Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/08/76 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES December 8, 1976 Regular meeting of the City Council of the C:ity of Bremcrton, Washington, was held in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 239 Fourth Street, on Wednesday, December 8, 1976, at 9:20 A.M., PST, with Mayor Jarstad pre- siding. Also present were Commissioner Stewart, Commissioner Schoneman, City Clerk Yeadon, Assistant City Attorney McCluskcy, and a member of the press. Meeting was opened with Pledge of Allegiance and invocation was given by Rev. Hal Staats of the Summit Presbyterian Church. HEARING ON REVENUE SHARING PROPOSED BUDGET City Clerk stated he had advertised this hcaring and published a copy of the 1977 Proposed Budget For Use of Federal Revenue Sharing Funds; that no written comments had been received. There was no one present to discuss the proposed budget with the City Council. Motion by Mayor .Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart to approve the proposed budget as presented to the City Council. Under discussion: Mayor Jarstad stated all Revenue Sharing Funds have been used mn the General Funds; no Revenue Sharing Funds have been used for any new purposes and all uses are proper. Motion carricd unanimously. DOG CATCHER Clerk stated he had been asked by the Humane Society Manager if the City wished to continue with the special budget for rounding up dogs and using the City Van for this purpose. A lengthy discussion was held concerning: (1) whether the City should discontinue this particular service; (2) attempt to find someone more aggressive; or (3) go on a month-to-month basis. Mayor Jarstad favored working within the organizational structure of the Humane Society; Commissioner Stewart favored an aggressive program not necessarily within the Humane Society structure; and Commissioner Schoneman suggested terminating the structure, keeping the money budgeted and making it known the intention is to try and get someone else. Motion by Mayor Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart that the City continue with the present animal control through the Humane Society and place it under a contract that can be discontinued on 30 days notice by the City of Bremerton, carried unanimously. MINUTES OF DECEMBER l, 1976 Clerk read minutes of December 1, 1976. Mayor Jarstad ordered the minutes approved as read. NOTICES OF EMPLOYMENT Mrs. Joann B. Proctor, Wastewater Dept., $4.00 per hr., extra help, effective 12/8/76; Charles William Buell, Parks a Recreation Dept., Part-time Play Leader, $5.50 per hr., effective 12/8/76; Ronald Lloyd Richardson, $3.00 per hr., Parks a Recreation Dept., Part-time Play I,eader, effective 12/8/76; Phillip M. Best, Municipal Court, Judge Pro-Tempore, $9.43 per hr.; Gary A. Cunningham, Municipal Court, Judge Pro-Tempore, $9.43 per hr.; Bruce G. Martin, Municipal Court, Judge Pro-Tcmpore, $9.43 per hr; and Lawrence E. Soriano, Municipal Court, Judge Pro-Tempo]e, $9.43 per hr. Motion by Mayor Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart to approve the notices of employment, carried unanimously. PAYROLL VOUCHERS Claims Fund, Company FICA and Bank Service Fees, $4,176.04; and Salary Funds, Gross Payroll Nov. 15 through Nov. 28, 1976, $143,577.80, both audited by John R. Ross. Motion by Mayor Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart to approve Payroll Vouchers, carried unanimously. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES December 8, 1976 Page two APPLICATION FOR TAXICAB DRIVER LICENSE Gary Lee Waddington, approved by Police Dept. Motion by Mayor Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart to approve the application for taxicab driver, carried unanimously. SURPLUS TYPEWRITER Clerk read memo from Mayor's Office, dated Dec. 3, 1976, requesting that a surplus typewriter be transferred to the Commissioner of Public Work's Office. Motion by Mayor Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart to declare typewriter surplus and transfer to Public Work's Office, carried unanimously. CALL FOR BIDS - CABPET FOR MAIN 0EFICES, FIRST FLOOR, CITY HALL Clerk read memo dated Dec. 6, 1976, requesting a call For bids for carpeting the main offices, First floor, City Hall. Motion by Mayor Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart to call for bids and charge it to the Cumulative Reserve for General Municipal Purposes Fund. Under dis- cussion: Commissioner Stewart stated the approximate amount needed is $4,000.00. Motion carried unanimously. WARREN AVE. AT 16th ST. CHANNELIZATION FAM-M-5487(2) Clerk read memo from City Engineer, dated Dec. 7, 1976, which stated that the Warren Ave. at 16th St. Channelization FAM-M-5487(2) project has been completed and recommending acceptance of the project. Motion by Commissioners Schoneman and Stewart to accept project as complete, carried unanimously. WHEATON WAY AT SYLVAN IMPROVEMENT Clerk read memo from City Engineer, dated Dec. 7, 1976, which stated that the plans and specifications for the Wheaton Way at Sylvan Improvement project are in the hands off the State IIighway Dept. and Federal Dept. of Transporta- tion, and requesting permission to advertise for bids as soon as authorization to proceed is received from the State Highway Dept. Motion by Commissioner Schoneman and Mayor Jarstad to call for bids when proper time arises and get clearance, carried unanimously. WHEATON WAY 5th LANING (BROAD ST. TO RIDDELL RD.) RIGHT-OF-WAY Clerk read memo from City Engineer, Dated Dec. 7, 1976, which stated that additional right-of-way for' the Wheaton Way 5th Laning Right-of-Way Project is needed only for sidewalks, curb returns, and signal pole locations; that deeds or letters of agreement are in the mail to cover all right-of-way for full improvement from the south line of Hollis St. north except Pot four parcels for which the owners opted to receive compensation in accordance with PAM regulations. It further requested authorization to proceed with ihc purchase of these four parcels of right-of-way, which total $20,200.00. Motion by Commissioners Schoneman and Stewart that authorization be given to proceed with the purchase of four parcels off right-of-way totaling $20,200.00, carried unanimously. 10:00 A.M. - PUBLIC RECOGNITION Dr. John Arkins, 1514 Eastlake Dr., read and presented a letter for file from the Board of Directors, Kitsap Lake Environmental Association, dated Dec. 4, 1976, requesting the City Council initiate appropriate action to repeal City Ordinance 3210 amending the Zoning Ordinance i792. It further stated that this request for repeal js a direct protest to the multiple dwelling units known as Forest Ridge Condominiums that are currently planned for construction in an R-1 zone within the Kitsap Lake Basin. City Clerk advised him that this subject would be discussed at the evening recessed Council Meeting in connection with Sheridan Park Neighborhood request For returning the ordinance to the Planning Commission for hearing. -2- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES December 8, 1976 Page three COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS Commissioner Stewart: Received proposal from Cascade Trailways to operate the City Transit; met with the president of the company yesterday afternoon; thinks it is a proposal that will have to be looked at. He does not believe that the bus system will be able to pay for itself even with a $1.00 houschold tax. Has had the contract looked at by a CPA who is critical of the contract because it is based on overhead costs and if BCT increases their business, the overhead goes up and it costs the City more. lie believes the City should negotiate a new contract this coming year. Has asked the City Treasurer and City Auditor to bring in an ordinance to amend the budget in the amount of $50,000.00 to continue the bus operation. May have to talk about an increase in fares as well. He would like some Feelings from the City Council on the proposals. Has talked to Commissioner Gene Lobe that unless the City receives household tax from county people, service will be discontinued. Also may consider raising rates out in the county. Concerned about the length of time it takes to get the area identified in Navy Yard City. tie is not sure the people want a big bus service running with 29 buses and maybe he should cut down the bus service in addftion to raising rates. The proposal he has received is not exactly the type of contract he would like, but would rather have one based on mileage with a different amount for the Navy Yard one-time runs. Commissioner Schoneman commented the City has the taxpayers' approval to increase to $1.00. Mr'. Stewart stated this would not cover the costs. He stated he had to put a budget together for next year; that he had asked for figures From the bus company and did not get them when requested. Mr. Schoneman stated consideration should be given to any proposal that would do the transportation for less and give service. Mayor Jarstad stated the City Council negotiated a contract when the City took over' the bus operation and at the time, it was one of the finest contracts going into a system in the State of Washington. It was the lowest mileage and least subsidy than anyplace in the state of Washington. The City is taking in more in fare box revenue by percentage than most bus operations. BCT has some of the finest maintenance mechanics and has courteous drivers who give good service. Mayor Jarstad discussed the possible use of sales tax revenue and stated the bus service should be continued until the people get an opportunity to vote. If the sales tax vote was favorable, the household tax would be eliminated. Commissioner Stewart stated management has been very slow in changing routes to increase ridership. He cited figures from other cities who are operating their own transit. Commissioner Schoneman: 1. Rain is a blessing; need quite a bit more. The water behind the dam has dropped to a low point since last February; however, the lack of rain assisted in getting Transmission Line #3 installed. Pipe is undergoing flushing and pressure testing. Will be looking at an extension of another 6,000 ft. of smaller line to the freeway intersection at Kitsap Way where this can be brought directly into the system. Waiting for new reservoir in the Kitsap Lake area. 2. This afternoon at 2:00 P.M. the State Highway Dept. will bring a Film to be viewed by anyone who wishes to attend in connection with the use of barriers. 3. Just about finished the timber harvest, $94,342.00 received. Presently building roads throughout the watershed and especially to stands of timber that have not been harvested. Will be a yield in 5 years, about twice as much revenue from timber harvest. Will be taking in about $200,000.00 per year at that time. 4. Continuing the thinning process in the small 9-hole golf course, particularly on f'airways 7, 8, and 9. Scrap materials that cannot be sold commercially will be made available to the public as was done previously. -S- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES December 8, 1976 Page four 5, Had a meeting with the Library Board offering use of a basement area for Senior Citizen activities in their new building, City to pay construction cos~. Some of the questions were: Who is on the site committee and what is happening ]n this area, and when can it be anticipated there will be a new fire hail and swimming pool? He asked to be brought into the site committee, that he has some suggestions for the site committee studying the swimming pool location. Mayor Jarstad stated that the bonds havc been authorized for sale and then proper applications will be submitted to receive funds from IAC for outdoor Funding, which must be submitted by May 1. Probably looking at award date of September for the Activity Center. There will be some public hearings regarding the site selection. There will be discussions in the school district about consolidation of schools which may have an effect on the site location. Mayor Jarstad assured Mr. Schoneman he would be part of that committee and ultimately it will be the City Council's decision. Park Board has been interviewing leading architects in the business of swimming pools and they have picked what they feel is the best qualified firm and will be discussing this with the City Council. The site committce came up with the No. 1 proposal, East Side near school, and No. 2 was Roosevelt Field site but nothing definite has been decided. Commissioner Schoneman stated he felt the best site would be the Coontz School site. Mayor Jarstad: 1. Complimented Mr. Stewart on his hard work and effort on the public trans- portation issue; he has been innovative, factual and hard-headed, for example, going into taxicab service. 2. Seat cushions on the first four rows of Council Chambers will be installed shortly. 3. Reported on the lengthy collective bargaining session held yesterday with the Firefighters Association and City Council's consultants and arbitrator. It was a fair and excellent presentation; hope to have a decision by Dec. 22. ORDINANCE - REFUNDING BONDS PARKING FACILITY Clerk presented Ordinance No. 5527, "AN ORDINANCE of the City of Bremerton, Washington, providing for the issuance of $755,000.00 par value of "City of Bremerton Parking Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1976," for the purpose of providing the funds to redeem $740,000.00 par value of its outstanding" City of Bremerton Parking Revenue Bonds" dated November 1, 1970; fixing the date, Form, denomination, maturities, interest rate, terms and covenants of such refunding bonds; providing for and authorizing the purchase of certain obliga- tions of the United States of America out of the proceeds of the sale of such refunding bonds and for tbe use and application of the moneys to be derived from such investment; providing for the redemption on November l, 1987, of the then outstanding "City of Bremerton Parking Revenue Bonds" dated November 1, 1970; authorizing the execution of an agreement with Seattle-First National Bank, Seattle, Washington, as Refunding Trustee; confirming the sale and providing for the delivery of the refunding bonds to First Washington Corpora- tion, Seattle, Washington; and declaring an emergency." Mr. Jack Shirley, who is handling the bond refunding program, was present. Commissioner Stewart stained that this ordinance was prepared by Bond Attorney Gay; that he had asked specifically if there was any risk to the City; that the City can refund again at a future time. Mr. Stewart stated he wanted a letter from Mr. Gay and from Mr. Shirley stating that there was no risk in this refunding process to the City. Mr. McCluskey stated he had reviewed the Ordinance and Agreement but he wasn't going to give an opinion and wasn't going to take responsibility because when the City hired outside bond counsel and had Mr. Gay's opinion, City Counsel should rely on his opinion and not Mr. McCluskey's opinion; that Mr. Gay gets paid out of the refunding for his legal advice and as a specialist in the area, the City Council can rely on his opinion. Mr. Shirley stated he believed Mr. Gay would give the City a letter to the effect there is no risk to the City. Mr. Shirley stated that Mr. Gay could write a letter regarding laws in effect today, but it is possible that a law could be passed that could affect the bonds in the future. -4- CITY COUNCIL M1NUTES December 8, 1976 Page five Mr. Stewart stated he wanted a letter assuring that the City has taken a step in the right direction. Mr. Shirley stated this is as clean a refunding as he has seen in years. Mr. Stewart asked for a letter from Mr. Shirley also. Mr. Stewart stated he has been told these things already and the ordinance is being passed on emergency due to time element involved in the refunding. Motion by Commissioner Stewart and Mayor Jarstad to pass Ordinance No. 3527 on first reading, by title only, carried as follows: Mayor Jarstad, Yes; Commissioner Stewart, Yes; Commissioner Schoneman, Yes. REFUNDING BOND AGREEMENT Clerk presented agreement between City and Seattle First National Bank called the "Refunding Trustee". Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Schoneman to approve the agreement and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign for the City, carried unanimously. VACATION OF HOULE STREET Clerk read memo from City Engineer, dated Dec. 6, 1976, stating that when the City vacated their interest in an Easement on Houle St. in the Qualheim Hill area a portion was inadvertently omitted; that it is believed it was the City's intention to vacate interest in the street easement on Houle St. from the south margin of Kean as now exists to the southwest margin on Hartberg St. as existed in 1966. Asst. City Attorney McCluskey stated that a petition was needed to obtain a vacation. Motion by Commissioner Schoneman and Mayor Jarstad to obtain a petition, carried unanimously. SET HEARING DATE - SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - WOWARAS Clerk read memo Prom Asst. City Planner requesting hearing date for' Substantial Development Permit/Wowaras be set for Dec. 22, 1976. Motion by Commissioners Schoneman and Stewart to set hearing date for 11:00 A.M., Dec. 22, 1976, carried unanimously. PROPOSED HUD BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FOR 1977 Clerk read memo from Grants Administrator, dated Dec. 3, 1976, stating that the required public advertisement will appear in the Bremerton Sun on Dec. 4, 1976, allowing for the necessary time period of 10 days prior to the first public hearing; that the charges for the advertisement will be shared with the Kitsap County Grants Administration; that the dates and times for the 2 bearings are Dec. 15, 1976 at 7:0O P.M. and Dec. 22, 1976 at 10:00 A.M. Motion by Mayer Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart to set hearings for these dates, carried unanimously. STATEMENT OF CANVASS Clerk read Statement of Canvass from the Ellection Board of Kitsap County, dated Nov. 22, 1976, certifying that Proposition No. 1 passed with the necessary 60% YES votes and Proposition No. 2 passed with the necessary 50% YES votes. Mayor Jarstad asked Clerk to get precinct count on this election. NAVY WATER/SEWER CONTRACT Clerk reported that the Western Division Office is working on evaluating the government audit and will be arranging a meeting about the middle of December with City officials. Mayor' Jarstad reported that sometime in the future, the Navy will be treated the same as far as rates are concerned as any heavy industrial user; that this will come from a federal law. SAFETY COMMITTEE Clerk read letter from Safety Specialist, Great American Insurance Co., dated Nov. 29, 1976, stating that Defensive Driving Training Course should be con- sidered top priority so all City drivers will have completed this course; that the accident review rcvcaled no vehicle accidents during the past month; that the ageads for the Dec. 16, 1976 meeting should include progress of Defensive Driving Course Training, supervisor's information for scheduling the one remaining First Aid Course, and formulating plans to establish the Safety Organization objectives for 1977. -6- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES December 8, 1976 Page six APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE - TV Clerk read letter from Shirley A. Marbin, Staff Assistant for Community Tele- Communications, Inc., dabed Nov. 25, 1976, stating that Nation Wide Cable- vision, Inc. has applied for authorization to add additional television signals; that a copy of application should be placed in the City's public files and be made available for inspection to any member of the public. RESOLUTION N0. 1694 Clerk read resolution No. 1694, "RESOLUTION authorizing the filing of a pie- application with the Department of Housing and Urban Development, United States of America, for Comprehensive Planning Assistance under Section 701 of bhe Housing Act of 1954 as amended." Motion by Mayor Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart to pass Resolution No. 1694, carried as follows: Mayor Jarstad, Yes; Commissioner Stewart, Yes; Commissioner Schoneman, Yes. ORDINANCE N0. 3328 Clerk read Ordinance No. 3328, second reading, "AN ORDINANCE accepting and incorporating into the corporate limits of the City of Bremerton certain lands lying outside the limits of the City of Bremerton and being contiguous to the City of Bremerton." Motion by Mayor Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart to pass Ordinance No. 3328, carried as follows: Mayor Jarstad, Yes; Commissioner Stewart, Yes; Commis- sioner Schoneman, Yes. ORDINANCE - FIRST READING CORRECTION ORDINANCE Clerk read, first reading, "AN ORDINANCE repealing Ordinance 525, Sections 11, 13, 14, 15 and Ordinance ~25, Section 20, as amended by Ordinance 1979, Section 1. Motion by Commissioner Stewart and Mayor Jarstad to approve ordinance on first reading, carried as follows: Mayor Jarstad, Yes; Commissioner Stewart, Yes; Commissioner Schoneman, Yes. REVOCABLE EASEMENT - FIRST STREET DOCK City Clerk stated that the Revocable Easement on the First Sbreet Dock from the Port of Bremerton had expired and he had asked the City Attorney to draw up a new one for presentation to the Port District. If the Port District felt they want the City to have an easement, they will have their Board approve it. Motion by Mayor Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart to present the Revocable Easement to the Port District for their consideration, carried unanimously. BILLS Motion by Commissioner Stewart and Mayor Jarstad to give blanket approval to voucher 4878 and vouchers 4880 to 4961 inclusive in the amount of $68,815.50, audited by John R. Ross, carried unanimously. Meeting recessed from 11:40 A.M. till 7:00 P.M. Recessed meeting of the City Council was called to order at 7:0~ P.M. in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 239 Fourth Street, Bremerton, Washington, on Wednesday, December 8, 1976, with Mayor Jarstad presiding. Also present were Commissioner Stewart, Commissioner Schoneman, City Clerk Yeadon, and Asst. City Attorneys Sexton and 0lsen. TAPE #95 HEARING - INTERPRETATION OF TIIE 9 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE - 0RDINANCE 5210 (5182) (As it pertains to Lance Haynes) City Clerk stated he had advertised, posted, and mailed letters as required by the zoning ordinance. Clerk read minutes of Planning Commission, dated Nov. 16, 1976 concerning "9 dwelling units per acre". He then read Asst. City Attorney 0lsen's letter of Dec. 6, 1976} a letter dated Dec. 5, 1976, signed by Lloyd and Niva Valentine, owners of lots 32 and 33, First Addition of Sheridan Park, urging City Council to approve the request of Lance Haynes Construction Co. to build the planned units; the last part of a letter signed -6- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES December 8,1976 Page seven by Glenn Garrison, attorney for Lance Haynes, starting with the section entitled, "Law applicable to the appeal"; and a memo, dated Nov. 18, 1976, to the Planning Dept. from the City Engineer giving information concerning pete tests and sanitary sewer systems. It was noted there are other pieces of correspondence in the file, but the clerk was not required to read them. Mr. Sexton gave an opening statement concerning the purpose of the hearing, which is to decide the merits of the 9 units per acre interpretation as it applies to Lance Haynes; that the issue is whether the Lance Haynes project comes under the 9 units per acre; that the Planning Commission upheld the Planning Director and the issue is whether the Planning Commission was erroneous. The hearing opened with some residents asking questions to clarify the matter to bc discussed. These persons were: William Amo, 238 Willow, Charles Ullock, 137 Lower Marine Drive, and Lewis Morris, 304 Lebo BIvd. Commissioner Stewart stated he lived near Willow St. and asked if he should bc involved with the hearing. Mr. Sexton asked if he owned a single-family house and he stated he did. Mr. Sexton asked if he had any plans for develop- ment and Mr. Stewart stated he did not. Mayor Jarstad stated he owned property in the Sheridan area. Mr. Sexton asked the audience if any citizens had an objection. There was no indication of objection. Mr. Glenn Garrison, Attorney, discussed the "appearance of fairness doctrine". Mayor Jarstad asked the record to show that neither party in this hearing has contacted him privately on this matter; no neighbor in the area has contacted him privately nor the petitioners. Commissioner Stewart stated he had been contacted; that one neighbor called him who was not opposed to the 9 dwelling units per acre and anothcr said it shouid be repealed. Commissioner Stewart stated the petitioners did not contact him, neither did Mr. Haynes contact him at any time on this issue. Commissioner Schoneman stated he had not been contacted. Lewis D. Morris asked about the mcthod of taking the perc test, which was answered by Mr. Sohoneman. Meeting recessed at 7:55 P.M. and reconvened at 8:04 P.M. William Amo was the first person to discuss the issue. Mr. Amo did not agree that this development is legal under R-1 classification; that it is described accurately under R-2. Mr. Amo then went point by point through the zoning ordinance under R-1 and R-2 classifications and definitions and compared it with Ordinance 3210 to indicate that Ordinance 3210 did not comply with Ordinance 1792. He discussed sidewalks, set backs, lot lines, and densities. Mr. Amo's opinion was that the 9 dwelling units per acre Ordinance 3210 contradicts previous zoning rules sct forth in Ordinance 1792 regarding sidewalks, tot lines, parking, and building heights. He felt these two ordinances wcrc contradictory. Mr. Sexton was asked to give an opinion after each statement of Mr. Amo, and discussed the difference between the platting of propcrty and lot lines as designated in the zoning ordinances. Richard Wells, 126 Lebo, spoke concerning lot lines, which he believes should be retained for buildings. Charles Ullock talked about lot size, using a credit and charge formula. Considerable discussion was held concerning multiple structures in R-1. The following people discussed various provisions of the zoning ordinance 1792 and 3210: Jack Mangrum, 320 Willow, Ted Turner, 3517 Monticola Dr. Mr. Lance Haynes, 1705 John Carlson Rd., the developer, stated his building heights do not exceed 27 Ft. from garage floor to the roof; quoted from the 1973 Building Code. He stated the buildings are not marginal in any way and the Building Dept. can at any time turn down a project if it does not meet the codes. Further discussions were held by Mr. Sexton concerning the height, Front yards, and parking in answering points brought up by Mr. Amo and other residents. -7- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES December 8, 1976 Page eight Mr. Ralph Smith, 2740 Hefner, suggested the buildings could be sold off as condominiums in the future to take advantage of tax laws and Mr. Sexton stated the owner would have to reapply to the Planning Commission to do this. Mr. Smith suggested it would be better to build on separate lots. Mr. Lance Haynes talked about protecting the neighbors in the construction of the location of the lots of his proposed project. Mayor Jarstad announced that after about 15 or 20 minutes of testimony, the other question concerning the appeal to send the ordinance back to the Planning Commission for hearings would be taken up For discussion. Doug Booth, 1332 East Hope, discussed the question as to how far the Council feels comfortable in what is written in black and white in relation to the intent. Mr. Booth discussed whether this project is proper and the question is not if the zoning ordinance is proper; whether the proposal is a viable alternative to duplexes and the intent of what was behind the passage of the ordinance is not being attacked here but just as the ordinance applies to the project proposed. Ed Mill, 213 Willow, read a statement concerning multi- family dwellings and discussed the relationship of the 9 units per acre ordinance to Ordinance 1792. Mr'. Mill discussed the "intent" question. He stated the Building Dept. would be in violation of the Building Code in issuing a permit to Mr. Haynes. Mr. Bob Methaul, 2039 Northlake Way, asked to have the R-1 zoning left alone; that many people living in R-2 zones and apartment houses are looking forward to when they can get out of apartment buildings into single-family dwellings. Mayor Jarstad brought up for discussion the request of two petitions that have asked for a rehearing on the application of the 9 dwelling units per acre now that it has been in practice for approximately two years; that citizens have been concerned with the application of the ordinance in connection with large acreage. tie discussed the proposal of a housing development at Kitsap Lake in which it has been stated that the building of multi-family dwellings would amount to about 14 units per' acre because after construction, it has been stated by the developer that part of the land would be sold off. Commissioner Stewart agreed the ordinance should go back for hearings. Motion by Commissioner Stewart and Mayor ,Jarstad to send Ordinance No. 3210 back to the Planning Commission fox' review. Considerable discussion was held following the motion. Commissioner Schoneman asked some questions concerning returning the ordinance to the Planning Commission; indicated he was not com- pletely aware of the application and ramifications of Ordinance 3210. City Attorney Sexton stated bhat sending back the ordinance to the Planning Commission has no affect on Lance Haynes; that the Council still has to make a decision; that his rights were established at the time of filing his application. Mr. Sexton stated there are other projects that are being considered fox' applica- tion under Ordinance 3210 and the City Council could call For a moratorium while the ordinance is under review. tie stated further that the Council could enact some restrictions on bhc present ordinance which could restrict to three acres and anything over three acres would go through the Planning process. This would allow the City Council time to consider larger projects or to take action if the City Council wanted to restrict projects under this particular ordinance; if the ordinance simply is referred back to the Planning Commission, someone could come in and file an application and would be in a legal position, such as Lance itaynes is now. Mayor Jarstad favored a moratorium so that no permits would be granted; that the ordinance should go through the Planning Commission again, get in-put, and put in controls needed to be exercised and people can decide what they want in an R-1 area. Commissioner Schoneman agreed it should go back to the Planning Commission as this has opened a can of worms. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Mayor Jarstad and Commissioner Stewart that there be a moratorium and no permits will be granted. Under discussion: Commissioner Schoneman commented that jt has been a simple operation to go through zoning process -8- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES December 8, 1978 Page nine and this ordinance has opened many problems and he would like to see it go back for rehearings. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Jim Buckley, 7826 SE 75th Place, Mercer' island, representative of the developers for the proposed project at Kitsap Lake, stated that they have "vested rights" on the development at Kitsap Lake. Mr. Buckley discussed his company's position as it pertains to their having made application. Other residents who spoke in opposition were Ted Turner, 3517 Monticola, Al Colvin, 341 Hill Court, Doug Booth, and William Amo. Mr. Glenn Garrison referred to his letter which was read in part previously and stated that no one can deny the project complies with the words of the ordinance; that he did not find the ordinance to be confusing jn itself; that the Planning Commission concurred and he had looked at the minutes of the Planning Commission and found they had decided that Haynes has complied; that a change in the ordinance should not affect Mr. Haynes, who has bought the land and platted under what he thought the ordinance stated. Further dis- cussions were held concerning sidewalks and location of buildings. Ann Maloof, Rt. 1, Box 1740, asked questions concerning "vested interest". Mr. Sexton stated that "vested right" is established at the time a person requests a building permit - filing an application. A person is vested if he is granted a building permit in accordance with statutory requirements and in accordance with the ordinance. If there is some error or some manner in which a person does not comply, he is not entitled to being vested. if there is an error, he can't correct the error and the ordinance can be changed. Charles Ullock read from a prepared statement which he Filed at that time with the City Clerk. Mr. Richard Wells, 126 Lebo, discussed permitted uses and definitions. Mr. Ed Machinski, 321 Lebo, stated he believed it was the govern- ment intention when platting this land to reserve it for single-family units. A considerable discussion was held concerning intent - that Mr. Sexton stated the Council has the choice of looking back at their intent when passing the ordinance; that he feels the Council must look at the language to see if it is clear and not ambiguous; that this matter' has come before the Council on the question whether there is an ambiguity. If it is not ambiguous, then have to go back and concur in the ordinance. Doug Booth stated it has been clear that the intent was 9 dwelling units per acre and that is not the argument. What is being argued is: Can someone put two structures on one lot? Mr. Sexton has indicated that the new ordinance does not require these lot lines. The only persons who can determine this are the City Council. Did the City Council intend to allow two structures per platted lot? Mr. Sexton commented that the City does have two structures and has for many years and intent was to allow that by the City Council. Mayor Jarstad commented in looking at these areas, he did not think it was the evaluation of the passage of this ordinance that the City Council was talking about infinity on 9 units per acre. Maybe limits should have been put in the ordinance and the question is what is the intent in incorporating 9 units per acre in one area. Mr. Sexton discussed the question of lot areas, cited the zoning ordinance section 328, and commented it does not say in there there must be only a building on a lot. Past practice and common knowledge reveals that there are many places where more than one structure has been built on a lot or more than one lot has been used for a structure. Meeting was recessed at 11:05 P.M. and reconvened at 11:17 P.M. Mayor Jarstad asked for any new testimony. Mr. ,Jack Mangrum stated he believed the ordinance ambiguous and does not agree with the terms expressed in it. He also discussed the decision which the City Attorney has stated must be based on "intent". He declared that if the City Council's intention was to go in the way of a monstrosity, then Haynes has a valid application; otherwise, should vote against it. Commissioner Stewart discussed the possibility of getting -9- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES December 8, 1976 Page ten another opinion from Municipal Research Council and if the same opinion is received from them as the City Attorney has given, Mr. Haynes would be granted the permit. If not, the City could do something else. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Schoneman to get another opinion from Municipal Research Council and if bhe same opinion is received as from the City Attorney, only one decision could be made, which would be to grant the permit; if not could do something else. Mayor Jarstad did not feel this was a proper motion and discussed the need for evaluating the testimony. He stated there has been considerable discussion about "intent"; that he did not recall talking about broad areas in the City coming under the ordinance, but isolated lots that would mix in an R-1 area. He suggested that he would like to have the motion inclusive. Commissioner Stewart stated the question is: Has Mr. Haynes done everything legal? If he has, the Council has to grant his permit. Mr. Schoneman discussed the co-mingling of the two ordinances and made remarks about the background of the ordinance, that is, how it was drawn up; that the ordinance was proposed by the Planner, evidentally drawn up by the City Attorney's Office, approved by the Planning Commission, been before City Council for two readings, approved and adopted and in all fairness to Mr. Haynes, be has followed all that is in the ordinance; that from what he has gathered at this hearing tonight, that the ordinance is clear; however, he agreed that it was a good suggestion to refer the matter for review and another interpretation by another attorney. Mayor Jarstad suggested the City Attorney's Office would review the testimony and if there were any salient facts, the City Attorney's Office will be expected to inform the Council. Mr. Sexton's final comments were to state that if the 9 unit per acre ordinance was intended to allow something similar to this, there is nothing to interpret. The question is whether it was the City Council's "intent". The original question was whether the Planning Commission was erroneous in backing the Planning Director in approving the 9 units per acre; he stated he has had five attorneys in his office working on this particular problem. Commissioner Stewart stated he wanted to know about conflicts brought out by the ordinance. Mr. Morris asked if it was the intent of this ordinance to completely circumvent the R-1 zone. Commissioner Stewart stated it was not the intent to circumvent the R-1 zone; to some degree, yes. Motion carried unanimously. Hearing concluded at 11:35 P.M. ORDINANCE NO. 5329 Clerk read, first reading, "AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 3271 as amended by Ordinances 3278 and 3512 approprialing additional funds For the year 1976, and declaring an emergency." Motion by Commissioners Schoneman and Stewart to pass on first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 3329, carried as follows: Mayor Jarstad, Yes; Commissioner Stewart, Yes; Commissioner Schoneman, Yes. Meeting adjourned at 11:40 P.M. G. C. Yeadon, Sr.,City Clerk Approved: Glenn K. Jarstad, Mayor -10-