Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/09/78 UNAPI'ROV[ D M1NU[[ S city coMMzss oN.R ;' CO!JNCIL APPR0VED May 9, 1978 !378 ]APE #133 Regular meeting of the City Commissioners of the City of Brementon, Washington, (A) 2151 was held in the Counci] Chambers at City Hall, 239 Fourth Str'eet~ on Tuesday, May 9~ 1978 at 9:10 A.Mo with Commissioner Stewart presiding. Also present were Commissioner.Swanson, City Clerk Mandio, Asst. City Attorney Sexton and representatives fPom the press and radio. Mayor Jarstad was absent, attending the National Convention of the Council of Governors in Denver. Meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and invocation was given by Rev. Leslie OttePby of Our SaviouP's Lutheran Church. MINUTES OF MAY 2~ 1978 Clerk Pepopted that there were two amendments to the minutes of May 2, 1978: (1) NOTICES OF PTBA BALLOT IN MAY - the motion was seconded by Commissioner Swanson, not Commissioner Stewart; and (2) The minutes should reflect that City Youth Day was sponsored by the BPemerton Elks~ Lodge #1181 and the Elks sponsored a luncheon fop the youths who participated and City officials on that day. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to approve minutes as amended, carried. SEPARATIONS Dennis W. Hancock, Police Dept., Warrant Server, 5/19/78. Frank ShaPp~ Water Supply, Serviceman Senior~ 5/10/78. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to approve separations, carried. NOTICES OF EMPLOYMENT Sheila Anne Pullin~ Parks & RecPeation~ Part-time PlayleadeP~ $3.50 pep 5/8/78. James M. Coombe, Water Supply, Extra Help, $4.00 pen hn., 5/15/78. Mike DougZas, Parks & Recreation~ Extra Labor~ $2.65 per hP., 5/8/78. Scott Allen Coney, Street Dept.~ Temporary Employee~ $4.00 pen hr., 5/8/78. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to approve notices of employment, carried. PAYROLL VOUCHERS Salary Fund, Gross Payroll fop period 4/17/78 thru 4/30/78~ $184,068.90 and Claim Fund, FICA and Bank Service Fees for same period, $6,445.13. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to approve payroll vouchers, carried. BONDS - Swimming Pool Clerk requested Council approval for printing of bonds fop the swimming pool and payment of bond counsel fees. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to approve printing of bonds at an approximate cost of $500.00 and payment of bond counsel fees at an approxi- mate cost of $1,500.00 to $2,000.00, carried. APPLICATION FOR TAXICAB DRIVER~S LICENSE Mark Thomas FowleP, appPoved by Detective Baxter for Chief of Police. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to approve application for taxicab drivep*s license, carried. CALL FOR BIDS - Salt Machine and Sanders (Street Dept.) Clerk read memo from Street SupePintendent~ dated May 8, 1978, which requested authorization to ca1! fop bids fop one salt machine and two sanders. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to approve call for bids as stated above, carried. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to surplus two 1966 Hopper type spreaders and use fop trade-in, carried. CALL FOR BIDS - Asphalt Contract (Engineering) Clerk read memo from City Engineer, dated May 8~ 1978~ which requested authoriza- tion to call fop bids fop paving materials and equipment fop the period July 1978 thPu June 30, 1979. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to approve call for bids as stated above, carried. CITY COMMISSIONERS' M1NUIIS May 9~ 1978 Page two CALL FOR BIDS - RESERVOIR NO. 19 (Water Dept.) Clerk read memo from Water Superintendent~ dated May 9, 1978, which requested authorization ~o call for bids for Reservoir No. 19. The memo stated this project ~s funded by 40% Referendum Funds~ 50%+ Trident Impact Funds and the remainder by local funds. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to authorize call for bids for construction of Reservoir No. 19~ subject to approval of plans and specifications by the City Attorney's office, carried. CALL FOR BIDS - Back-Pressure Sustaining Valve & Two 16" Butterfly Valves (Water) Clerk read memo from Water Superintendent, dated May 5, lg78, which sta~ed it is necessary to install a sustaining or back-pressure valve at Gorst Creek. The memo requested authorization to call for bids for two flanged butterfly valvesf Dresser Type No. 450 or equal, and one 16" Cla-Valve Model 51G or equal at an approximate cost of $7,000.00. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to call for bids as stated above, carried. 1977 ANNUAL REPORT SUPPLEMENT Clerk presented the 1977 Annual Report Supplement and stated the National Flood Insurance Program requires that communities designate the person responsible for recording the elevations of the lowest floor (including basements) for all new construction and substantial improvements to existing structures in the special flood hazard areas. Commissioner Swanson requested that this be Pererred to his office fop review.before Someone is designated. AMBULANCE SUBSIDY Clerk read letter from Robert Mussman, Chairman of Ambulance Committee, dated May 8, 1978, which recommended that the City pay Leyde Enterprises a flat rate of $2,000.00 pep month rather than the present payment schedule. The letter stated that except for one month in the last year, Leyde Enterprises ambulances have made more runs pep month than was necessary to obtain the maximum subsidy of $2,000.00. Commissioner Stewart stated he has no objection to this, but he feels they shouldwai~ until Mayor Jarstad returns. Commissioner Swanson agreed. GRANT AWARD FOR REMODELING MANETTE COMMUNITY BUILDING Clerk read memo from Parks Superintendents dated May 5, 1978, attached to which was a copy of the official notification of the City's grant award of $10,000.00 to further remodel the Manette Community Building. The memo stated the Parks Department's plans ape to expand the present day room and to make some minor improvements to the Pestrooms and kitchen areas; and Mr. Foley will contact Mr. Chuck Gilman fop architectural services. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and 'Swanson to accept grant award and authorize Mayor and City Clerk to sign for the City, carried. PUBLIC HOUSING PROJECT (Letter to Housing Authority from HUD) Clerk read copy of letter to BPemerton Housing Authority from HUD, dated April 20, 1978, which stated they are please to approve the application fop Publlc Housing Project and to issue the Program Reservation for project WASH 3-8. EASEMENT AMENDMENT - Sanitary Sewer on Vacated Houle Street Clerk read memo from City Engineer, dated May 4, 1978, which recommended that the City accept an easement amendment fop the maintenance of the existing sanitary sewer llnes on what was heretofore known as Houle Street, which will be ten ft. in width. The memo stated this amendment has been approved as to form by the City Attorney's office. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to accept easement and refer to City ~lerk fop recording, carried. STREET LIGHTS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS Clerk read memo from City Engineer, dated May 4, 1978, which recommended that street lights be installed at the following locations: (a) In the vicinity of Washington State Driver Licensing Building on Auto Center Way; (b) In the vicinity of Washington State Dept. of Social and Health Services Building on -2- CiPf COMMJSSiONIRS' May 9, 1978 Page throe Auto Center Way; (c) On 13th Street between Chester and Broadway; (d) At the intersection of' East 18th St. and Winfield Ave.; and (e) OIl Winfie]d Ave. between East 18th St. and East High]and St. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to follow recommendations of City Engineer and approve installation of street lights as stated above, carried. PROSPECTIJS AND AGREEMENT FOR 6th & WARREN Cler'k read memo from City Engineer, dated May 5, 1978, attached to which was a prospectus and agreement for the widening of Warren Ave. south of 6th and a prospectus and agreement for a traffic signal at Burwell and Montgomery. The memo stated the Engineering Dept. feels that these projects may be funded from the Safer-Off-Systems Federal Funds. Motj. on by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to accept prospectus and agreements and authorize Mayor and City Clerk to sign for the City, carried. BFVISED PROGRAM OF UTILIZATION FOR FORMER FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTIES WHICH HAVE BEEN CONVEYED TO THE CITY FOR PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATION USE Clerk read memo from Parks Superintendent, dated May 2, 1978, which stated the Parks Dept. received a letter from the United States Dept. of the Interior, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service indicating that all, or portions of the following surplus properties, appear to be in non-compliance with the program of utilization submitted in the appIication for them: Portion Naval Ammunition Depot, Deed Date, 1/23/64; Portion Naval Ammunition Depot, Deed Date, 2/15/66; Portion NavaI Ammunition Depot, Deed Date, 2/15/66; Portion Navy Eastpark Housing, Deed Date, 3/4/68; Portion Naval Ammunition Depot, Deed Date, 6/18/68; and Portion Navy Eastpark Housing, Deed Date, 4/5/71. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to approve revised program of utilization. Under discussion: Clerk stated Mr. Foley submitted a copy of an amended deed which should be referred to the City Attorney for review. Motion carried. REAL ESTATE CONTRACT BETWEEN CITY AND JAMES M. CARTER Clerk stated'tHe City had~entered into a real estate contract with James M. Carter in 1958 and he has paid off the contract. She presented a quit claim deed which fulfills the terms of the contract. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to approve Quit Claim Deed and authorize Mayor and City Clerk to sign for the City, carried. AMBEUN REZONE HEARING (Letter from Mr. Amo) Clerk read letter from Wi11iam Amo, dated May 4, 1978, which stated that he had contacted approxlmately 50% of the neighbors ~egarding development of a condominium in the Sheridan Park Neighborhood and if anyone feels he cannot or will not make a decision based on the testimony that will be presented at the Planning Commission Hearing, he will step down and not participate in the fezone hearing. Mr. Sexton stated it is his opinion that Mr. Amo step down. ORDINANCE NO. 3429 - Harris Rezone Clerk read, second reading, "AN ORDINANCE amending the use and area maps of Ordinance No. 1792 (HARRIS)". Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to pass Ordinance No. 3429 on second reading, by title only, carried as foljows: Mayor Jarstad, Absent; Commissioner Stewart, Yes; Commissioner Swanson, Yes. ORDINANCE NO. 3430 - Mills Rezone Clerk read, second reading, "AN ORDINANCE amending the use and area maps according to Ordinance No. 1792 (MILLS)." Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to pass Ordinance No. 3430 on second reading, by title on]y, carried as follows: Mayor Jarstad, Absent; Commissioner Stewart, Yes; Commissioner Swanson, Yes. BILLS Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to give blanket approval to vouchers 4228 and 4230 inclusive in the amount of $5,317.22, audited by John Ross, carried. -3- CI]Y COMM]SSIONERS' MINUTES May 9, 1978 Page four. MINIMUM MAINTENANCE ORDINANCE Discussion was held regarding the minimum maintenance ordinance and Commissioner Stewart stated that if a simple ordinance were adopted and a committee formed, the problem of maintenance could be solved. Mr. Sexton stated he would assign Karen Conoley to work on this. Mr. Sexton asked where the City stands on the dangerous buildings on waterfront areas and Commissioner Swanson stated the buildings on Washington Beach are going down slowly. Mr. Sexton asked about other buildings along Washington Beach and Commissioner Swanson requested that someone be assigned to take a look at all those buildings along Washington Beach; that he feels there are several buildings along there that are dangerous. He also requested the status of the ones that are being torn down. WATER BILLS Commissioner Stewart stated the United States Supreme Court has Said that a person is entitled to a hearing before their water can be shut off. He stated he would like to set up a procedure that anyone who thinks their billing is wrong, can talk to someone outside his department~ possibly someone in the ClePk's office. Discussion ~ollowed and Commissioner Stewart explained the process now being used before water is ~hut off. He stated he had talked to the State Auditor~s office and it was suggested that the City raise the 50¢ penalty fee. Meeting recessed from 9:50 until 10:30 A.M. HEARINGS - Jolin Rezone~ Citizen Participation Plan and Proposed Amendment to Brementon Shoreline Management Master Program Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to hold hearings in order listed above,.,carried. TAPE #133 JOLIN REZONE (A) 2167 Clerk stated the hearing had been advertised, posted and letters of notification sent as required by law. She read Planning Commission Resolution No. 464 which recommended approval. She stated 46 advisory ballots had been sent, 22 returned with 15 in favor and 7 against. Clerk then read letter from Lyle Robands, Pres~- dent of Charleston/National Area Neighborhood Council, dated April 17, 1978, which stated their neighborhood group voted to approve this Pezone. Ken Artebony, Planning Director~ stated the proposed development is located on the NW corner of FarPagut and Charleston Streets, both of which ape 60 foot right-of-ways. He stated the proposed plan is fop development of a six- unit ~partment structure, showing access to the parking area from Charleston, with parking stalls for six caps. He stated the Planning Commission felt some consideration should be given to some Pedesign to make additional parking fop at least.two caps available on the site. PROPONENTS: James Jolin, 5664 Benjamin Rd., stated that both FarPagut and Charleston are 30 foot roads and the road can be utilized fop parking. He stated the parking lot is quite large and their intent was that they did not want cars backing onto Charleston. He described the proposed development and stated that he feels this is the optimum use of the property. He explained that he had talked to the residents and received approval from 80% of the neighbors. No one spoke in opposj.tjon to the fezone. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to approve request for fezone from R-1 to R-2 and include condition to develop site as pep the site plan presented~ carried. TAPE #133 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN FOR FEDERAL BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION (continuation) (A) 2319 Clerk stated no correspondence has been received. Kay Wilson~ AssiStant City Planner~ spoke of the Citizen Participation Plan and explained the procedure which has been followed to date. She stated this Plan is an attempt to fulfill the minimum requirements of the Housing and Development Act of 1977 with regard to citizen participation. -4- CITY COMMISSIONER!;' MINtJ1ES May 9, 1978 Page five No one was present to speak. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to approve the Citizen Participation Plan for Federal Block Grant Application, carried. TAPE #133 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO BREMERTON SHORELZNE MANAGEMENT MASTER PROGRAM (B) Clerk stated the heaping had been advertised and posted as required by She read proposed changes to Appendix D of the BPemePton Shoreline Management Master Program. She then read letter from Mange Mansfield, dated May 9, 1978, which stated she is fop the amendment of the Shoreline Management Master PRogram; a letter from Charles Ullock, dated May 2, 1978, which stated he opposed the amendment until such time as the new Comprehensive Plan is developed by Citizen Task Forces; and a letter from Dr. & Mrs. J. M. McCluPkan~ dated May 7, 1978, which stated ~hey supported,the amendment. Glenn VockPodt, 1409 MaPlow, asked what the rationale for the change was and why the'Councilwants to amend it. Commissioner Stewart Peplied that he thinks it is working a hardship on some of the people. Ken Attebery, Planning Director, went through the proposed changes one by one. He stated the first issue is height and the proposed change would read: "No buildin9 shall exceed a heigh~ of 25 ft. as measured from the average gPad~ level as defined in WAC 173-14-030(6) to the highest point of the Pool nor be more than two stories in height. Story shall have the meaning as defined in the BPemerton Zoning Ordinance.'! He stated this proposed change only clarifies the height restriction. He explained how ~he average grade l~vel is found. Commissioner Stewart stated he did not understand the logic of the story situa- tion and Mr. AttebePy explained that the general intent is to maintain and not wall off the waterfront. Mr. Sexton suggested just limiting the height to 25 ft. He stated the existing grade should be defined and Mr..AttebePy stated if the Council Concurs with this proposed amendment and would like added definitions as Mr. Sexton suggested, they could work someth,~ng out. Glenn VockPodt~ 1409 Marlow, questioned the average grade level and stated the height should be 25 ft. from the original grade. He stated the existing grade can be changed through different ownerships~ and Commissioner Stewart stated there is no way to control that. Mr. Vockrodt stated they should go back to the natural existing grade. Charles Ullock~ 1137 Lower Marine DP.~ stated the Shoreline Management Master Program, the Zoning Ordinance and the UBC ape in conflict with each other and he felt that something should be done about alt~thnee to bring them into conformity. Commissioner Swanson stated it was his understanding that this proposed change was merely a further clarification of the Shoreline Management Act. Mr. Attebery stated this proposed change just clarifies and makes it easier to administer. He stated he is in sympathy with Mr. U11ock's comments about conflicts between regulations, but the more restrictive regulation takes precedence. Mr. Ullock stated a request for variance or conditional use shou]d be used instead of trying to amend the Shoreline Management Master Program at this time. He recommended that no action be taken on this until the Task Forces have had a chance to make their recommendations regaPdieg the comprehensive plan. Glenn VockPodt stated he did not feel this is the place to hear this proposal; that it should go through the Planning Commission. He stated he is on the Task Force for Land Use and they are studying shoreline management. Arthur PedePsen, 2609 East Phinney Bay DP.~ read from the minutes of Oct. 5, 1977 and asked Mr. Vockrodt if he knows how hard it is to get a variance. He algo asked Mr. Vockrodt why he didn't suggest sending it through the Planning Commission in October~ as he is suggesting now. Mr. Vockrodt replied the City Council appeared to be determined at that time, so he did the best he could for the community. He also stated that a variance is not a difficu]t thing; that it goes to the Planning Commission and if it is denied, it can be appealed to the City Council. Mr. Sexton explained that Shoreline Management Variances have to go the State; the Planning Commission and City Councll have nothing to do with it. CZTY COMMISSIONER,'3' MINUTE S May 9~ 1978 Page six Mr. Attebery explained that the City does not have the author, ity to approve variances or conditiona] use permits; they have to go to the State. He then explained the procedure and stated it takes 2~ or 3 months. Mr. U11ock stated it should be turned back to the people and he spoke of the history of its development, which took several years and not having enough citizen participation. He stated the procedure for variances or conditlonal use permits is spelled out very clearly in the Act as well as the gu&delines. He stated further that peop]e must learn to plan ahead. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to accept proposed change to the height Pestfiction as presented; that this change is a clarlfication of the Pestfiction as it now reads. Under discussion: Mr. Sexton suggested that the proposed change be accepted using the Washington Administrative Code defini- tion of average grade level but adding a condition that the average grade level be the existing grade level before any fill on the property. Amended Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson,to include Mr. Sexton's suggestion regarding existing grade level. Question was called and both motions carried. Mr. Attebery presented the second issue,~,which is setback, and stated the pro- posed change would read: "Every building shall have a 25 ft. setback from the ordinary,, high water mark, except that where the direct adjacent setbacks ape more oP less than 25 ft., the setback shall be the average of the adjacent setbacks. FoP the purposes of determining the average setback, an adjacent vacant lot shall be considered as having a setback of 25 ft. The setback shall be measured from the closest building line (excluding uncovered and unenclosed steps, porches and decks) to the oddinary high water mark." He stated this change will make the setbacks more'consistent with requirements in R-I zones,and provides more clarification, Commissioner Stewart stated the reason fop setbacks is so others' views aren't blocked. Commissioner Swanson asked how the 28 ft. setback was arrived at and Mr. Attebery stated this was a compromise between what the community wanted and the setback requirement fop an R-1 zone. He stated his feeling is that the setbacks should be consistent but he would have no difficulty administering it as 28 ft. which is the number of feet used in the present language. Mr. Sexton expressed concern about a person being affected by the locat&on of his neighbor's house and why he should suffer because of the location. Examples were shown and the ~mpact of these examples were discussed. Leslie Collins, 2603 East Phinney Bay Dr.~ stated he llves next door to the Pedersen's house and he never agreed to provide a view to the publlc when he bought his land. He stated the b~ckerlng between 25 and 30 ft. is futile. Commissioner Stewart stated he thinks the word "more" is the whole problem. Mr. Sexton Stated there ape so man~ variables involved in shorellnes that it is difficult to be fair to everyone. CommisSioner Swanson suggested that the question of setbacks be referred back to the Planning Dept. fop neevaluation. He stated he has a feellng this portion is going to require more than Pewording at this time. Motion by Commissioners Swanson and Stewart to exclude the proposed change on setback and ask Planning Dept. to do more neevaluation in cons~deration of what came up today. Under discussion: Commissioner Swanson spoke about the need to avoid changing this, sending it to the State and then having to change it again. He asked fop a PepoPt in 30 days. Commissioner Stewart stated the Cit~;AttoPney convinced him there ape some serious problems regarding how this is writtea. He repeated that if the word "more" were taken out, that would correct it. He stated he would like to put this on the agenda and make a decision. Mr. AttebePy stated that if the Master Program is revised on an annual basis, the Planning Commission should get involved. He suggested that the hearing be continued to a date certain to have thls brought back. Charles U]lock asked the Commissioners to bear in mind that a Citizens' Task Force has the responsibility to hear this this summer and Commissioner Stewart stated -6- CI]Y COMMISSIONERS" MiNUrES May 9, lg78 Page seven the City Council isn't going to lay down and play dead until the Citizens' Task Force comes up with something; that they will continue to respond and if they make mistakes~ they wi]l try to correct them. Question was never called and motion died. Clerk was directed to set a June 20th date fop continued heaping on the setback requirements only. Mr. Attebery presented the third proposal, width coverage. He read the proposed change: "The greatest width of any building shall not exceed 60% of the width of the lot measured at the proposed front or rear building line whichever is less, except that on lots measuring less than 100 ft. in width as prescribed above, nothing in this section shall preclude the construction of or addition to a building which would result in a buildingof not more than 60 ft. in width at its widest point unless the width is otherwise limited by other existing oddinances." Mr. Sexton asked if this is the only provision where it is based on percentage rather than footage. He stated that it is his understanding that this is fop a view corridor. Mr. AttebePy stated that this would improve the view corridor of property owners and general public, not so much fop the neighbors. Mr. Sexton asked if restrictions can be set on side yards and setbacks and Mr. Attebery stated in cases of less than 100 ft., these restrictions could be used making it mope possible to use the !and. Mr; VockPodt asked about set- backs in R-2 zones for apartments and Mr. Attebery stated that the side yards increase as the building goes up in size and:would be adjufted to that. Dennis BoPchePding, 1350 Jacobson Blvd.,stated all three amendments affect bhe use of his property. He stated the property is divided into four separate lots and he owns two lots and one house. Another party bought the Other two lots and they have built a house 20 ft. from the water. He stated he has lost 60% of his view and he has contacted an architect about building a house on the front lot. He stated the ordinance that affects Mr. PedePsen also affects him. Commissioner Stewart asked him what the 60% does to him and he Peplies that the lot is 70 ft. wide on the water and 93 ft. wide in the middle; that he can only build 42 ft. under this 60% ruling. He went on to say that buildin9 a home would enhance the property and that he is against the Shoreline Manage- ment Act as it stands today. Commissioner Stewart gave an example of a lot size that could not be built on because of the 28 ft. setback. Mr. VockPodt stated that you could not build on that size lot on 4th St. either. He stated he is afraid the City , will throw out this ordinance because it affects someone and people will keep coming in all the time to ask the Council to keep changing the ordinance. He stated the first thing you know, we will have a dictatorship. He stated further there are remedies for all these situations and there ape all kinds of lots that can't be built on. CommissloneP Stewart returned the discussion to the proposed setback language. Motion by Commissioner Stewart to take the word "more" out of the proposed wording. Under discussion: Mr. Sexton stated that he sees no problem from a legal standpoint in removing that word. Commissioner Swanson stated he is reluctant to rush into these thin~s and felt it ,had been rushed into once before. He stated he is not supe~ but there may be more wrong with it. Motion died fop lack of second. Discussion PetuPPed to the proposed width coverage. Jack Connor, 1918 Weslon Place, spoke of having a 60 x 150 ft. lot and a 50 ft. house. He stated that under the present language of the width coverage proposal, he cannot put a 50 ft. wide house on that lot. He stated he feels they ape being discriminated against and they would like to see it changed. -7- CZTY COMMZSSZONI May 9, 1978 Page eight Helen Collins, 2603 East Phinney Bay Dr., stated there is very little watenfnorlt property that is not already built on. She stated that a11 along the roads the tr. ees are what block the view, not the houses. She stated she does not see why there should be different regulations for waterfront lots than for other lots; that these regulations are not needed. She stated it does not give the general public a chance to view the water anyway; that it isn't fair to people who have paid taxes and a great deal of money for their property. Pat Carey~ IOg-B Oak, stated this could be argued forever but there willbe problems on the Shorelines Act because of the layout. He stated variances will have to be relied upon to settle disagreements because the City cannot keep changing the ordinance. He stated people have the right to be heard, but there will be more complaints. Commissioner Stewart asked if he had looked into the variance procedure. He stated it is a rough process-.and the State usually turns everything down. He stated further that the City does'not have any control over the variances; that it is State controlled. He stated he would like to see the City make changes as they come up. Mr. Carey stated he did not see how the Act can be amended to fit in all of the problems and Commissioner Stewart agreed. Commissioner Stewart stated there will always be some problems; that it depends on which ones the City wants to deal with. Nora Connor~ 1918 Weslon Place, questioned why variances could not be handled locally and why the.power was given to the State. Commissioner Stewart stated that the people passed a constitutional amendment On the shorelines by election. Commissioner Stewart stated he sees the problem with what Mr. Sexton presented regarding adjacent setbacks. Regarding the width coverage, he stated he thinks the percentage figure is wrong and he feels the City needs to set some certain side limits and take the percentage out. Commissioner Swanson asked if residential development comes under the category of substantial development and Mr. Attebery stated that there ape certain developments that do not require substantial development permits and single family residence is one. He stated the plan is set up so that all develop- ments should meet the regulations of the documents. Single family residences would have to comply with regulations for residential developments. He stated there is some confusion because being exempt from the permit process is not being exempt from the provision of the Act. Commissioner Swanson commented that it appears the master program does not clarify residential development until you get to Appendix D. He asked if this appendix was taken on later and Mr. AttebePy referred to page 22, 23 and 24 of the master plan. He stated page 46 refers to residential development and there ape not many regulations in this section that ape restrictions on single family housing. He stated Appendix D was added at the last minute as an appendix~ as it did not fit into the text. He stated there ape other areas that applyto residential development. Motion by Commissioner Swansonto eliminate Appendix D and ask that the Planning Dept. come up with a new appendix that is workable. Under discussion: Mr. Atteber stated this would still have to go through 45 days of State review and amendments to the program ape effective when approved. Mr. Sexton stated that the current language in Appendix D would remain in effect duping that 45-day review period. Motion died for lack of second. Mr. Attebery stated there were some positivel:comments from the State in their original approval which indicated their concern about some setback and height restrictions. He stated he wished he had the perfect resolution to these problems today. He stated this is a very complex situation and it is very difficult to write regulations which conceive of all particulars that might come up. Commissioner Stewart stated that at the State level, not one variance has been allowed unless people could not use their property. Pie stated it scares him when he finds out that is what the procedure is at the State level. Mr. Sexton stated the courts now look at the number and nature of hearings ~nd this did not have the scope of review 8rid research that it should have. He stated the zoning ordinance did go through extensive hearings and the Council can feel comfortable with that. -8- CITY COMMISSIONERS' MZNIJI'ES May 9~ 1978 Page nine Commissioner Swanson stated that this does not look as if it takes cape of most of the pr'oblems and he would like to see restrictions on residential and small lots. Motion by Commissioner Swanson to accept the proposed width coverage change. Motion died for' lack of second. Commissioner Stewart stated no one will be hurt by what these people ape trying to do; that we ape stuck with a State law and some decisions have to be made fop use of the property. He stated that maybe the percentage makes it too complicated and maybe should have setbacks on side yards like what is in the building ordinance, five ft. on each side. Commissioner Swanson stated this applies only to single family residences and if Commissioner Stewart feels that percentage could be eliminated entirely, he would like to talke to Mr. AttebePy on that. Mr. Attebecy stated those restrictions development within these urban development areas. Commissioner Swanson stated what he requested several weeks ago were revisions related to single family residences. He stated he does not want to remove all restrictions. Mr. Attebery stated this applies to developments other than single family. Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson that width coverage foc single family Pesldences be eliminated and that their develOpmentbe Pestclcted in accordaoce with other existing ordinances regarding Side yaPds~ carried. ORDINANCE~ FIRST READING - BPemePton Housing Authority Clerk reads first peading~ "AN ORDINANCE amending the use and area maps according to Ordinance No. 1792 (BPemerton Housing Authority)." Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to approve ordinance on first Pead~ngm by title onlym carried as follows: Mayor Jarstad, Absent~ Commissioner Stewartm Yes; Commissioner Swanson~ Yes. BILLS Motion by Commissioners Stewart and Swanson to give blanket approval to vouchers 04234 thru 04357 inclusive in the amount of $331~124.00~ audited by John Ross~ carried. Meeting adjourned at 1:30 P.M. KATHLEEN L. MANDIO, City Clerk Appnoved: ROBERT B. STEWART, Mayor Pro Temp