mr. Brontoll w111 have some suggestions on ways to lmprove future ftlmlng. Mrs. Horton reported she also had the opportunity to tour the Cable TV access studio and view the City Council meeting tape. Mrs. Hotton emphasized the importance of the City and community giving their fullest cooperation to the efforts being made In developing the access channel programming. Mr. Overson stated that District #4 is doing the best it can under the conditions - the downtown district slowly recovering with new activity going on. As a member of the Audit Committee, Mr. 0verson explained the Committee is addressing Mr. Johnson's concerns and moving ahead with hiring a new Auditor and developing a very aggressive program to be carried out. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Mayor Gene Lobe presented a Key To The City Of Bremerton and a "Bremerton" monogrammed hat to Tony Boddte and expressed how proud all of Bremerton can be of Tony's accomplishments throughout his career in football and wished him much success in his professional football career. Tony Boddte thanked everyone in Bremerton for supporting him during his years of playing football and appreciates the recognition. He thanked his parents for their long term support and his wife and daughter for the support.given during his time as a professional football player. Tony stated that other local athletes deserved recognition as well as himself and particularly noted the outstanding capabilities of Sllverdale~s Brian Htnkle with the Pittsburg Steelers. 6A - BID AWARD RECOMMENDATION - PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICES - SORIANO, SORIANO a LOWiNS, #AB88-044 Requests for Statements of Qualification and Proposals were prepared, advertised and received in accordance with accepted CALL-FOR-BID procedures for Public Defender Services for indigent defense in Bremerton Municipal Court. Two (2) proposals were received. Proposals were reviewed by two attorneys representing firms outside the City and a Bremerton business owner. The review of Statement of Qualifications reflected both firms were qualified to provide the requested services. Review also included the firm's attorney and support capability relative to staff size. The final phase of review considered proposals received. Dave Hiestand, Personnel Director, briefly outlined his involvement in handling the bid proposals, use of a blind test for evaluating the two firms before a panel composed of- two local attorneys and a businessman and submitting the panel~s recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder. Mr. Hiestand noted. that there was a $7,000 difference between the two bid proposals. Mr. Johnson noted a substantial increase in cost over 1987 and wondered what caused the increase. Mr. Hiestand stated for clarification that there is actually a reduction in cost over last year ($45,000 vs 852.500). TAPE #521 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 17, 1988 Page 3 of 14' #0816 Mrs. Horton questioned specific wording referencing the Bremerton City Jail under the "Scope" portion of the contract, considering the City will be contracting with the County for part of this year. Ian Stevers, City Attorney, suggested striking the wording referencing "Bremerton City Jail" from the contract. Mrs. Hotton questioned if the City would be paying in advance for services due to the wording in the contract - that the City would be making payment in "equal monthly installments beginning March 1, 1988"? Mr. Hiestand stated that the new firm will begin services that- date and the old firm will cease services on that. date. Ms. McCluskev, City Clerk, stated that generally payment would be made at the end of the month, after having received the service. Mr. Sievers suggested the wording "in equal monthly installments for services beginning March 1, 1988". 'Vice President Overson questioned the section under "Scope" relating to conflict of interest and how this would affect this contract? Ian Sievere stated ther~ may always be some conflicts, however, nothing out of the ordinary is anticipated with this firm and in the past the number of cases which represented a conflict were few. M/S/C/U(Dawktns/Johnson) that the contract to .provide Public Defender Services for indigent defendants in Bremerton Municipal Court be awarded to the firm of Soriano, Sortano & Lowans. The bid was $45,000.00 per year. Term of contract will be through December 31, 1989 (beginning March, 1988) with the following .amendments: (1) Sco~e Section, second paragraph - striking the wording "in Bremerton City Jail", and (2) Compensation Section - payment will be made "in equal monthly installments for services beginning March 1, 1988". 6B - PROPOSE CHANGE FROM ONE-WAY TO TWO-WAY TRAFFIC - NORTH/SOOTH ALLEY FROM ROGERS TO COONTZ BETWEEN CALLOW AND WYCOFF, #AB88-045 : This alley was designated one-way southbound by Councll action May 8, 1988, at the request of Kitsap Transit because of risk to developmentally disabled persons who were employed to wash buses. This activity is being telcoated to accommodate construction of the new facility. Kitsap Transit has requested that two-way traffic be reinstated. This will assist them in moving buses and other equipment during the course of construction which is scheduled to begin February 9, 1988. Jan Stemkoski, Assistant City Engineer, was available for Council's questions. Mr. Collins 'questioned why this action was before Council? Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated that apparently the City Council approved the original request as a one-way street and this request is to remove that which w~s previously granted. Mr. Collins pointed out that due to lack of occupancy of buildings along the alley that Kitsap Transit is the only one affected. Mr. HornIns questioned what the cost would be to the City if approval is given on this request? Mr. Stemkoski stated any cost lnvolved to remove or change signs would be covered by Kltsap Transit. TAPE #521 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 17, 1988 Page 4 of 14 #0732 M/S/C/U(Colllns/Crutcher) to approve Kitsap Transit's request to change North/South Alley from Rodgets to Coontz between Callow and WVcoff from one-way to two-way. #1006 6C - SURPLUS OF CITY ~ICLES, #AB88-O46 The City has several vehicles which are surplus to present needs (complete listing attached to supporting documentation). A declaration of surplus is necessary to allow disposal. Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, stated that all the vehicles listed are well aged and definitely well worn. Mr. Crutcher questioned whether or not the funds received from the sale of vehicles would go back to the General Fund or to each department? Mr. Hanna stated funds would be directed back to the fund which owned the vehicles. The police vehicles and patrol cars would go back to the General Fund as would the Parks vehicles except those owned by Equipment Rental Reserve Fund. All of the Street Department vehicles are owned by.the Equipment Rental Reserve. Mr. Hornina questioned the Police Department's desire to surplus the 1977 Harley-Davidson motorcycle. He recalled discussion with the Police Chief as to keeping the motorcycles for ceremonial occasions. Mr. Hanna pointed out that the motorcycle on the list is one of three owned by the City and to his understanding it was the Departments intent.ion to use the two newer cycles, which are in a better state of repair, for ceremonial purposes, but not to retain the 1977 Harley-Davldson. Mr. Hanna explained that all three motorcycles are Harley-Davtdsons but the other two are three years newer and a different size. Mr. Hanna stated that the Police Department vehicles listed were at the Police Chtef~s request and the Harley-Davtdson was included. Mr. Johnson pointed out that the 1980-81 Mallbus were purchased out of the Cumulative Reserve ~und and questioned whether or not the surplus funds would be returned to that fund? Mr. Hanna stated that the ownership records in his hands indicate that they belong to the General Fund. Mr. Johnson questioned if it would be possible to request that all funds be returned to the Cumulative Reserve Fund except for Utility and Equipment Rental funds so that those funds could be used for re-purchase of a capital investment. Mr. Hanna stated it could be done. Mr. Johnson questioned the surplus of backhoe equipment and how the City is equipped to cover that need? Mr. Hanna explained that the City currently has one in the Street Department and two in the Utility Department, which are all heavily used. The Transportation Department has budgeted for an agriculture t~pe vehicle with backhoe feature which the Parks Department plans to use if and when needed. M/$/C/U(Johnson/Horning) to declare vehicles No. 1423, 1424, 1444, 1451, 1452, 1453, 1442, 1405, 1416, 1450, 1421, 1426, 1445, 1401, 1551, 1458, 1831, 1839, 1843, 140, 29, 30, 3005, and 3030 surplus aria authorize their sale in the best interest of the .City, with the exception of #1433- 1977 Harley-Davtdson motorcycle, which is to be brought back to Council after discussion with the Police Chief concerning ceremonial use; and, that the funds from the sale of all non-Utility, non-Equipment Rental vehicles be returned to the Cumulative Reserve Fund. TAPE #521 City Council,Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 17, 1988 Page 5 of 14 6D - DOCESIDE PROJECT KITSAP LAKE, #AB88-047 During the course of review for the Preliminary Plat of Dockside (known then as WeStview) it was determined that sometime in the near future there may be a need to upgrade the sanitary lift station affected by the Dockside development. A detailed investigation was not performed at that time, but it was stated and agreed to by Osberg Construction Company to participate in a future upgradtng of the system should it be determined necessary. This participation would only be 'required If the Dockside development proved to overload the system. While the construction of the Plat has been under way, the Utility has had an opportunity to evaluate the impact of the development on the Utilfty. It has been determined by the Utility that there is a need in the immediate future to upgrade the water system rather than the sanitary sewer system. At this time, with the consent of Osberg Construction Company, the Utility desires to amend the conditions set forth for the development of the Plat to allow for upgrading the water system in lieu of the sanitary sewer system. Improvements to the water system basically will involve construction of a pumping station off the now existing 18" Kitsap Lake Transmission main located on Price Road to increase the water pressure in the Kitsap Lake area. Osberg Construction Company has agreed to provide a suitable tract of land with minimum dimensions of 50 feet by 50 feet located on Price Road near the southeast shore of the lake and that the City agreed to accept the title to such a tract from Osberg Construction Company in full compliance with Its obligation to participate in the possible upgradlng of the sewage pumping plant at some future date. Bill DuffV, Utilities Director, stated the Utility has had an opportunity to review all its utility plant and services in Dockside of Kitsap Lake area and based on that determination the water facilities do need to be upgraded. The current pump station is the only water service to the area. The existing pump station is old and has the capacity of about 400 gallons per minute. The Utility is very desirous of getting a second facility into that pressure zone to service the Kitsap Lake area and to also enhance the existing facilities. Mr. DuffV provided a drawing showing the proposed parcel being offered by Osberg Construction for the pump station. Mr. Johnson stated his concern that with the sewage problems experienced by residents in the area why is a water pump station being considered rather than a sewage pump station? Mr. Dully explained that the s~wage problems were a result of a mechanical mallunction/ operator error and not due to over capacity. Mr. Johnson questioned if the current water pressure in this area meet FIre standards for hydrants ? Mr. DuffV stated some of the areas do depending on the main size - there is a 12" main that runs along Hatlow Drive up to the [eservoir located at the end of Werner ROad and water supplies off of that line are in good shape. However, some of the side mains as well as the back up of the reserve capacity to replentlsh the reservoirs are a problem with a single pump station. The pressure will not change only the capacity to service the area will change. TAPE #521 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 17, 1988 Page 6 of 14 #1180 M/S/C/U(Johnson/Hornlng) to approve the amendment of the conditions set forth for the development of the Plat wherein 0sberg Construction Company will. provide a parcel of property (lot 21) for future construction of a water pump statlon in lieu of upgradlng the sewage pump station subject to Administrative Pollcy and Procedure. 6E - aa~leD~ ll TO CONTRACT NO. 2921 FEASIBILITY EVALUATION, #AB88-048 The Utility has received several inquiries with respect to providing sanitary sewerage services to the Gorst area. This area is t-ncluded in the Utility's service area and its currently unsewered. The Utility lacks sufficient data to provide a response at this time and is therefore requesting authorization for a feasibility evaluation for the development of sanitary sewage facilities in the subject area. The cost of the evaluation is estimated to be approximately $25,140.00. Thls project has the support of the Kitsap County Health Department and State Department of Ecology. Blll Dully, Utilities Director, stated this project does lie wlthln the Clty's servlce area and better information ls needed in order to-serve the area. The treatment p/ant currently runs at less than one half capaclty and the more customers hooked up .helps keep the rates down and helps pay. for the debt of the system. Blll Amo, 6520 Lake Drlve, asked if the people of Gorst would be assessed for frontage as other neighborhoods have when the sewers were put In. Mr. DuffV stated yes, it will be a stand alone project and the residents of the Gorst area and surrounding areas would support 100~ of the cost. Mr. Dawktns asked if the City had annexed all areas around the 6orst area. Ken Huches, staff, explained that there is an area to the south east that is not annexed - owned ~y McCormiek and Alpine Corporation. Mr. Dawktns questioned if this would require them to come lnto the City if the sewer service were provided. Mr. Huuhes stated the City Attorney is researching a Spokane Court decision on Outside Utility Agreements which could be important in this matter. Ian Slevers, City Attorney, stated it is hoped to require an annexation waiver or no protest agreement to go along with extension of service if in fact this is a later result of the study. Mr. Huuhes stated that there are several Outside Utility Agreements that were not been enforced by the prevlous Clty Attorney, however, he would support enforcement as it may be,beneficial to the Clty long-term wlth future population growth of that area. Mrs. Horton questioned if any of the inquirers from the Gorst area are helping to carry the 828,000 cost of the study? Mr. DuffV stated he ls currently in negotiations with several entitles in the 6orst area, one being Olymplc Vlew Bandfill. It ls a good size project and in order to continue the negotiations the City needs to take the first step with the Engineering study to flnd out what ls involved. Mrs. Hotton questioned if the result of the study would PaY off? Mr. Dully stated he was very hopeful #1472 TAPE #521 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 17, 1988 Page 7 of 14 that after the study he would be looking for some grant money as well as publlc participation. Mr. Hornlna.asked If there was a tlme frame? Mr. DuffV stated it was part of the overall Wastewater Comprehensive Plan contract which has a time frame (6 months from the date of the orlgtnal contract). Mr. Dully stated he expected to have the study completed wlth 90 to 120 days. Mr. Johnson questioned if the funding would be the standard LID of residents and businesses of the area. Mr.n~ DuffV explained that would be part of the study - showlng the best way to flnance the construction project. The study would ldentlfy the problems and look at the optlons available to funding It looking at grant monles, looking at size of area to be served, if served, and the best methods of gettlng servlce from that area to the treatment plant. The cost of the ~study would be recoverable through the construction project. Mr. Johnson questioned if Councll should conslder action at this time or wait until the Spokane Court case decision is final? Mr Sievere stated the request is for a study and it is not known if services will be extended, and if the decision is to extend service then the legal decision should be in by that tlme. M/S/C/U(Dawktns/Horton) to approve Amendment #1 to Contract No. 2921 between the Ct-ty of Bremert~n and CH2M Hill .for providing a feasibility evaluation fo~-· sewerage service to the GOTst area. #1548 7A - RESOLUTION #2200, CITY COUNCIL 1988 STATElYMrS OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT, #AB88~024 The Resolution prepared/by the City Council expresses the direction and intent of/ the Councll's pursuant to concerns related to and adoptlon of, the 1988 Budget. M/S/C/U(Crutcher/Horton) Bremerton Clty Councll's for FY 1988. 7B - RESOLUTION #2204, EMPLOYEES, #AB88-049 to approve ,~tatemente INCREASING Resolution #2200, the of Legislative Intent BENEFITS OF RETIRED There are currently five individuals in the old non-uniform employee retirement !system. Their last 1norease was in January 1986 and was 5~. The attached Resolution would provlde for a 10~ increase in 1988. There ts.$85,000 in the retirement fund. These individuals are 90 years of age and older. A 10~ 1norease would result in the following monthly payments: Ed Duke Bernard LaFave Elsle Shaw Anne Taylor $773.44 990.42 536.73 473.90 $ 2774.49 X 12 = $33,293.88 annually Kathleen McCluskeV, Clty Clerk, noted that these were non- uniform employees under the system prior to the PERS System and the City pays directly for their retirement and it has been low over the years. TAPE #521 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 17, 1988 Page 8 of 14 #1904 Mr. Crutcher stated he wished these Individuals could be given more and they represent how people can live to a ripe old age in the City of Bremerton because of all the good conditions we have around us, low crime rate, good neighbors, etc. Mr. Hornina noted that by projecting out the $85,000 over a four year period funds may be depleted before there are no longer survivors of this group. Eathleen McCluskev, City Clerk, stated there is concern that funds may run out by the fourth year, however, it is desired that the individuals receive all the funds and considering all of the individuals are in their 90's it is somewhat of a balancing act. In the event the. retirement fund is exhausted then the City will have to fund any remaining individuals out of the General Fund for the rest of their lives; Mr. Horninn questioned what would be the impact of funds if a 5~ increase were considered? Ms. McCluskeV stated it would amount to approximately 81,500.00. Mr. Homing questioned who had submitted the proposal? Ms. McCluskeV stated it was the Mayor's and etaflus recommendation to propose a raise at this time due to the last raise of 5~ being given in 1986. And, the attrition rate is about one per year. At their ages, one if not more are in nursing homes. Mr. Crutcher continued to feel these individuals should be getting more and strongly urged that the full 10~ increase be approved and if a lesser amount was considered he would consider it an insult. Mr. Hornina stated it is appropriate to be concerned about the General Fund and impact of future obligations on that fund. M/S/C/(Crutcher/Dawkins) to approve Resolution #2204, increase the benefits (10~) of retired employees authorized by Ordinance #3411. Vote: In Favor: Crutcher, Hotton, Overson, Collins Dawkins, Johnson Abstain: Homing ' as 7C - RESOLUTION #2205, DESIGNATING SEAFIRST BANE AS AN AGENT OF THE CITY FOR THE SAFEKEEPING OF SECUI~ITIES, #AB88-050 The proposed resolution is necessary to allow the City to executive34 the attached safekeeping agreement with SeaFirst Bank. The purpose of the safekeeping agreement is to set up an account with the Trust Division of the bank into which the City can place securities purchased from third parties. Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, stated that the proposed resolution would authorize him to sign, in behalf of the City, a standard banking service agreement with SeaFirst Bank. The purpose of entering into this agreement would be to create a relationship with the Trust Department of the Bank which would allow him to have wired into a Trust Account for safe keeping securities that would be purchased from third parties. In other words, when doing business with securities brokers, dealers or banks other than SeaFirst bank the City's present Commercial Banking Services Contract includes safe keeping of securities purchased from the trading room at SeaFirst but does not embrace third party transactions that would be dealt with under this ,agreement. Mr. Johnson questioned there are some very complex rules as to who has physical custody verses electronic verses changing TAPE #521 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 17, 1988 Page 9 of 14 #2149 name on flle drawer...where does this put us. Mr. Hanna stated that the proposed agreement would embrace both physical securities and those that exist in only electronic media. Mr. Johnson questioned if the City purchases SeaFirst Securities and SeaFirst maintains security are suggested safeguards in place? Mr. Hanna explained yes...the proposed agreement would be with the Trust Department of SeaFirst which is a separate entity within the SeaFirst Bank Corporation. The City's securities would be held in the City's name and not An a pool format in which the City's securities would be intermingled with those that make up the Bank's own portfolio as well as other customers. Mr. Overson questioned how had the City handled this in the past? Mr. Hanna explained the City has held securities with the bank under the terms of a Commercial Agreement, which embraces having the bank do internal transfers of the securities that we purchased through SeaFirst directly into the Trust Department. The proposed agreement expands our capacity to allow either on delivered free or delivery verses payment basis to transfer securities purchased from other parties who might be a broker, dealer or another bank. What perctpitated this requested action - one of the dealers with whom we have traded quite actively is leaving the Seattle market place thereby necessitating that the Clty's securities currently being held by that brokerage firm be transferred to a safe keeping account. M/S/C/U(Horton/Johnson) to approve Resolution No. 2205, designating Seattle First National Bank as an agent of the. City of Bremerton for the safekeeping of securities. 8A - POBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF PLANNING COBe!ISSION'S DECISION UPHOLDING THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S DENIAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE ADM VAR-3-8?. APPLICANT: VIRGINIA & ROCCO PIZZUTO, LOCATION: 1206 FIFTH STREET, #AB88-052 On January 19, 1988, the Planning Co~ission voted 4 to 2 upholding the Director of Community Development's denial of a variance request to construct a garage at 1206 Fifth Street. This decision is being appealed to the City Council. In order to overturn the Planning Commisslon's decision, the Council must pass a motion by 2/3rds vote. will take 6 votes to overturn the Planning Commission's decision.) Vlce President Overson asked the "Appearance of Fairness/Conflict Of Interest questlon wlth all Councll members belng s&ated. Jack Alllnuham, planning, outllned the request for vatlance and the Plannlng Commissions action to de~y that request. Mr. Alllnuham stated that the Zonlng Ordinance requlres that garages maintain at least a 10 ft., setback from the center of the alley and that garages and accessory structures not exceed 50~ wldth of the rear yard area. Mr. Alllncham provlded a view foil showing the property and placement of the proposed garage. The alley is 14 feet wlde and the garage would have to set back an additional 3 feet from property line. If there was no alley and no other structures on an adjoining property within five feet of the property, then a garage by the existing Zoning TAPE #821 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 17, 1988 Page 10 of 14 Ordinance, could be constructed in such a fashion. Mr. Allnaham stated he had slides available if Council wished to view them. Walter M. Hackerr, Attorney, representing Virginia and Rocco Pizzuto, stated that the required 10 ft., setback would pass through the proposed garage as well as two existing garages and that is the reason the applicant is requesting the variance. The existing garages were constructed before the presenting zoning classification for that area. Structures were built on smaller than normal size lots because that is what was permitted in the City of Bremerton at that time. This appllcant's property was originally built as a government house during WWI, not built to modern measurements and built before most people owned automobiles. The applicant believes he qualifications for a variance for the following reasons: (1) the lot in its topography were made use of before the existing Zoning Ordinance was adopted and no other feasibility alternative to provide off street parking (applicant concerned with lack of off street parking and vandalism); (2) the variance is necessary to preserve the enjoyment of substantial property right. This would provide security for the vehicle and make it possible to sell for future use of this property as it is being used as a residence. The appllcant's may be willing to do without a garage but if someone else is interested in purchasing the property they may want a garage as an amenity; (3) the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public 'welfare or injurious to the property improvemen~s in the vicinity - as it will match the garages already in the same block on the same alley. Mr. Hackerr explained that the garage would front on the alley with access diagonally across the westerly portion of the property approaching the portion of the garage already situated on the Pizzuto property. (4) The variance will not adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan - all of the surrounding lots are not in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. These houses were constructed, area laid out and platted well before the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Bremerton was initially adopted and before Bremerton had a Zoning Ordinance. An alternative the applicant has considered is to move the proposed garage closer to the house, however there is only S feet between the proposed garage and house. Mr. Hacker/ stated he d~d not believe that for ascetic reasons or public welfare it is any more conducive to the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance to subject h~m to put the garage flush with the back of the house. Also, if there was no alley this proposed garage would be legal. Mr. Hackerr pointed out that the proposed garage would not pose any more safety hazard than the existing garages. Mr. Hackerr urged the Council to overturn the Planning COmmisston's denial of the requested variance. Jack Allincham stated when considering a variance the legislative body should consider that there are certain aspect that have to be met and that there are special circumstances applicable to the subject property, such. as shape, topography, location or surroundings. The conclusions of the Director found there was no special circumstance. In response to the issue that the variance is needed for the 'preservation and.enjoyment of a substantial property it was determined that the current use is residential and an accessory structure could be constructed and meet the standards of the Zoning Ordinance. The Director of Planning determined that by granting the TAPE ~521 CltV Councll Reg. Mtg. Mlnutes February 17, 1988 Page 11 of 14 vatlance there could be problems and detrimental affect on surrounding properties. Addressing the Comprehensive Plan - granting of such vatlance will not adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan - stated in the staff report there are goals and policies of Comprehensive Plan regarding non- conforming lots and non-conforming structures. This non- conforming lot does not meet the 40 ft., minimum width, allows construction on it as long as the new construction does meet re'cfuired setbacks. Final/y, for granting an Administrative Variance all of the adjoining property owners must agree and in this case there have been no objection by adJoin~ng property owners. This fourth criteria is dropped from the Planning Commission requirements for granting a variance, therefore is not an issue before the Council. Mr. Hackeft stated that he has never been given an explanation or reason wh~t detriment there is to public welfare for granting the variance. It is acknowledged that the lot dad not meet the Comprehensive Plan. Most lots in that area also do not meet the Comprehensive Plan. But does granting the variance for the proposed garage cause a greater problem than is there are the present time. The Planning Commission and Directors findings do not elaborate on the reasons that are in some way injurious to the public welfare. One of the rationals for setback, in the case of an alley, is interfering with traffic - can a truck or emergency vehicle travel through an alleyway - apparently no one has previously had problems with the existing garages all down the area. If the variance is not granted the applicant will be the only resident who will not be able to construct a garage large enough to fit his size of automobile and use the alley. Without adequate garage space or adequate place to park a vehicle in a secure location the detriment to the future value of that property ks great. Mr. Hackerr stated that without an explanation as to what the detriment is to the public welfare the variance should be granted. Mr. Horninu requested that the Planning personnel to show the slides that are available. Jack Allincham showed s/ides of adjacent structures to the applicant's property, alleyway, and applicant's property and proposed site for the garage. Mr. Collins questioned how high .the dirt bank was located at the garage site? Mr. Allincham stated 4~ to 6~ feet in height. Mr. Dawktns questioned as to the possibility of the applicant redssigning the garage so that it would be part of the house? Mr. Overson stated that the applicant would only have to move the garage three feet in order to meet the setback requirements. Mr. Collins expressed concern that another problem be added to an existing problem in that area and Just because previous decision allowed undesirable conditions did not mean that it had to be added to. Mr. Hackerr stated his clients needs were for a garage to house a large size automobile with a workbench area and a single type garage would not meet his needs. Also, the issue of security is an issue. APE #522 #0005 TAPE #521 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes February 1?, t988 Page 12 of 14 M~. Johnson stated that everyone would like 'a garage and it is not the intent to deny the ability to have a garage. However, there are restrictions which prohibit a double garage on the proposed site but would allow a single garage. It is up to the applicant to prove very specific terms in the Zoning Ordinance whereby a yes answer can be given to 3 of the 4 questions regarding variances. Mr. Hacket~ stated that the adjoining neighbors signed on the appltcant's application that they had no objection and during the Planning Commission hearing there was favorable testimony from a neighbor. ' M/S/C/U(Colltns/Johnson) to uphold the Planning Commlssion's decision upholding the Planning Dtrector~s denial regarding ADM VAR-3-87. 7D - RESOLUTION #2206, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES RELATED TO PUBLIC NOTICE AND ADOPTION OF THE NEW ZONING ORDINANCE, INCLUDING THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS, #AB88-051 The new Zoning Ordinance has been recommended by the Planning Commission for City Council approval and will be before the Council soon. Prior to scheduling any public hearings or taking any action, it would be 'beneficial to formalize the most important aspects of this adoption process, specifically "notification" and "correction of errors" following adoption. Eathleen McCluskeV, City Clerk, read into the record a letter received from Rusty Hagar requesting that all property owners, who would be affected by the new proposed Zoning Ordinance, be notified by mail prior to its adoption and with sufficient time to hire consultants, if necessary, to respond to proposed Council action. Ron Houah, Planner, stated that the resolution addresses two important aspects of the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance, (1) notification and (2) correction of errors. The resolution states that notification will be'done through the local newspaper. State law requires that a notice is published announcing that a public hearing will held to take legislative action to adopt a new city-wide Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map. There is no State law requiring that each property owner must be notified, however, it is proposed to put a full page ad in The Sun and also like to either send out notices with utility bills or include an attachment to the utility bills, which would cover most of the owners of property with the City (about 8,500 owners of approximately 16,500 lots within the City limits). It is felt that by doing the suggested advertising it would be providing more than is required by law. Mr. Houah stated that if every property owner received a notice informing them of the current zoning and the proposed zoning - would take one person full time for approximately 1~ years to'complete the Job plus the expense and cost. This method appears to be prohibitive to inform each property owner what the new zoning is going to be. Bill Amo, 6524 Lake Drive, spoke in opposition to the resolution, noting that from hi~ past experience on the Planning CommisSion and serving as a City Council member, that a great amount of effort 'had been put into the new Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map and now that it is completed and ready to bring before the public the public should have an opportunity to voice their acceptance or objections. In order for them to have that opportunity they must be TAPE #522 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes .February 17, 1988 Page 13 of 14 notified properly and running an ad in the local newspaper one or two times is not going to reach each and every property owner affected. Michael Gustarson, P.O. Box 1, Southworth, Bremerton property owner, opposed the proposed resolution and agreed that the City needs a livable Zoning Ordinance but had a problem with the proposed notification process. His attendance at the Council meeting was by chance - he had not read a notice in the newspaper nor received anything by mall. As a property owner he stands the chance of taking a potential loss of up to 8400,000.00 through the proposed Zoning Ordinance and feels that anyone affect in such a way should receive a notification by mail of a scheduled public hearing. Jim Adrian, 621 Washington Avenue, spoke in opposition to the proposed resolution and emphasized the importance of proper notification to all property owners, by mail, of any public hearing scheduled to take action on the new proposed Zoning Ordinance. He pointed out a number of creative ways, including cable access channel, printed "ballot" t~pe booklet, etc., to provide the property owners notice and felt that the newspaper advertising one or two times was totally inadequate for such an important issue that could or would affect a large number of people. Mr. Homing questioned how much money is set aside for notification purposes? Mrl Pratt stated It is not budgeted as a separate ltem...it is under several .;ine items - 85,000 to $6,500 currently is in the budget. t~owever, his dilemmm is if he spend all his budgeted funds ?or advertising he will need additional funding for production of the final approved document. Mr. Homing questioned what a full page ad in The Sun would cost. Ron HouGh stated that a full page ad would cost $921.92 for one time. Mr. Homing also questioned what a "legal notice" in the newspaper would cost? Mr. HouGh stated they run about 830.00 per one time. Mr. Homing stated for clarification that for a cost of 830.00 the City .could meet the State requirements for giving notification on this issue. Mr. Hornin~ questioned what the cost. would be to include notification in the utility billing? Mr. HouGh stated that if a separate flyer were attached to the billing the printing cost could be approximately $200.00. Mr. Hornina questioned the possibility of th~ Planning Department developing a video film to be shown over the cable access channel. Ms. McCluskeV stated that it would be possible to produce such a program and produced fairly quickly depending on how quickly the Planning Department could put together the material to be used. Mr. Hornin~ questioned if mailing labels were available from the County for all property owners. Mr. Houch explained they can be obtained from the Assessor's Office, however, in many instances the notices would be mailed to the banks holding the mortgage on the properties. Mr. Homing questioned' if there was a way to generate a list of property owners at a reasonable cost? Mr. HouGh stated he did not know how difficult it would be do. Mr. Dawkins suggested using voter registration mailing lists. Vice President Overson suggested that a Study Session be held to study ways to notify the public and present-to the Planning Department for further development. Mr. Dawkins questioned who many pieces of property are going to be actually change by the proposed Zoning Ordinance. Mr. TAPE #522 City Council Reg. Ntg. Ninutes February 17, 1988 Page 14 of 14 Pratt stated that the whole City is not being rezoned. New zones are being created to follow the Comprehensive Plan that was adopted and of the 16,000 parcels of the CIty, the Planning Commission found fewer than 25 that warranted a change from residential to Commercial. Mr. Horninu pointed out that the proposed Ordinance would eliminate construction of duplexes in some residential zones and the public is not aware of that proposed change. Mr. Collins expressed concern that each property owner has had the opportunity to attend public meetings or become Involved in Planning CommissiOn meetings and are aware of the affect on their property. He did not support having to handhold them on this issue and believed they were Informed. Mr. Johnson stated the property owners need to be notified in a reasonable manner - that is part of operation of good government practices. #1301 M/S/C/U(Horntng/Johnson) moved to continue this Item for three weeks and that Vice President Overson and/or President Hank Walbel appoint a committee of any interested citizens and a meeting be held at 12:00 noon next Wednesday for a brain storming session and two weeks hence staff returns to Council with costs and time frames. With no further business meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. EATHLEEN L. MCCLUSEEY, CITY CLERK HANK WAIBEL, Council President City of Bremerton ELM/HW/me ccs: Normal Distribution File/Vault //