HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/01/2006 AGENDA
tIDj'
;:. i_~_)~_:;,1ti~'-:!;\.-.:!!
CITY COUNCil 345 6th Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, WA 98337-1873 03 (360) 473-5280
* * * AMENDED * * *
MARCH 1, 2006
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
1. PRE-COUNCil STUDY SESSION: 5:00 - 5:30 P.M. in COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM 603
A. General Council Business
B. A 10-minute Executive Session to "lReview laborr Negotiations" perr R.C.W.
42.30.140(4)(1b)
2. CAll TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M. in MEETING CHAMBERS LOCATED ON FIRST FLOOR
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Invocation
3. MAYOR'S REPORT
4. PUBLIC RECOGNITION & ANNOUNCEMENTS - "A Call to Citizens... 11
5. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Claims & Check Register (#AB06-039)
B. Appointment of Bill Mosiman to the Planning Commission (#AB06-040)
C. Contract Award for Carpet Installation by MALLORY ENTERPRISES, INC. dba ABBEY CARPET
OF BREMERTON, in the Gold Mountain Golf Complex Clubhouse; and Approval of related
Budget Adjustment (#AB06-041)
D. Justice Assistance Grant for 2006 (#AB06-042)
E. Bremerton Kitsap Access Television Service Contract with Kitsap County (#AB06-043)
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS - There are no PUBLIC HEARINGS this week...
7. GENERAL BUSINESS
A. Resolution No. 2988, adopting the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan for the
City of Bremerton (#AB06-044)
B. Referral to Planning Commission - Highland Avenue Neighborhood Heights [Item
Continued from February 22, 2006 Council Meeting] (#AB06-038)
8. COUNCil MEMBER REPORTS
9. ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCil BUSINESS MEETING
fI Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodations provided upon request. Those requiring special
accommodations should contact the City Clerk's Office at (360) 473-5323 by noon on the Monday preceding the
Council meeting.
BILL # (50 -() 37
DATE SUBMITTED:
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
5A
........................................................................................
SUBJECT:
Claim & Checks Register Approval
Committee Meeting Date:-
COUNCIL MEETING Date: "3 - / -() (;;
Department: Financial Services
Presenter: Cathy Johnson
Phone:
SUMMARY:
ATTACHMENTS:
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount):
APPROVALS:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
FINANCE DIRECTOR:
MAYOR:
FISCAL/BUDGET:
OPERATIONS:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT:
I CONSENT AGENDA IZJ I
~4t'/~;Z-.~~
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve:
1) Check #'s 3oUJI.srr..- '301/.1 593
EFT's ~ S'~X5?f;jpr;-~)
f?g-~~f
$
!/(c( 5'11. ~S-
2) Regular Payroll for
$
3) Retiree Payroll for ;( -;;(25" -() G,
$
/~ ..sy/, CJ r;
/
COUNCIL ACTION: ~prove
o Deny
o Table
o Continue 0 No Action
DATE SUBMITTED: February 14, 2006
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
BILL # O~- Cl<.ib
sa
............................................................................'............
SUBJECT: Appointment to the
Planning Commission
Committee Meeting Date: February 22, 2006
COUNCIL MEETING Date: March l, 2006
Department: Executive
Presenter: Mayor Bozeman
Phone: 473-5266
SUMMARY: There is a vacancy on the Planning Commission due to the resignation of Clarence
Nelson. It is recommended the vacancy be filled by Bill Mosiman.
A TT ACHMENTS: Application for appointment.
FISCAL IMP ACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): n/a
APPROV ALS:
DEP AR TMENT DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
FINANCE DIRECTOR:
MAYOR:
FISCAL/BUDGET:
OPERATIONS:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT:
---------.
CONSENT AGENDA Cj'
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to confirm the appointment of Bill Mosiman to the Planning
Commission.
COUNCIL ACTION: 0 Approve 0 Deny D Table
o Continue 0 No Action
Application For City Boards/ Commissions/ Committee
Date: Nov. 25, 2005
Name: Bill
FIRST
Parker
MIDDLE
Mosiman
LAST
Home
Address:
Madrona Point Dr.
NUMBER STREET
School Admin; Special
Occupation: Ed.
Horne
Phone:
W A Bremerton
STATE CITY
98312
ZIP
Employer: Central Kitsap School District
Work
Address:
9210 Silverdale Way; P.O. Box 8
NUMBER STREET
Work Phone: (360) 662-1058
Fax: ( )
W A Silverdale
STATE CITY
98383-0008
ZIP
E-Mail: mosiman@comcast.net
Education:
Western Washington University: School Administration certification
Cardinal Stritch University: M.A. Special Education. U. of Wis Stevens Point: B.S. Biology
Local References (names and phone numbers):
Jeff Brody, 692-4147
Judy Friedberg-Nerf, 792-2843
Dave Brown, 377-4044
I am interested in serving (please check one or more):
Disability Action Committee
Civil Service Commission (I8 yrs. and older)
Urban Forest Committee
Public Access Citizens Advisory Committee
Community Development Block Grant Advisory
Board
Youth Council
Safe Streets Steering Committee
Board of Appeals, Housing/Building Codes
Other
Planning Commission (18 yrs. and older)
Parks & Recreation Commission
Ethics Commission
Parking Advisory Board
Mayor's Select Committee on Law
Enforcement
Bremerton Housing Authority
Solid Waste Management
Citizen's Commission on Council Salaries
Is this an application for No
reappo intment?
If yes, how many years have you served on this
commission! committee?
N/A
"Vhy are you applying for this appointment?
When my wife and I moved to this area over ten years ago, we chose to live in the Bremerton
area and have since moved into the city because it had many of the qualities of life that we were
looking for. In many aspects Bremerton reminds us of a small version of our home town of
Milwaukee, WI. We enjoy having neighbors and living in a neighborhood and wanted to live in
a place of ethnic and economic diversity and that had activities for its citizens. Besides the
qualities that the city has, its location is ideal in that it provides access to a large metropolitan
area; it avoids the large metropolitan traffic problems and affords us easy access to many of the
outdoor activities that we enjoy.
As much as we enjoy what Bremerton is now we are excited to see what Bremerton is becoming
which is a small city with character, district neighborhoods, growing business diversity and a
lively downtown. I believe that the 9 themes outlined in the Comprehensive Plan provide a nice
summary of the issues that the city will need to address to make the future Bremerton a better
place for all its residents.
I have now lived here long enough that I feel that I have a good understanding of the city, its
issues, its citizens and the surrounding communities. It is my wish to become involved in
helping to shape this community I have chosen to live in and to give my time and talents to that
end.
Which of your personal and/or professional interests prompted you to apply for this
appointment?
One of my overriding interests is in people and the rules that they choose that govern how they
live and interact together. Everybody brings different experiences, needs and wants to the table
when there is an issue that needs to be addressed with the challenge in finding a consensus that
the majority can agree to. That process involves not simply exploring the issues, but in coming
to understand what the underlying needs are for each individual or group. It is this process that I
find fascinating and is also the most rewarding part of my professional life.
My interest in community and the people that live in that community is another strong motivator
for my application to this position. The use of property and the space we must all live in, work
in and share is part of that community puzzle. I find myselflooking at what uses of property and
structures exist in an area and in thinking of what those things mean to the people working or
living nearby. Differing social and economic interests must be taken into account as well as
environmental concerns when addressing what we want our city to look like now and in the
future. Besides my interests in these matters, it is the complexity of the issues and the process
itself that attracts me to apply for this position.
Have you ever served on any other Bremerton Board, Commission, Committee or Task
Force? If yes, please list: I have not served on any other Bremerton Board, Commission,
Committee or Task Force.
Please list your qualifications for this appointment (include skills, activities, training, and
education):
I have much experience in the interpretation and application of rules, regulations and laws. I am
a former IRS auditor and applied the federal tax code in matters of personal and small business
finances. I commanded a nuclear capable EOD unit in the U.S. Army and was required to adhere
to those stringent regulations. In my current position as a special education administrator, I
interpret and apply federal and state laws governing children with disabilities in the public
schools. I supervise staff and programs across 19 different sites and coordinate programs
between special education and general education. I also coordinate programs, contracts and
services with private, county and state agencies.
I have completed a 60 hour training course in negotiation, mediation and large group facilitation
and apply that training in my current position in which misunderstandings and conflict occur
with regularity.
I have a B.S. in Biology, an M.A. in Education and am licensed as a school administrator. I
came close to, but did not finish a bachelor's degree in political science and was one class shy of
getting a B.S. degree in wildlife management which included courses in forestry, water science,
soils, and environmental education.
I have lived, worked and served with people of economically and ethnically diverse
communities. I am knowledgeable about the issues impacting the economic underclass
especially regarding education, health and social services.
"Vhat are your community interests (committees, organizations, special activities)?
I am currently on the editorial board of The Kitsap Sun; my term will expire in January of2006.
I am on the Peninsula Regional Support Network Advisory Board. This board advises the
county commissioners in Kitsap, Clallam and Jefferson Counties(the Regional Support Network)
on matters regarding policy and expenditures of federal and state mental health funds.
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
BILL # 0 (() - (') If ,l-- _
DATE SUBMITTED: 2-15-06
5<:.
...........................................................................................,
SUBJECT: Contract Award for Installation
of New Carpet in the Gold Mtn. Golf
Complex Clubhouse and Approval of
Related Budget Adjustment
Committee Meeting Date: 2-22-06
COUNCIL MEETING Date: 3-1-06
Department: Parks & Rec
Presenter: Pat Westhoff
Phone: 415-6875
SUMMARY: Requests for sealed bids were received at the office of the City Clerk for the City of
Bremerton on January 31, 2006. Two firms bid the project for providing approximately 970 square
yards of new carpet, providing all labor, material and equipment for installing new carpet and the
removal and disposal of the existing carpet at the Gold Mountain Clubhouse. The low bidder was
Mallory Enterprises Inc. dba Abbey Carpet ofBremerton in the amount of $30,797.87 including sales
tax.
ATTACHMENTS:
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): The 2~06 budget for this expenditure was $25,000
in the Gold Mountain Fund and the Capital ImprovementA~ch is not enough to cover the amount as
indicated in the low bid. A budget adjustment of $6,000 is required for this action.
APPROVALS:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
FINANCE DIRECTOR:
MAYOR:
'\ ' /;/"-;;?1-4
/~f:~;tjf!l~c- / ./p-~.
~ //~;.. -' I /
_-- - '-~"_i{ ..'..::...._1"""1 >r.L/~ ~.r. / if'
- ..';:"" . .Y---
-/::;:; , L.
~.c>t<
I CONSENT AGENDA fl
FISCALfBUDGET:
OPERATIONS:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT:
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve tbe contract award for carpet installation at tbe Gold Mountain Golf Complex
Clubhouse to Mallory Enterprises, Inc. dba Abbey Carpet of Bremerton for $30,797.87
including sales tax and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract and to approve the related
budget adjustment in the amount of $6,000.
COUNCIL ACTION: 0 Approve 0 Deny 0 Table
o Continue 0 No Action
BID TITLE:
. 1'.
..LVl c) -/71 Ne vJ (~a ';).k',-+-'+()y"
cd- -G,o tel {,(Atv\...> (;'cJb\::; c..cvlA.rJ lex
OPENED BY:
DATE OPENED: /.- ~:::;/-'() Co
NAME OF BIDDER
CITY OF BREMERTON
BID TABULATION
/) ,
V~< /
'(.(tl (-A
,
,,...~"-'.'~'~' i /
j ~ !tt(~'-i""")
. () II. / / ') , f'/-'<.._,./
, ,
TIME OPENED:
".....') ~ ,..,,~,\
'./' ." 1,'<:., jJ 1.'/ I
~ .. C./ / v'V\..,
~ -' I
/"'1 .' ........- ~.~ /
// I "J / .j.,
RECORDED BY:!,-;Ul.-{({_ /rJ J'if;/-1 ({775 J \
BOND ITEM 1
ITEMS
i4: i/.I i!l,; !.,vl-t"f'v'k~('i"'('< "L~\('
. I
\ i~), i/ .j." 'J ;C1r1 /1;'/', '\L~/; A,
/ ......
f
SUMMARY
APPARENT LOW BIDDER
/~i;;'L //0('1 L~;,!.t::'ti~l:/ s.e's
SECOND LOW BIDDER If
i '.i; \ / C'.:)' .", ,"', 1/" /t,~ 'it-,:,) /"
v ,. ~;" Y. r [ L; l.' , ~,.,',.._ f;J ...---"p t ...._.~~--~.
THIRD LOW BIDDER
1.____
,-
V
\.../'/
ITEM 2
ITEM 3
ITEM 4
A (;.'2, (7::', O' C\
>'6..,)~.);(I- I
,
'2 !'-Y") <'. - '\ "J
.>'1 "^ );(;C
i
ITEM 6
TOTAL BID
COMMENTS
ENGINEER ESTIMATE (lNC SALES TAX) $
"-:'(":. ".:' ~'C". 0
c,,,,,:. iF, ~)~) 1. (;
f ).),. ~-- () /")
I ." -" " -'~'
I
SALES
TAX
TOTAL
'J I /'2 k:' r;,-.,
to?'.. 'T ,jj X';'
---; /' -7 ") -" ()' .'/
..5 c.) l (; (~ 6 l"
K '7;') (; -2 (- ';3 (j. i. '("--;'~ -:< -'"
- I ',x.. 6, ) ,.' - ( f ') /. j ~
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
BILL # 0 (., - O~d-
DATE SUBMITTED: January 26, 2006
51)
SUBJECT: Justice Assistance Grant for 2006
Committee Meeting Date:
COUNCIL MEETING Date:
Department:
Presenter:
Phone:
February 22, 2006
March 1,2006
Police
Tim Sholtis
473-5277
SUMMARY: The City of Bremerton Police Department applied for an Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant
(JAG) that will allow the City of Breme110n to support a broad range of activities to prevent and control crime based on
our own local needs and conditions. These needs are to purchase an electronic card swipe security access system and
electronic roll down grille door needed to protect and preserve valuable Police and City provided resources. Funds will
also purchase ancillary prevention and education equipment which is needed to improve community policing services.
These two construction fund areas have identified funding shortfalls or no allotted funds that could impact needed
equipment purchases. Using grant sources, the Police Department is funding shortfalls and mitigating unfunded
equipment requirements. The grant is from the Department of Justice. No matching funds are required of the City. The
total grant amount is $39,643.00. The grant duration is through September 2010.
ATTACHMENTS: Applicable Sections of the Grant Application
....
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None. The JAG funding is a revenue source for $39,643.00. Itwi'H-
pnl'/iole aolhm 'rw chArt.<< pc <<nrl mitig'ilt,<, 'IRfliRlio:ol ilE)liiflfflEJfl.t !'ltlrc;h!l~c~. ""-- ...~.;, ~ N..e. _~ ~..... ~,,~~.. '\-~ ~::.
~ \00.. ~..:,~ ~'l"Q """ Y-e..5C. ~ w.~ 0:..."'" _ \...J ~..... " -N ~ "U)C)<.o \o\,)o.."\. ~ ~ - 'f"e.. ~..:)' 'V- \ ''''"\
c:....\DI,)~e..\... o-""^\'..-"'-&~ ~c::. ~"t,\, ~e. ~ ~v-. =' ~~c..e.c:.~.....
APPRO V ALS:
DEP ARTMENT DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
FINANCE DIRECTOR:
MAYOR:
FISCAL/BUDGET:
OPERATIONS:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT:
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Justice Assistance Grantk-iJDDC L. -'"1-~t"u._..t NuUl'l !;. ~
O".........Q..~ \:-~ l.CC~ 'ID\)~,\fa.\- O...'->\\....,....~\ 1...\~ It.~~''-\~..\....:l~~ \.-0 -C('-> -.r~\-.~e.
(;.\."-3 Q... \.Q.~\.r-() ~ ,c c.~-cl 'S ~\~ -::>a c:. '-.) v:\. ~ v..c<::.~~ S\~\.c..""" ~0
<t.. \ e.. c:- \: ",.0 "-.i, t.. '("-Q \ \ c.\.Q ~ ~ ~".: \ \ \ e c\.cc It' \ t-..,) ~c.... "'^- c>...,'" \:- <J ~ ~.3 ~ . ~ <--i3 .
CONSENT AGENDA ~
COUNCIL ACTION: D Approve D Deny D Table
D Continue D No Action
Bud2;et Narrative. (Atch 2)
$30,643.00 Electronic card swipe security access system and roll down grille door for
the sally port of the new Police Department facility. These assure critical
criminal history records, evidence, other administrative resources and
police vehicles needed for successful case prosecution and police
deployment are protected and available when called for. This eliminates
directed patrols on vehicles and motorcycles at the administrative facility.
This reduces officer exposure to criminal elements and enhances officer
safety.
Equipment:
Electronic Card Swipe Equipment
Associated Mounts
Cables/Connectors
Monitor Panel
Electronic Roll Down Grille Door
Total:
$15000.00
$ 1000.00
$ 2250.00
$ 4500.00
$ 7893.00
$30643.00
$9,000.00
Ancillary prevention and education equipment provides the proper training
and educational aids and equipment that today's officer needs to
strengthen the officer safety program. When the officer is well prepared,
they are able to better protect the community from criminal and terrorist
threats.
Equipment:
Elliptical Trainer Machine
Cardio Treadmill Machine
Total:
$5000.00
$4000.00
$9,000.00
$39,643.00 Total Expenditure
DATE SUBMITTED: 2-14-06
BILL # O(g- 0 'f'3
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
Sf
........................................................................................
SUBJECT: BKAT Service Agreement with
Kitsap County
Committee Meeting Date: 2-22-06
COUNCIL MEETING Date: 3-01-06
Department: Financial Services
Presenter: Laura Lyon
Phone: 473-5722
SUMMARY: The City manages Bremerton Kitsap Access Television ("BKA T") - providing
production and access services to Kitsap County under a professional services contract. The current
professional service contract which was executed on January 11, 1999 and as subsequently amended
and extended, has now expired and is in need of replacement. Staff is recommending the City
Council approve execution of a new professional services contract with the County that provides for
continued provision ofBKA T production and access services for a period of 10 years with the annual
fee as established in the first year being adjusted each year thereafter during the contract term by an
agreed upon published CPI index.
ATTACHMENTS: Discussion Memorandum and Service Contract
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): Supports the revenue expectations included in the
2006 BKA T Fund budget and BKA T business plan.
~//
//
// ~ /~,~
APPROVALS:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR: ,_ 0
CITY ATTORNEY: (/ / :d
FINANCE DIRECTOR:
MAYOR:
FISCAL/BUDGET:
OPERATIONS:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT:
/fid;~ (/e' .
"/~~.. (
-~, /".--
k~<4"'~ ;.: ,.... ,-* -:;7"
..:--~ z.~ \~ . ,..0'" 'c:.. _.-'. ~J' ~
r;:::::::::::j' A~r:~ 4--y?"'~~1'./Pl" --,,0
, .P~ . .
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve the Bremerton Kitsap Access Television Service Contract with Kitsap County and
authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement in substantially the form as presented.
I CONSENT AGENDA BJ ]
COUNCIL ACTION: 0 Approve D Deny D Table
D Continue 0 No Action
.--~'." - ~-"".~" -'<"..,. -"-. ._, .". -.. -
;:lm"';;~'''",,''C';t'';o''';''''''''<'''~.,
, ,
L~..
;:~ ':,
,." '.,
{;- of:!
.:...'.'..',.... ..... . ........,.. ....... ..... ...','
b. ... ~!i
j:~ "-"'@~"'" ..",!
~: ,);
Memorandum
To:
From:
City Council
Mayor Cary Bozeman
Laura Lyon, Director of Financial service/
BKA T Service Contract with Kitsap County
Re:
Date:
February 15, 2006
Bremerton Kitsap Access Television (BKAT) is an important resource for the City
of Bremerton and for the greater Kitsap community. The City manages BKAT
and has provided production and access services through professional service
agreements with Kitsap County and the City of Poulsbo (among others). In
addition, the City has operated under a separate funding agreement with Kitsap
County - which provides BKAT with the County's Public, Education, and
Government (PEG) pass through fees collected pursuant to their cable franchise
agreements. The County PEG fees are provided to BKAT for the purpose of
ensuring public access television is provided throughout the County.
In response to the growing concern about BKAT's financial viability and future
(and recognizing that cable franchise agreement negotiations were about to get
underway), the City in cooperation with County staff prepared a business plan for
BKAT and presented that plan to the City Council on June 14,2005. Key
elements of the plan included:
· Partnership (combining the two prior contracts into a single
Interlocal Agreement) between the County and the City
· Service Contracts with other Public/Government Entities
· Significant Reinvestment in Capital Facilities
. Changes in How Operations Were Conducted (Efficiencies)
· Identified Targeted Franchise Renewal Objectives
· Affirmed the Role of Advisory Groups
After the plan was developed, the City began working with the County to
complete the proposed agreement and proceed with implementation. However,
shortly thereafter the County underwent significant staff changes in key positions
related to this issue - necessitating a return to the basic matters contained in the
plan. Specifically, the plan had specified a partnership arrangement with the
County which was proposed in response to expressed concerns by the previous
County staff about having more involvement in the operations of BKA 1.
After reviewing the information and deliberating internally on the matter, the
current County administration has concluded that they would prefer to return to
the previous model of a service contract for production and access services, and
a separate funding agreement for the PEG fee revenues and their usage. The
City responded by drafting proposed new service and funding agreements -
providing the essential needs of SKAT as identified in the business plan and
addressing the identified concerns of the County. Specifically the proposed new
agreements provide for:
1. A longer time frame (10 years as opposed to the previous year to year
agreements) which provides more financial stability for the City and will
reduce administration time associated with these contracts
2. A clearer articulation of the scope of services provided for under the
service agreement
3. The annual service agreement fee increases over the duration of the
contract term based upon an agreed upon published CPI index. This
provides reasonable revenue expectations without necessitating annual
negotiations on what the amount should be each year.
4. The funding agreement clearly expresses the County's requirement that
PEG fees collected under the County franchise agreement and passed
through to SKAT per the agreement - must be used for equipment and/or
debt service for equipment financed with debt.
5. The funding agreement sets forth required reporting requirements to the
County demonstrating compliance with 4. above and recapping key
service statistics.
6. The funding agreement now provides mechanisms for SKAT to undertake
debt obligations with the PEG fees pledged for the debt service on such
obligations. This may never be used by the City - but provides significant
flexibility that was not previously available.
Currently, the City Council is being asked to approve the professional service
contract with the County for production and access services to the County. It is
independent of the Funding Agreement and required at this time because the
existing service agreement has once again expired. A new agreement is
needed to be executed so that the County can begin remitting payments for the
2006 services being provided.
The remaining agreement (Funding Agreement) will be brought to the Council in
the near future but is pending while the County works through a few key
provisions in their new franchise agreement with Comcast. They are close to
completion on the substantive matters and we expect this will be forthcoming
shortly.
BREMERTON KITSAP ACCESS TELEVISION
SERVICE CONTRACT
KITSAP COUNTY
The City of Bremerton (hereinafter referred to as the "City") and Kitsap County (hereinafter
referred to as the "County"), referred to collectively as the "Parties," enter into the following
agreement on this day of March 2006:
Section 1. Scope of Services. The City, through Bremerton Kitsap Access Television
(hereinafter referred to as BKA T), shall provide governmental access television services
including but not limited to video production and program scheduling related to the County's
commitments as outlined in this Agreement. BKA T shall provide technical support,
consultation; pre-production and post-production services; properly trained staff and volunteers
including videographer for field assignments; proceeding/event tape duplication and delivery no
later than the 2nd business day following completion of project to program sponsor; and
coordination of programming hours and studio time. BKA T' s specified number of service
commitments covered by this agreement are herein established:
D
Kitsap County Commitments
Number per
L f Shdl Y
I
escrmtlOn oca IOn c e ue ear per ven
Kitsap County County Courthouse I First and Third
Commission Administration Monday of each
Meetings Building month (9am - 10m) 24 4 hours
County Courthouse I
Kitsap County Administration Two Thursdays per
Hearing Examiner Building Month(8am - 2 om) 24 6 hours
Kitsap County
Planning County Courthouse I
Commission Administration
Meetings Building As requested 3 8 hours
Special Meetings I
Kitsap County Public Hearings
Commission Special Outside of Normal
Meetings Chambers As requested 4 8 hours
Kitsap County Various Locations
Council for Human throughout the
Rights County As requested 4 6 hours
Miscellaneous Various Locations
Forums, Workshops, throughout the
Etc. County As requested 3 6 hours
Kitsap County Various Locations
Department throughout the
Programs County As requested 2 25 hours
Estimated Time
E t
The County shall retain control over program content and designate one person to authorize and
schedule programs produced under this agreement. BKA T shall provide production and
playback of regularly scheduled Board of County Commissioners, and Hearing Examiner
meetings. Production requests by the County beyond the scope of this Agreement will be taken
on a per production basis. Fees for these services are separate from this Agreement and shall be
determined by the applicable rate schedule as published by BKAT. Production schedules and
timelines for services beyond the scope of this Agreement shall be determined by the Parties at
the time of request. The County shall have total control over content of special productions.
BKA T will work with the County to establish regular, consistent playback times for programs
produced under this agreement. Once scheduled, program times shall not be moved, altered or
deleted without consent of the County.
Section 2. Payment Obligations. In consideration for the services provided pursuant to this
Agreement the County shall pay the City on a monthly basis, 1I12th of the current annual amount
as specified herein. Services rendered beyond the scope of this Agreement, as set forth in
Section I, shall be billed in addition to the annual amount at the rates established and published
by BKAT. The County shall make funds available to the City as follows:
Upon execution of this Agreement, the County shall pay 2/lih of $45,000 which is the January
and February 2006 monthly payments for the first year of the contract and will thereafter pay
1I1ih of $45,000 by the last day of the month on which payment is due. Each year thereafter, on
January 1, the annual amount will be recalculated based upon the amount paid in the previous
year increased by the Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton Area Consumer Price Index (CPI) as published
in September of the previous year. The City will annually prepare a written notice to the County
of the recalculated annual amount and provide this no later than November 30 prior to the
January 31 revised billing date. A monthly invoice will not be provided. It is the responsibility
of the County to ensure payments are initiated and completed in a timely manner.
Section 3. Term. This Service Agreement shall be for a period of ten (10) years commencing
January 1,2006 and terminating December 31,2015.
Section 4. Termination. Either party to this Service Agreement may terminate the agreement
without cause upon giving one hundred twenty (120) days written notice to the other party.
Section S. Severability. In the event any provision in this Agreement is deemed
unconstitutional, illegal, or void as a matter of law, the parties agree that all of the provisions of
this Agreement that are not affected by such occurrence, shall constitute a full and complete
Agreement between the parties.
Section 6. Indemnify and Hold Harmless. The County and City shall each indemnify, defend,
and hold the other harmless from and against any and all claims, suits, actions, causes of action,
losses, damage, or liabilities arising or resulting from any alleged negligent or intentional acts or
omissions arising out of the performance or non performance of their respective responsibilities
as set out in this agreement.
Section 7. Notices. All notices and other communications to be given by either party may be
given in writing addressed to the appropriate party as follows:
Director of Financial Services
City of Bremerton
345 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, Washington 98337
Department of Information Services Director
Kitsap County
614 Division Street MS-21
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
Section 8. Compliance with Laws. The Parties shall comply with all applicable Federal, State,
and local laws in performing their obligations under this Agreement.
Section 9. Choice of Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted according to the
laws of the State of Washington. Any judicial action to resolve disputes arising out of this
Agreement shall be brought in the Kitsap County Superior Court.
Section 10. Assi2nment. Any assignment of any portion of this Agreement shall not be made
without the written consent of both Parties.
Section 11. Waiver. Failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed a
waiver of that provision. Waiver of any right of power arising out of this Agreement shall not be
deemed a waiver of any other right or power.
Dated this
day of
,2006.
CITY OF BREMERTON
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
KITSAP COUNTY
CARY BOZEMAN, Mayor
CHRIS ENDRESEN, Chair
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
PATTY LENT, Commissioner
Roger A. Lubovich, City Attorney
JAN ANGEL, Commissioner
ATTEST;
Opal Robertson
Clerk of the Board
Page 1 of 1
From: Mick Sheldon [Iittleroundtop@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, February 27,20063:06 PM
To: City Council
Subject: BKA T
Dear Bremerton Council Members,
Please support local access TV. BKA T
I also believe it is role of government to further increase the capability of citizens viewing as many public meetings as it possibly can
This allows the working citizens to see and get a real view of what is happening in government.
Mick Sheldon
2/27/2006
DATE SUBMITTED: 02-15-06
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
BILL # Qk: O'f~
1A
....................................................m...................................
SUBJECT: A Resolution adopting the
Comprehensive Emergency Management
Plan for the City of Bremerton.
Committee Meeting Date: 02-22-06
COUNCIL MEETING Date: 0~.9-06.3 --I - (I C,
Department: Fire
Presenter: Al Duke, Fire Chief
Phone: 360-473-5381
SUMMARY: The Revised Code of Washington 38.52.070 authorizes and directs local jurisdictions
to establish and maintain a comprehensive emergency management plan. This resolution will adopt
the Comprehesive Emergency Management Plan for the City of Bremerton.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution # J crBB
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None
APPROVALS:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
FINANCE DIRECTOR:
MA YOR:
r'".C'). ___--
", I ......~
t;.: ,
.."r'"'~
RECOMMENDED MOTION: To approve Resolution #
Emergency Management Plan for the City of Bremerton.
FISCAL/BUDGET:
OPERA nONS:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT:
1/fCONSENT AGENDA 01
that adopts the Comprehensive
COUNCIL ACTION: 0 Approve 0 Deny 0 Table
D Continue 0 No Action
RESOLUTION NO. d. qg ~
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, adopting the City of Bremerton's
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP)
WHEREAS, the Revised Code of Washington 38.52.070, authorizes and directs
local jurisdictions to establish a local organization for emergency management and to develop
and maintain a local comprehensive emergency management plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton has previously prepared an Emergency
Operations Plan (EOP) which included information that is normally included in a Comprehensive
Emergency Management Plan (CEMP); and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton desires to remove that information from the
EOP and create a CEMP which will include the information removed from the EOP; and
WHEREAS, a CEMP has been created to include information that ensures
consistency with the Kitsap County and Washington State Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plans and the National Response Plan; and
WHEREAS, the CEMP specifies the authorities, functions, and responsibilities
that pertain to establishing collaborative action plans between local, State, Federal, Tribal,
volunteer, and public and private sector organizations; therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON
DOES HEREBY RESOL YES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Adootion of the Citv of Bremer ton Comorehensive EmerfZencv
ManafZement Plan. The City of Bremerton Comprehensive Emergency ManagementPlan is
hereby adopted.
SECTION 2. Severabilitv. If anyone or more sections, subsections, or
sentences of this Resolution are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Resolution and the same shall remain in full
force and effect.
Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force
immediately upon its passage.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington this
March, 2006.
day of
CECIL McCONNELL, Council President
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ATTEST:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney
P AULA JOHNSTON, City Clerk
R:\Legal\Legal\Resolutions\FireICEMP 2006 Resolution.doc
2
Comprehensive Emergency
Nfanagement Plan
COMPREHENSIVE
EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT
PLAN
", ...,
_.." ;_. ::.l:
Protecting lives, property, the environment, and the economy....
Januarv 2006
0/
DATE SUBMITTED: 2-22-06
BILL # 06-038
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
18
.....................8..................................................................
SUBJECT: Referral to Planning
Commission - Highland Avenue
Neighborhood Heights
Committee Meeting Date:
COUNCIL MEETING Date: ;2 22 06-- -3 -1- 0 0
Department: City Council
Presenter: Wendy Priest
Phone: 473-5280
SUMMARY: It is being recommended to remand the Highland Avenue neighborhood height
restriction back to the Planning Commission for further re-consideration.
ATTACHMENTS:
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount):
APPROVALS:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR: ____ ___
<: k-::::;~-----==-~=
CITY ATTORNEY: ~--==-=--=-___?:-~~--:===-
FINANCE DIRECTOR: - '----_____
MA YOR:
FISCAL/BUDGET: I CONSENT AGENDA 0 I
OPERATIONS: _ _
~--/ -- ~ /~~--/ ~
COUNCIL PRESIDENT: _;:,;;:-::;;:-~--;;t/{4 '1?4 .?CA-~-r -?}/;
67 ' P'/"
RECOMMENDED MOTION: '
Move to send to the Planning Commission for re-consideration the issue of the height restriction
in the Highland Avenue neighborhood and to direct the Department of Community
Development to suspend all action on design standards until Council has acted on this issue.
COUNCIL ACTION: 0 Approve 0 Deny 0 Table
o Continue D No Action
Page 1 of 1
Lori Smith
From: Kate O'Reilly [youranimalsfirst@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22,200610:03 AM
To: City Council
Subject: new zoning Pleasant/Highland
Dear City Council member,
As a resident and homeowner in the Pleasant! Highland area of downtown Bremerton, I am very concerned
about the rezoning proposal to allow 60 ft buildings to be erected in our neighborhood.
I attended the Design guideline meeting earlier this month, and was disappointed in the presentation of this
new proposal. There was a very vague handout that was given to all attendees. It had several photos of various
buildings and labeled them as "successful" or "unsuccessful". None of the photos illustrated a 60' tall building,
much less show how such a large building would impact the character of our neighborhood.
In short we were given very little to go on.
I moved to downtown Bremerton because I like being close to amenities. I am in favor of building up rather
than out. However I don't think that my street, Pleas ant Avenue, will benefit in any way from adding 5 or 6
story buildings at this time.The street itself is so narrow. Even if all the tenants on such a building are given
parking spaces on the property, if more than a few have visitors at the same time where will they park?
There are some wonderful old houses in our neighborhood. If they are destroyed, we will lose part of the
character and history of Bremerton.I can't imagine people wanting to live in a house that is dwarfed by a 6 story
building next door. A little moderation is in order at this time. Bremerton has a lot going on and we don't need
to change everything at once.
Also, it may be prudent in my opinion, to wait until the waterfront condo project has reached a successfull
conclusion before building even more housing without knowing if people will actually want to live here.
Sincerely,
Kate O'Reilly
938 Pleasant Ave
Bremerton, WA 98337
360-479-0891
Kate 0' Reilly
Animals First
360-479-0891</DIV>
') n7 noor.
'C' ,P-: /,;1-3 /0 (p
I..... .It,y.e....~
February 23, 2006
To the City Council, Mayor, Community Development Director, and members of the Planning Commission,
RE: Rezoning of the Highland/Pleasant Ave Neighborhood
I am a resident of Highland Avenue. I moved here from Seattle 10 years ago and bought a house on Highland
because I was looking for an old Victorian to restore in a neighborhood of historic homes within walking
distance of downtown. I didn't buy my house as an investment. I bought it in order to pursue and enjoy a
particular quality of life. What I've always anticipated is that as property values increased, more of these old
houses would be restored, some as homes and some, since they are so close to downtown, as professional
offices. Also, I've always assumed that some would be either replaced by or incorporated into multifamily
housing. However, it never occurred to me that we would see condominiums on the scale now being
considered. I have three specific concerns:
· Height: The 60 foot height limit approved by the City council is the issue of most concern to neighbors.
The city's argument for this height is that greater density is needed in neighborhoods near downtown in
order to attract retail merchants. While this is true, I feel it can be accomplished without going up 60 feet.
See my argument below under "Density". Secondly, city officials say residents shouldn't complain about
60 feet because before the city council made this zoning change, developers could have erected buildings
of 120 feet. While this might be literally true, it is a completely specious argument since no one was ever
going to build anything that tall.
The problem with 60 foot buildings is that they are completely out of scale with the surrounding buildings.
There are two 3 story buildings on Highland, both are small apartment buildings. All of the homes and
other apartments are lor 2 stories in height. All you have to do to realize how tall 60 feet really is, is to
look at the tallest home on the street, which is probably 30-35 foot tall, and imagine it being twice as tall,
and then compare that to the bungalows next to it. Buildings of this height will leave neighboring
properties in a perpetual shadow 6 to 7 months of the year. On a personal note, that would mean no
longer being able to growing roses in my garden. That may not be important to the city in its big picture,
but to me it's an important "quality of life" issue, and one that would force me to leave.
· Density: I can accept the concept that greater density will facilitate more retail development. Having
worked in market research for over 20 years, I know this is the case. My question is: How much density is
too much?
On Highland Avenue between 6th and 11th, there are approximately 50 properties. Since some of these
are apartments, my guess is that there are approximately 100 dwelling units on the street. I've been told
that one development being proposed will contain 100 units, thus doubling neighborhood density. I've
also been told by the community development department that whatever rules apply to one development
applies to all others and that there is no way to limit density. So, if there is a second development, density
could triple. At what point does this cease to be a neighborhood and instead become an anthill? At what
point does the City carve away our front yards to widen the street? Many things in life are good in
moderation, but not so good in excess. For example, traffic is good for business until it gets so congested
that drivers are unwilling to get off the road for fear of not being able to get back on.
I don't see why the planning process can't take into consideration the issue of limiting density. If there is
no way to cap density, then at least limiting height will have a positive effect. Many of us who bought
homes in this area did so in order to live in a neighborhood that is not so crowded; one where we can enjoy
a sense of space.
· Perspective: There seems to be an ethos in city hall that in order to revitalize we must get rid of everything
old and replace it with something new. I am sure that city officials view these old homes as being in the
way of progress.
lst Story: The city near where I grew up faced a challenge similar to the one Bremerton faced in the past.
A mall opened up about 15 miles from downtown and one by one the downtown department stores closed
and moved out to the mall. In an effort to save downtown, the city tore down some of the old stores,
replaced them with new buildings, put a lid over about 10 blocks of downtown and created a mall. It didn't
work. Gradually, all the downtown stores moved to the new mall or went out of business. Now, the city
has removed the lid, restored the old theater and hotel, and is in the process of restoring the few old
buildings that remain. The department stores will never come back, but specialty stores, high-end
boutiques, and restaurants will. The moral of the story is that today the character of these old buildings is
appreciated. It is the old buildings that are going to save that downtown.
2nd Story: Bus tours from cities on the east coast bring tourists across the country, stopping at the usual
tourist spots; Yellowstone, Boulder dam, Train museums, etc. One day, driving through the middle of
Nebraska, one of the passengers asks "what's that?" pointing to a grain silo in the distance. As the bus
approaches, they see someone outside, so the bus stops. The silo worker is happy to show people around
and explain how things work. It turns out the workers don't have anything to do in between the times
when there are no trucks or trains to load or unload. It also turns out that the tourists are fascinated to
learn about a working silo and it becomes a regular and popular feature of the tour. The moral is that
often we don't realize the value of our own surroundings. When we think of our surroundings, we think of
the view; the water and mountains. But Bremerton has a very rich and fascinating history. Those who
have lived here a long time may take it for granted and not realize how valuable that history is.
Unfortunately, not much remains of the old Bremerton; only the old houses and some buildings on the Navy
base. My home, which is actually two houses put together, was built in the late 1800's and early 1900's. It
pains me to think it could be torn down to make way for condominiums; buildings that might be fashionable
now, but could look tired in 10 years. Of course, old houses, if not maintained, can become decrepit, but they
can also become more valuable with age and care. As a city, we should be very thoughtful before allowing
them to be demoliShed. Once they are gone, they are gone forever.
Developers prefer the 60 foot limit because they want to maximize their investment. Who could blame them?
It's why they purchased the property in the first place. And developers are part of the picture. We need
developers if we are going to have development.
The City wants greater density, a new image, and of course, the increased tax revenue that condominiums will
bring. And who could blame them for that? But the city has a greater responsibility than accommodating
condominium developers. Such accommodation is somewhat understandable as the City rushes to revitalize
downtown. There is a natural desire to build momentum and keep it going. The picture changes though as
soon as you start talking about where people live instead of where they work or shop. That is a fundamental
shift in perspective.
To me, all of this discussion boils down to one about the quality of life - that is, how livable the city will be.
Quality is not only about being bigger, taller, and newer. It's also about how people want to live their lives and
the responsibility of the city and residents to create safe, diverse, livable neighborhoods.
I ask the city council to reconsider the height issue in favor of something more in keeping with the character
and scale of the neighborhood. I ask the mayor, the community development director, and members of the
planning commission to do the same. If the goal is to create a "world class city" then we will need world class
neighborhoods. How that is done will take some careful thought and deliberation.
Sincerely,
Brad Rucker
911 Highland Avenue
Bremerton, WA 98337
360-792-3371
rucker52@msn.com
Quick decisions are not always best
Page 1 of 1
From: NERO (Nels Royer) [royern@zgi.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 9:09 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Quick decisions are not always best
RE: Washington / Highland / Pleasant Avenue Neighborhood
DearCounciIMembe~,
You are fortunate to have the opportunity to reconsider the building height zoning where I live. In other cities, 60 feet is
above the limit for similar neighborhoods. Was the original decision thoughtfully reached? Consider the motive of those
who promote the 60 foot limit. How long before someone decides money can be made off your neighborhood? Profit for
a few individuals is a lousy argument.
In addition, destroying a charming historic neighborhood with oversized mediocre condos/apartments is a terrible way to
increase density. More successful places have adopted a better solution, building condos/apartments in the business
district itself and devoting the street level to retail space. Examples of this can be seen throughout the vibrant downtowns
of Seattle and Vancouver, BC.
The ability to re-evaluate a hasty decision that has permanent consequences is a rare luxury. Any fool can "stick to their
guns". It takes wisdom to recognize a mistake, and just a bit of courage to correct it.
Kind regards,
Nels Royer
912 Highland Ave.
2/27/2006
l'age 1 or 1
From: Justin Zeigler [justziggy@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 8:57 AM
To: City Council
Subject: send height restriction back to planning commission
Dear City Council Members:
It has come to my attention that you may be putting the decision on height restrictions in my neighborhood back to the
planning commission at this weeks meeting. Since I am unable to attend because of my work schedule I wanted you to
know that I believe this is the right thing to do for several reasons.
The process by which the zoning changes took place did not seem to aUow fair input by aU residents in our neighborhood.
There is currently a large sign at the end of Highland Avenue announcing public hearings regarding the design guidelines
for the proposed 60' structures. When were there large signs stating that you wanted our input regarding the proposal for
increased height limits in our neighborhood, a change in the height limits in the fIrst place? There needs to be better
communication between you and your community, not just developers.
The area of Pleasant, High land, and Washington A venues is a historic residential neighborhood that is adjacent to the
downtown core of Bremerton. My wife and I purchased our home in this neighborhood because the people were kind,
had families, and shared similar interests as ours. They too wanted to live in a home in a historic neighborhood and have
easy access to downtown. When I visit other cities I always end up walking through the historic neighborhoods that are
adjacent to the downtowns. Pleasant, Highland, and Washington Avenues are Bremerton's historic neighborhood
adjacent to the downtown. In 15 years I cannot imagine how beautiful these houses will be. It will be a tourism draw in
itself, unless a mega structure is present to ruin the character.
Never, would I have believed that the city would have shown gratitude of our neighborhoods revitalization byaUowing
such a monstrous building to be in our neighborhood. Would you mind if we built a 60' condominium building next to
your house? I appreciate the historic character of Pleasant, Highland, and Washington Avenues. I would like to see you
show your appreciation for this historic neighborhood and its residents by reducing the recently changed zoning from 60'
back to 35' feet.
Please do not force us out by aU owing such a large building in a residential neighborhood. Again I have to ask, would
you want this type of building next to your house, blocking the sun, ruining your gardens, giving your no place of privacy,
and increasing traffIc?
I am adamantly opposed to the large bulky condominium building being proposed for my neighborhood. I would like to
see you, the city council go back on your original decision on the height issue, and consider more public input for the
historic neighborhood that my family lives in, and consider how you can enhance a vital piece of Bremerton History.
Thanks for your considerations,
Justin Zeigler
Highland A venue
2/27/2006
Page 1 of 1
From: Wendy Priest [wendypriest@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 9:54 AM
To: Adam Brockus; Brad Gehring; Carol Arends; Dianne Robinson; Mike Shepherd; Nick Wofford; Will Maupin
Subject: Density in MR zone
I just wanted to share something with you I checked into after talking with Adam yesterday. The MR zone in the Highland
neighborhood has a density of 40 units per acre. I talked with an architect that works on multiple family housing projects
and he said that we could achieve 80 units per acre (comfortably sized units) with 4 stories. So, that's double what the
planned density is for our area. We've only heard from one developer that 6 stories is what they need to make their
project pencil.
I also recall many concerned citizens months ago commenting on the Downtown District extending down to Evergreen
Park and around many neighborhoods. They were assured by DCD that densities and heights did not have to be the
same for the whole district. It seems they are being told something different now.
Wendy
2/28/2006
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
David & Libby [parins@mac.com]
Monday, February 27,2006 11:42 AM
City Council
Rezoning of the Highland/Pleasant Ave Neighborhood
February 27, 2006
To the City Council, Mayor, Community Development Director, and Members of the Planning
Commission,
RE: Rezoning of the Highland/Pleasant Ave Neighborhood
Background:
I own 952 Washington Avenue on the waterfront near the Manette Bridge. My wife and I
bought our house in 2002 on speculation that downtown revitalization would actually
manifest. Our purchase was not real estate speculation, but rather a gamble on Bremerton
providing a good quality of life for us to raise our child. In 2002 I watched a drug
dealer operate every day from a waterfront section-eight house near mine. This drug
dealer had one of the best views imaginable from his apartment. At the time I feared my
gamble on Bremerton was foolish. But Mayor Bozemen?s leadership is succeeding, and the
scales have tipped in favor of Bremerton. We currently live in New York City with plans
to remodel our Bremerton house before returning in two years.
60? height restriction is reasonable:
I am in favor of 60? buildings in this neighborhood. Bremerton?s housing stock is
severely outdated, most of it having been built for the swell of shipyard workers during
W.W.II In most cases it is not cost effective to restore or retrofit poorly designed and
built structures. They have to be torn down to make room for some mid to high priced
units. Currently there is no adequate housing available in this neighborhood for
incoming professionals. Middle to high income earners are the last missing component
our revitalization, and our infill potential is small. We are talking about just a few
lots that could make or break downtown. So let investors build up 60? feet. Everyday I
walk among 60? foot buildings in the suburbs of NYC and while some are monstrosities,
others are true gems .
The height of a building has less effect on a neighborhood than the quality and design of
the building. Even a 40 foot building could damage our neighborhood if not built with
sensitivity towards neighborhood integrity. Our goal should be well designed, well built
buildings for mid to high income earners. That is the void we need to fill. Bremerton?s
history has delivered cheaply build, poorly designed structures to house low to moderated
income workers. The few nice historic homes,. mostly on Highland Avenue, are a small
minority and can not alone sustain the retail core we are trying to generate downtown. I
could not recommend this neighborhood to my professional friends because there are no
satisfactory units available. The more investment in quality housing we can get, the
better. Let us not stall and stagnate based on the minority opinion of a few well
positioned Highland Ave residents.
Sincerely,
David Par ins
360 286-1196
parins@mac.com
1
f'"'lft.1 fl~~~.t,~p~.~~r~il r,g;orr~r9-~
qfl~ @!'?'ll.l",l fllt'nr. '
tAli it I.l.vV~.o;~~!.. ~~ <l d'~~:.l
912 Highland Ave.
Bremerton, W A 98337
.~~.,~.:lj2,8.!~,h_~,,~.
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I would like to draw your attention to the photo that was picked for the Bremerton section of
Discover Kitsap 2003 - a publication that promotes tourism in Kitsap County. They obviously
considered this view of the Washington Narrows, the Manette Bridge and the historic Highland
neighborhood something of value; something that attracts visitors. They didn't decide to run a
photo of the nondescript condos of Evergreen park or Manette. As Bremerton grows, we need to
be wise about how it grows and we need to protect the things that give it character. Let's start by
keeping 60 foot buildings out of our HighlandlWashington neighborhood as the planning
commission originally recommended. I have also attached a few photos that show how condos
can overwhelm smaller houses.
I keep hearing about the urgent need for high density housing but Bremerton has actually had a
decrease in population since 2000. This isn't Manhattan or Waikiki; people aren't waiting in line
for housing, so when we build housing it needs to be attractive, it needs to add quality rather than
take away from the area. If you allow some speculators to build a 60 foot, 100 unit, mediocre
building in the tiny 2 block residential area of Highland Ave, you will only wind up with more
rentals and more rental vacancies. Condos work well in the downtown business core, residential
streets require something different. People move to Bremerton neighborhoods for value - nice
house with yard and/or view - not to live in some ugly apartment building. The current building
trend in many urban, residential areas is the return of the bungalow - small, well-crafted houses
with yard space. In fact, the award winning cottages of Ross Chapin Architects were just
featured in the March Issue of Sunset Magazine.
When I attended one of the design meetings for the 60ft buildings, Chris Hugo - who was acting
more like an Enron executive than a city employee - stated "the Mayor wants condos...If I had a
house in this neighborhood I would sell to developers and live in the top floor unit". It is ironic to
me that the city wants to attract people to the area, but for those of us who already moved here _
who think of our properties as homes rather than a vehicle for making as much money as
possible - the attitude seems to be one of contempt. Please be careful of your priorities. Think
about what you would like to see in your neighborhood.
Sincerely,
/
(~-:: 'i-/-;:--- 'c!.~"C' >;t~::;:~
,. /
/
Sally BanfiII
'I!
.:\
<l'C""\;.",:;', '1';_~~~~:.'r"!i
, ~'~&DJkk~~~ ,;. i~~;!}'!i:;';\' ~~. ,~tg;,~ L .~
>-~'.
I
l-
t!
I
"I,
i
I
I
I
I
I
/
J
!
"
March 1, 2006
Councilwoman Dianne Robinson
Norm Dicks Government Center Council Office
345 6th St., Suite 600
Bremerton, W A 98337
Re: Highland / Pleasant Building Heights
Dear Councilwoman Robinson,
I am a resident and homeowner of 1315 Victoria Ave. in your district. I sincerely hope
that you will support the Council's earlier decision to allow for 60 foot tall buildings in
the Highland / Pleasant neighborhood of downtown Bremerton.
This issue affects Bremerton as a whole, not just the Highland / Pleasant neighborhood.
We need more residents in downtown to create a vibrant and active City and to support
more businesses and jobs. Design guidelines will make sure taller buildings 'fit in'.
Bremerton's adopted Comprehensive Plan already supports a vital downtown that is the
urban capital of the West Puget Sound. As a first time homebuyer, I invested in my
house in Bremerton with the hopes that the City would grow and prosper according to the
vision in the Comprehensive Plan. Please, don't let one or two Council Members' local
concerns hurt the future of Bremerton as a whole.
Sincerely,
Geoffrey Wentlandt
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Kyle Cruver [kylecruver@wavecable.com]
Wednesday, March 01,2006 11 :30 AM
City Council
The Mayor
Height restrictions
Greetings, Council-
I have some definite misgivings about the appropriateness of 60'
buildings in our residential neighborhood areas. In discussions with the stakeholder's
group formed around this issue, conversation surrounded just how something of this
monumental scale could be integrated into a residential neighborhood. It became
increasingly clear that 40' structures might indeed be built in such a way as to reflect
surrounding properties, but 60' structures would, by a factor of height alone, dwarf,
shade and obscure surrounding properties, creating a tunnel effect in neighborhoods. There
did not appear to be any tangible way to mitigate a development of this size, through
facades, roofline augmentation, surface modulation, that promised anything but a wall of
obscurance to quality of life for those effected.
I fully understand the need for increased population density in Bremerton. I saw Seattle
grow and burst at the seams throughout the '80s and '90's. What is to many a story of
great redevelopment success there, can also serve as a cautionary tale to others. Be
careful what you ask for. And ask for a certain degree of consideration for those who are
the current residents.
Thoughtful growth instills pride and purpose to those living in emerging neighborhoods. It
encourages participation and citizenship.
Vital, growing neighborhoods enable small businesses to survive and even thrive. We all
want this dynamic to take seed in Bremerton.
That said, I would be very encouraging of mixed-use, highest-density residential
development in the "urban heart" of downtown, with an eye to issues of affordability as
well as quality of development. In adjoining neighborhoods, however, I would encourage
scale- appropriate, site-appropriate medium-to-high-density development, with an eye to
maximizing quality of life for existing as well as future property owners. To me, this
looks a lot more like quality, architecturally-reflective development that tops out at
around 40'.
Best Regards,
Kyle Cruver
1
--
.~. ","",'0
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
kinneydouglas@netscape.net
Wednesday, March 01,;200612:12 PM
City Council
MR hight
I live own a dwelling at 630 pleasant, my name is Doug Kinney. I think 50 ft. is as high
as new construction should go. I worry about current side setbacks though. Thanks Douglas
Kinney
Try the New NetscapeMail Today!
Virtually Spam-Free I More Storage I Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com
1
March 1, 2006
Bremerton City Council
239 4th Street
Bremerton, W A 983377
Re: Reconsidering height limits on Washington, Highland and Pleasant
I would like to briefly go over some reasons why you should not send the height issue back to the
planning commission:
1) Growth Management Act and Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan
. According to Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan which is a result of the GMA, 13,000
new people are supposed to come to Bremerton by 2023. The Comprehensive Plan
designates a sizable portion will need to come to the downtown. If not to downtown, then
where?
. The Downtown Regional Center (to Evergreen Park) is supposed to have average density
that is twice that of any other Center. Reducing heights will make this impossible.
. Our project matches the city goals and Comprehensive Plan. The people who want lower
heights have a very narrow viewpoint. As Chris Hugo said last week, zoning is supposed
to represent the city goals not the parochial views of a few neighbors.
2) Time matters
. The Growth Management Act and Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan indicate that
downtown Bremerton needs to get denser population by 2023. The more you delay, the
less likely it is that you will be in compliance with the GMA.
. Bremerton is "hot" right now. The city has invested public money. Now the private
money is here. If you delay, it will pass us by. Who knows how long we will have to
wait for the next economic window?
3) The council needs to stick to decisions.
. To do otherwise is unfair to businesses and confusing to everyone.
. Wendy Priest has indicated she feels that the council can change zoning at any time.
Clearly you can, but it is not. This sentiment is very scary for businesses and if you
endorse such a view, people will be reluctant to invest in Bremerton.
4) Condominiums are good for the city
. Higher density is good for business in the downtown core. More residents mean more
restaurants, more shops and more visitors.
. Higher home ownership is good for the neighborhood, the schools, and the city. That is
why it is one of the 2006 City Council goals.
You unanimously made the right decision on November 30th. Don't make the wrong one now.
Don't send the height restriction issue back to the planning commission. Let Chris Hugo
complete the guidelines for 60 foot residential structures in the Downtown Regional Center. Let
those structures be built. Let Bremerton's Downtown Regional Center be revitalized. There is no
reason to undo years of planning.
VOTE NO on Bill # 06-038 (Referral to Planning Commission).
~YOu,
Claire Schrodt
631 Washington Avenue
Bremerton, WA 98337
360-710-8094
My name is Shane Schrodt. I live at 637 Washington Ave.
Before the city council votes on whether or not to send this issue back to the Planning
Commission, I think it's important to remind ourselves of the all the planning that has
already taken place.
There are people who would have you believe that the idea of high density in the area
around Highland Ave. just popped up recently without any warning. In fact, many
people have planned this for downtown Bremerton, the Downtown Regional Center. And
not just for the past few years, but for decades.
Chuck and Anne Laubach, who's names may be familiar to some of you, pieced together
9 contiguous properties totaling almost an acre of land, back in the 80s. In 1990, they
paid Rice, Fergus Architects to come up with a sketch for condos on Highland Avenue.
And the Laubachs were not alone. Another couple bought a half an acre in the 70's.
Other landlords accumulated slightly smaller groups of property.
In 1985, Bremerton planned for high density in the downtown area. They zoned for it
and created 120 foot height limits. The city has planned for this type of project for more
than two decades.
In the last few years, the Bremerton planning department, planning commission and the
city council have planned the revitalization of Bremerton. You created a comprehensive
plan. Your plans and your goals all but beg people to build condos in the downtown, the
regional downtown. High density. High home ownership. That means condos.
The state planned its future with the Growth Management Act. It mandates that the
Downtown Regional Centers absorb the new residents of our state.
Don't let someone tell you that you have not planned enough. This plan has been in the
works for decades. You, the mayor, the city staff and others have revitalized Bremerton.
This building, the conference center, expanded Evergreen Park, the Hampton Inn are
here. Anthony's, a new marina, another hotel, an expanded boardwalk are coming.
Bremerton is happening.
The next step in the plan is condos. Get more people living downtown - the regional
downtown. Restaurants, boutiques and art galleries will follow. Decades of planning are
finally being realized. Please, stick with the plan.
Thank You
S ~f1rJ e-- s c.. 't-{ r<o~ ,-
'7ID-~4fofo
.
. .--~-- --- ---A~7J-c~~ --~-~ -~-dkcJ--- ~_h:(.L.CL_CWL-C~.cLlj,._Q._._ -'-_____ ~__ __ _.U
() ()-' ~_ J:&
-- -- .-----~~9W __nO. .. ~.~~_..h~._~-~(..1__~c== (J ... .---- ----~-
----- -- ---P~~~-~\\\- _{'o~rh~ -\~cud-a.Q.Q.-'1 6~~ -- ------- -
_u___~_____fQS'_~_ ~~_. ,_~u ~--.emsv' ~--;~c&---ap~ __~5>_____ __
____u_ -c:m---~~cc6a~. ~ --\..)\...o-OAlL~~J---tt-.>_-\~rOV-L'---'--- -- -_____
---ftvLh~ctcd::it&--h~"\\~cr1-'.~ 'D~---~C~--O/A)~-~---::~-. -- - -----
-- ---_.._ -~C\-0~eJ\.Ck ,_ _....:~_ ''{L~~~~O- CllAQ... ~I' -- -. ---- ---
---~---.- -- ~~--~ \..V^_cL~\.O'l\_~ d. ~- (JDQ t-.fu2{Ja-c''\ -__ ~)"\. ___{tM.;~~_____ ----~-
----- ~ ~-O\I\.c&-<1~u.L-l'cLJ<& _~J_hol',.('l__'-0M.k..._lu<:.-_cV1-e..__~_ -.--- ---- --
- -- -. _._.___e&\_0\.Q.CAo'-1~\~ ---Ao - _~~. -rkc~~-- ~--- j W:k --~.,._ --.. - - -_~______ ___
. --- --ca OWL -Ci/Vl::k _~u~_ ~ - {CMA_ ~ --~ _'-.~+~<D__ - -- --- ___un ---
- - - - --~\C~/~GNe.&~ ~_-Q~ ~ yeo.M--Q,ytJ-~~~ - _0-.
- ---- ~- b-,,_~\o~_-.- -O\.V)._.C:y:>cJl.:0-+V-pOV~~~-o.-rcJ\:~--- - --------
-- uu. _~--~~ -.~c9.. ~.o,...J..--'ro--~ OM-__~ -~~-- -------..- --
-- _n - - --,~--~~-0~ ~-I -~~-Ylo\--~--.~LQ.U:kt~J ------
- --- -v'h- -~ l\Q-<-.) -~~-~,-~Q0- dw\U.~ .~ -k ---
____ _u __ ~~ _~_ k~ .1.._ _______ ___ __ __ ______ __ _ _ _ __ __. ___ ___
-- -------- --J.---'vl~..~~J.--~~~~~_~---Sr~--'D~ -------
n _ _~~t} ~_,_ _Pk_e~_d.o_~-\_ -M-u-.L)~--t'-V-W-, _We. -N>eJ _ ___ __
--------..::k~-.-~~W2.- -f4'o~---'JH.o _~_..~_~JJ -~--~- ..------ --
- ---- -- -~4-..iM---~~_wa,(f) _~__~~__~_~~\&:,O{'~,oJ~____ -- -- -
_____ __ .~--M---~--~~<2.---..~_e-Y.\:-v-\.;\::)""--0-{(?A~~ .~. _ __.__ _ _______
-e- i2,,"--Qc..U;~_::'- )"""--- .___u51;"~__+__ -- '--- - -
H__ .__ _" _.n .--- --~ e~ _ _ (~__qbLaq03 ~,.& Ave.).
- - __uH__ U -(%0) S'G7 ___ 0"6~ -- __~\-\dJ=?=L~ -
__, u.,__ ___u_. __u____,____,__ _______, __ _____ _. -n---n----___u_131L/t:>(~--n- __ ._. _
De - r. 8-,. . (' . ..,
- -- ----. --. .-..M---'--^-"J--L--o~-r----'- ---------.-....----------.-----------------
------ _____._._J__~_~~_ _yov- ck\U00 \O'A<frC----'~.-D~<~'-~\~-J----- _____ __n_
- ~_ - - - ~r~b<\._ -~WIb~-:9.1.,," ___~ -_~\s_~ _h.=__~_____._
.----- -5\J-~.~E\--k-\O"\C~-o.1:--~~-~~---~--~~-~~~--\&O.
- ---- -~0\Co)U-~-~~~-,-- --W-~-- 'x-..@.\J'L..Q_\tc€.-f_~-\..JJv-..-lCI~-C\'^-& -
- (" ((' \' ,- - . ' ) ~
- -----.--0Y\C.1L-\v:\.- -C\.-\\~:'a.\M...Q....-OW~'\ ("J-do - \<2-\Y.\.\J~iI..~_ nA\ OV\3- -- ;--- ----- -- -
,- - --- - -~-e3>'be.!---V\.e:.c.;~fuOJ- ,<2..\.c:::.a. -k-~Q..--~~""_~~~.'r-.----- ____._
--. -r\'NL - ~.(u.:)~ - ~ J-hc~ ~ J -. W,\\- 'oe _ CAH\.o~_ _~O\~~___ _.~ ___
u__ ___~-W~~_~_~-u:..\\d_._o.._~{:"V~~ j~J.~_~J~_,._~C~\lS~-~\\i(\5 ____________
u____._ -.YYl~"^--f'D~ry--W-\~. ~~~~-~--Ci.CCCNA.~€.~--'-~s--~m~-.1'5.- __ ______._____
- - - -- -- ~::k~~\'f- _C'C"-t_e.-_ , --'Do-nm~(:u\,;:L -.~-~--a..v;;>gy--9-\O\.:JeJ'"~I'\-J - --- -.- -- -------..
- e--. =M--iL-~~\\&\~~ _~c~~ - o.vti -:~~.\\u...t--I- .J.l' _~-oQ,ilC7l':\--.:\:t--sb-.uJ~- __um _n__
- ----- -~-~-~-cd:-\~--~-.-B-~--~-~cd:-is-w.~-\.V\.~ ---------
-------. -ou- ,M.~~\4-~k~-f-(-v~ee!---UM~-\~~--QkCUl,e--'o.e.-.~---------
. ----. _~-~6~H~O~-Nla.-~~~~_-1:o- ~--Ui\-:'~J~C~r\7~ .~- O\L'VL.------- . - n_
---__ --_ ::;7~-~.:eS:-t-,,------_--- _____.___~_______ _______._.____.____. __ __.___ n__.___.
_ _____j.~_~__~~_u~~~_--~~.~-~-,~ __ _~__ ____
_.H___.__ -~ -OJ\Q.Cl..--- \..0\\L _V\a~_CL_J-_o~-_kQ ~&--fo;\h~- ~___ _n ---------
~.-~- _ -~- -~--c..ow_.~~~~. -51Lcn::>~clt.ir\.'j-(J-{b~.--LJ\\\- .~.__ __ ____n _ _ ____
----%O-JlLp--~_'vCt\~--~6- vY'-~'1-'I\A.-D'\32_-~J5.IA)~5--w~LlLbe.~-- ~-- --- __ ---
) , &..\'..' - . '- ,. rL. (_~ Q..' \0"
-s- ~~~-~ --(M.ll::-'\!I.\.S -.\v:\---0~~_'\-V-\et~_:roT_\,__~..nU:L ~s.--------------
- ------- pS.D~-.W~\\\_-\Je.~-o..-- ~-~-~~~ ~-~-1--81p0l'.\5-~~-.------ ---- --
___n___.. -_Lu(~~~ -Cffi\.&o-S.-. -d_W:$___a!tt~ --\k--'N~T~~----------- ___
-e-- -. - 4er----<f~AoCU; -~- J)~J-~- -~avli--mJ --~~J-_.--- -..._-
n _______ClA--J__cuJ:erJ.'^~\~_ 1___ _ _ _.._ ______.. .___________ _____.. ___ ____ ___ _ _ __
Page 1 of 1
Christine Grenier
From: Christine Grenier
Sent: Wednesday, March 01,20063:26 PM
To: Adam Brockus; Brad Gehring; Carol Arends; Dianne Robinson; Mike Shepherd - HOME; Mike
Shepherd - Work; Mike Short; Nick Wofford; Wendy Priest - HOME; Wendy Priest - Work; Will
Maupin
Cc: Andrea Spencer; Chris Hugo; Paula Johnston; Roger Lubovich
Subject: Citizen Concerns re: Highland building heights
Nancy Byas of Manette called at 2:45 PM on 3/1/06 to express her concerns over building heights in the Highland
neighborhood.
She asked Council Members to 1) consider preserving homes with historical character such as the "Brayman
House" and 2) not allow development that will block views of homeowners.
She will be providing a letter for the record at a later time, but wanted her concerns noted for the record. I will
print this email for the record and distribute at pre-Council.
FYI
Christine
3/1/2006