The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04/20/2011 AGENDA I I I o Ilo` rY2i CITY COUNCIL 345 6 Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, WA 98337 ❑ Phone (360) 473 -5280 APRIL 20, 2011 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 1 BRIEFING 5 00 — 5 30 P M in COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM 603 A General Council Business 2 CALL TO ORDER 5 30 P M in FIRST FLOOR CHAMBERS A Pledge of Allegiance B Invocation 3 MAYOR'S REPORT 4 PUBLIC RECOGNITION 5 CONSENT AGENDA A Claims & Check Register B Minutes of Meeting — April 6, 2011 C Minutes of Study Session — Apnl 13, 2011 D Approval of Basic Life Support (BLS) Services Agreement with Handlers Racing Association E Approve Community Forestry Assistance Grant Interagency Agreement with the Washington State Department of Natural Resources to help pay for shade and habitat trees for use at Lions Park F Award contract to ESN Northwest, Inc for the project titled "ORCTM Injection at former Chevron Property" 6 PUBLIC HEARING(S) A Closed Record Heanng for Bremerton Investment Group, LLC proposed site specific rezone at the northeast comer of 1 e & Cambnan 7 GENERAL BUSINESS A Project Design Agreement with Puget Sound Energ (PSE) for Schedule 74 Underground Conversion of Pacific Avenue Improvements from 6 to 11 Street B Resolution No 3139 setting forth amendments to the Bremerton City Charter for submission to the voters at the November 8, 2011 General Election to Reduce the Size of the City Council from 9 to 7, and other related changes Continued to May 4, 2011... 8 COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS 9 ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING ® 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 BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKERS LIST PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME BELOW IF YOU WISH YOUR COMMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE RECORD � � v y REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CLERK THANK YOU AGENDA BILL 5A CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Study Session Date COUNCIL MEETING Date April 20,2011 Claims & Check Register Department Financial Services 'Presenter Cathy Johnson Phone 473-5296 SUMMARY: Consent Agenda item Approval of checks and electronic fund transfers ATTACHMENTS: Check Register FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount) APPROVALS: DEPARI'MENT DIRECTOR CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR MAYOR COMMITTEE CHAIR COUNCIL PRESIDENT CONSENT AGENDA GFNERAL BUSINESS ❑ PUBLIC HEARING ❑ RECOMMENDED MO'rION: 1) Check #s 342589 through 342720 and EFT's 10784 thiough 10809 in the amount of $1,694,50135 2) Regular Payroll Payout for the pay period ending March 31, 2011 in the amount of $17,025 56 3) Regular Payroll for the pay pei iod ending April 15, 2011 in the amount of $721,124 82 COUNCIL ACTION: 0 Approve ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action DATE SUBMITTED: AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Minutes Committee Meeting Date: bi /A for Meeting of COUNCIL MEETING Date ( 1o 10 II Department City Council Pre q-; i Presenter* Will Maupm, President Phone. (360) 473 -5280 SUMMARY: Attached is a summary of the City Council Meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Meeting Minutes FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount). N/A APPROVALS: COUNCIL PRESIDENT CONSENT AGENDA GENERAL BUSINESS ❑ PUBLIC HEARING ❑ RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Consent Agenda as presented I i i COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny y ❑Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action I DIGITAL RECORDING CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, April 6, 2011 The weekly meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order Wednesday, April 6, 2011, at 5 00 PM in Council Conference Room 603 of the NORM DICKS GOVERNMENT CENTER, 345 6` Street, Bremerton, Washington, with Council President Will Maupm presiding Council Members present were Nick Wofford, Carol Arends, Dianne Robinson, Greg Wheeler, Roy Runyon, Adam Brockus, and Cecil McConnell Council Member Jim McDonald was absent Also present were City Attorney Roger Lubovich, City Clerk Carol Etgen, and Legislative Assistant Lori Smith A COUNCIL BRIEFING was then held to discuss General Council Business at 5 00 PM in the Council Conference Room At 5 30 PM the meeting moved to the Meeting Chambers The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Cecil McConnell followed by the invocation provided by Retired Pastor Oliver Warren formerly of Eagles Wings Fellowship Church MAYOR'S REPORT — Mayor Lent • Presented a Mayor's Appreciation Award to the Bremerton Fire Department for their efforts in organizing the fundraiser for Hunter Smith, 4 -year old son of City of Bremerton Firefighter Rob Smith, • Thanked City employees Pam Bykonen, Community Development and Mike Bishop, General Facilities, for being leaders In the 2010 United Way fundraising campaign and was pleased to announce that City employees contributed $30,623, • Was pleased to receive a tour by volunteers from the Chuckwagon Senior Nutrition Program and 50/60 Meals on Wheels Program, • Thanked Council Members Greg Wheeler and Nick Wofford, members of the USS Nimltz, and all community residents who participated in the recent planting project at Lions Field, • Proclaimed Saturday, April 9, 2011 in honor of the annual `Bataan Death March Memorial ", and encouraged the public to attend the event beginning at 9 30 AM, and • Announced the "Take Back Our Drugs" one -time event on Saturday, April 30 from 10 00 AM to 2 00 PM at Kltsap Mall, and • Announced that City employees would participate in the County -wide Earthquake "Drop) Cover' Hold On'" Drill scheduled on April 20 at 9 45 AM PUBLIC RECOGNITION Mike Walton Marketing Director with the Kitsap Family YMCA, provided an update on the Kids Strong Campaign and Resolution Runs, and announced a "triple header', 3 free family events scheduled on Saturday, April 16 (Healthy Kids Day, Pools Day, and Splash & Jam) Robert Medley encouraged the community to attend the Annual Bataan Death March Memorial Service on Saturday, April 9 beginning at 9 30 AM at Bataan Park Joe Hudson owner of Evergreen Trophy, expressed his concerns about the proposed plan by the City to move utilities, especially how the City was able to vacate the alley without notifying any of the property owners Mayor Lent indicated that the City is putting together a packet of information which will Include notifications related to the permitting of this project, and hoped that questions provided by property owners will be answered CONSENT AGENDA A Check Numbers 342315 through 342588, and EFT -10739 through EFT -10783 In the amount of $1,467,185 99, Regular Payroll for the pay period ending March 15, 2011 In the amount of City Council Reg Mtg Minutes Wednesday, April 6, 2011 Page 2 of 4 $730,734 74, Regular Payroll for the pay period ending March 31, 2011 in the amount of $765,614 93, and Retiree Payroll for the pay period ending March 31, 2011 in the amount of $82,63318 B Minutes of Meeting — March 16, 2011 C Minutes of Study Session — March 23, 2011 D Minutes of Special Meeting — March 30, 2011 E Purchase of one (1) 2011 Ford Escape Hybrid for the Water Resources Division F Amendment No 1 to Interlocal Agreement with the Kitsap County Health District for Kitsap Regional Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) Clean Run -Off Project G Green Superintendent Agreement with Ed Faulk Operations, LLC for Gold Mountain Golf Complex H Golf Management Agreement with Scott Alexander's Golf Shop, Inc for Gold Mountain Golf Complex I Lease Agreement with Scott Alexander's Golf Shop, Inc for Gold Mountain Golf Complex J Goods and Services Agreement with Will Robinson for Lions Park Whale Play Sculptures K Resolution No 3137 to establish May 18, 2011 as a Hearing Date to vacate an Alley for Olympic College between 13 and 15 Streets, West of Warren Avenue There were no comments from the public 05:55:05 M /S /C (Runyon/Wheeler) Move to approve the CONSENT AGENDA as presented Voted in favor of Motion McConnell, Brockus, Runyon, Wheeler, Robinson, Wofford, Maupin Abstained Arends Motion carried 7 -Yes, 1- Abstention GENERAL BUSINESS A PRA ECT DE SIGN AGDNFRACNT WITH P UGET SAUNA ENER - V SCHED ll C 7A I IA111C�GROU D CONVERSION OF PACIFIC A VEN S IM12140V MEET - S . t=R GM TA 4 4 . QT�E Item was pulled PUBLIC HEARING 7A — RESOLUTION NO. 3138 TO DECLARE RESERVOIR NO 14 (LOCATED AT THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF IRONSIDES AVENUE 81 EAST 17 TH STREET) CITY WATER UTILITY PROPERTY SURPLUS Gunnar Fridriksson Public Works & Utilities, summarized that Reservoir No 14 is located at the southwest corner of Ironsides Avenue and East 17 Street The reservoir was in service until 1991 when it was retired due to small size, elevation issues with supply system and service area, and persistent leaking problems The City Water Utility and Engineering staff recommends surplusing the property Paul Correll Board Member of the Manette Neighborhood Coalition, questioned the reasons why the property, including the alley, needed to be surplused John Strauss summarized the issues that he outlined in an e-mail sent to the Council [the e-mail in its entirety has been included as a part of the record) Mike McWilliams summarized the issues that he outlined in several a -mails sent to the Council [the a -marls in their entirety have been included as a part of the record] City Council Reg Mtg Minutes Wednesday, April 6, 2011 Page 3 of 4 With no further comments, President Maunin closed the public hearing 06:07:20 Motion to pass Resolution No 3138 was made by Runyon, and seconded by McConnell, Discussion was then opened to the Council Mr. Fridrikkson responded that the alley was purchased in 1957 for access to the reservoir site and that area was not intended for public access Mr. Runyon asked for the assessed value of the property and where the proceeds of a sale would go, and asked if this area is a park, given that the area is used for recreational purposes Mr. Fridrikkson responded $90,000 and that proceeds of a sale would go into the Water Utility Fund for capital improvement project, and stated that the property is not on the list of protected parks, so the property is not recognized as a park Mr. Runyon also noted that he supported a citizen backed plan to purchase the property for their use Mrs. Arends asked if the City was required to surplus the property before the City could do anything with the property, including selling the land to the neighbors Mr. Lubovich confirmed that was correct Mr. Brockus reported that this issue was discussed at the last District 3 Neighborhood meeting on March 29 and neighbors asked the City for more time to come up with a plan to purchase the property for use as a neighborhood park 06:14:10 Amended Motion to change the date from November 18, 2011 to Apnl 30, 2012 in Section 2 of the Resolution was made by Brockus, and seconded by Runyon, Discussion then continued by the Council Mr. Runyon asked if the property were sold, would real estate excise tax be generated from the sale Roger Lubovich answered no Mr. Brockus hoped that a future change in use of the property will ultimately benefit the community Council Members also offered comments of support for the amendment 06:26:25 A -M /S /C (Runyon /McConnell) Amendment to change the date from November 18, 2011 to April 30, 2012 in Section 2 of the Resolution No 3138 Voted in favor of Amendment Brockus, Runyon, Wheeler, Robinson, Arends, Wofford, Maupin Voted against the Amendment McConnell Amendment approved 7 -Yes, 1 -No 06:26:55 M /S /C (Runyon /McConnell) Move to pass Resolution No 3138 declaring City Water Utility land surplus Voted in favor of Motion Runyon, Wheeler, Robinson, Arends, Wofford, McConnell, Maupin Voted against the Motion Brockus Motion carried 7 -Yes, 1 -No COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Adam Brockus reminded the public that the Manette Bridge will be closed to vehicular traffic from July to October, although it will remain open to pedestrians, and also attended the Washington State Science & Engineering Fair held last weekend City Council Reg Mtg Minutes Wednesday, April 6, 2011 Page 4 of 4 Roy Runyon also attended the Washington State Science & Engineering Fair, invited the public to attend an Earthquake Preparedness Workshop hosted by the Kitsap Department of Emergency Management on Monday, April 18, and announced that the Bremerton Bar & Grill, located at 109 Pacific Avenue will be open for business on April 18 For more information on available jobs, please visit www lobs woraboard /neighborhoodgnlls Greg Wheeler mentioned that he too attended the Washington State Science & Engineering Fair, as well as the event to say farewell to Captain Olsen on April 15 He also announced that the Rotary Annual Garage Sale ( "RAGS ") event would be held on April 16 at the Kitsap Fairgrounds, and the Sinclair Cleanup event was also on April 16 Dianne Robinson announced the Matan Park Construction neighborhood meeting will be held on April 19 beginning at 5 30 PM at 2220 Anderson Street Carol Arends emphasized the importance of the Bataan Death March Memorial event on April 9, and hoped that the public would make an effort to attend Nick Wofford mentioned that lodging tax funds were provided to the Washington State Science & Engineering Fair and explained that lodging tax revenue benefit non - profit organizations, who in turn, during events, generate revenue by encouraging people to stay at Bremerton hotels Will Maupin enjoyed his recent trip to Cabo San Lucas as well as the weather there 9A — EXECUTIVE SESSION At 6 42 PM, the Council convened for a 15- Minute Executive Session to consider a Real Estate Acquisition per RCW 42 30 110 (1)(b) Information Only No action was taken With no further business, President Maupin adjourned the Council Meeting at 7 00 PM Prepared and Submitted by i L RI SMITH Legislative Assistant Attest CAROL ETGEN, City Clerk WILL MAUPIN, City Council President WMCEIscg DATE SUBMITTED: AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL ■• rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr� SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Minutes Committee Meeting Date: /A for Meeting of COUNCIL MEETING Date p-en 1 ..o A Department City Council Presenter, Phone 3600 473! President 5280 SUMMARY: Attached is a summary of the City Council Meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Meeting Minutes FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount) N/A APPROVALS: COUNCIL PRESIDENT: CONSENT AGENDA GENERAL BUSINESS ❑ PUBLIC HEARING ❑ RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Consent Agenda as presented COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action DIGITAL RECORDING CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MINUTES April 13, 2011 A Study Session of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Conference Room 603, of the NORM DICKS GOVERNMENT CENTER, 345 6th Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, April 13, 2011, at 5 00 PM, with Council President Will Maupin presiding. Council Members present were Nick Wofford, Carol Arends, Dianne Robinson, Greg Wheeler, Roy Runyon, Adam Brockus, Cecil McConnell, and Jim McDonald Legislative Assistant Lori Smith was present to provide staff support President Maupin emphasized that the Study Session was open to the public, however there would be no opportunities for input or participation, that no action will be taken, and the content of these items is subject to change A NO DISCUSSION PLANNED - The following items are budgeted items or have been reviewed by the appropriate Council Committee, and will be placed on the April 20, 2011 Council Meeting Agenda 1 Approval of Basic Life Support (BLS) Services Agreement with Handlers Racing Association — Chief Al Duke, Bremerton Fire Department, and Adam Brockus, Public Safety and Parks Committee Vice -Chair Consent Agenda 2 Approval of Community Forestry Assistance Grant Agreement with the Washington State Department of Natural Resources to help pay for shade and habitat trees for use at Lions Park — Wyn Birkenthal, Parks & Recreation Director, and Adam Brockus, Public Safety and Parks Committee Vice -Chair Consent Agenda B FULL DISCUSSION ITEMS 3 Award contract to ESN Northwest, Inc for the protect titled "ORCTm Injection at former Chevron Property" — Tom Knuckey, Managing Engineer, Water & Wastewater Utilities, Public Works & Utilities Department, and Jim McDonald, Public Works Committee Chair Consent Agenda 4 Proposed resolution setting forth amendments to the Bremerton City Charter for submission to the voters at the November 8, 2011 General Election to Reduce the Size of the City Council from 9 to 7 and other related changes — Roger Lubovich, City Attorney, and Greg Wheeler, City Council Member General Business President Mauvin called a 10- minute recess from 6 25 to 6 35 P C GENERAL COUNCIL BUSINESS Council Committee Chair reports were provided, and General Council Business was discussed President Maupin adjourned the Study Session at 7 30 PM Prepared and Submitted by CO RI SMITH Attest Legislative Assistant i CAROL ETGEN, City Clerk I WILL MAUPIN, City Council President WMCEIscg DATE SUBMITTED 04 -06 -11 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Basic Life Support Agreement Committee Meeting Date: 04 -13 -11 between the City of Bremerton and Handlers COUNCIL MEETING Date 04 -20 -11 Racing Association Department Fire Presenter Al Duke, Fire Chief Phone 473 -5380 SUMMARY: This is an agreement between the City of Bremerton and Handlers Racing Association to provide one fire engine with a firefighter and one firefighter /EMT, at a minimum, on each race date South Kitsap Fire & Rescue has been providing this service for a number of years, but it has now placed a strain on their services to fill these positions every weekend from April till October The Handlers Racing Association is reimbursing the City at a rate of $100 00 an hour The Fire Department shall then hire individuals on overtime to cover the event and not take away from the on- duty staffing. ATTACHMENTS: Agreement between the City of Bremerton and Handlers Racing Association. FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount) This Agreement will generate approximately $18,300 in revenues and corresponding expenditures in the Fire Department APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR CITY ATTORNEY: FINANCE DIRECTOR. MAYOR - COMMITTEE CHAIR COUNCIL PRESIDENT CONSENT AGENDA GENERAL BUSINESS ❑ PUBLIC HEARING ❑ RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Basic Life Support Services Agreement Between the City of Bremerton and Handlers Racing Association with a corresponding budget adjustment and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the Agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action BASIC LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BREMERTON AND HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION This Agreement is entered into among CITY of BREMERTON, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as `CITY', and HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION, a Washington Nonprofit Corporation, and the principal in HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION, namely, GORDON HOWELL and BARBARA HOWELL, husband and wife, and HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION and the principals therein shall hereinafter be referred to as "ASSOCIATION', and shall each be jointly and severally liable for all obligations imposed upon the ASSOCIATION herein The ASSOCIATION has requested the CITY to provide basic life support services at BREMERTON RACEWAY regarding raceway events to be held commenting in April 2011, and concluding October 2011 The scheduled race dates are set forth as follows May 6 June 3 July 15 August 12 September 23 May 7 June 4 July 16 August 13 September 24 May 8 June 5 July 17 August 14 September 25 June 24 August 26 June 25 August 27 June 26 August 28 These said dates will hereinafter be referred to simply as "race dates" The CITY, through its career firefighters, has agreed to provide the services hereinafter set forth on the race dates Now, therefore, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, and the promises and covenants of the parties hereinafter set forth, they agree as follows 2011 BASIC LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN BREMERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AND HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION Pagel of 8 I Services provided The CITY, through its career firefighters, will provide a fully equipped fire truck, together with one Firefighter and one Firefighter /EMT, as at minimum, on each race date Indicated herein CITY personnel at each race date event shall be prepared to provide basic life support services and be equipped with radio communications to request Immediate response of advanced life support services In the event such services are required The fire truck and firefighters will be prepared to provide Immediate fire protection The response goal of the CITY's resources Is 60 seconds from notification of incident. It Is expressly understood the fire protection will be provided In the safe manner according the CITY standard operating procedures CITY personnel will also have the ability of request additional personnel and resources as required. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, however, If emergency conditions are present in the territorial areas served by the CITY on any race date, which conditions require the services of the equipment and personnel covered by this Agreement, then and In any such event, the services and equipment to be provided by the CITY on any such race date shall be withdrawn In the event emergency conditions prevent the providing of CITY personnel and equipment, a representative of the CITY shall attempt to notify GORDON HOWELL or BARBARA HOWELL as soon as possible at (360) 674 -2280. 2 Service Times On Friday race dates, the services to be provided by the CITY shall commence at 4 p m and shall end at approximately 9 00 p m The June 3 and 24 race events shall begin at 11 a.m On the race dates falling on Saturdays, the services to be provided by the CITY shall commence at 9 00 a m. and shall cease at approximately 6 00 p m On Sunday race dates, the services to be 2011 BASIC LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN BREMERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AND HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION Page 2 of 8 provided by the CITY shall commence at 9.00 a m and end at approximately 7 00 pm 3. Compensation For each race date event on which the CITY provides the service identified herein, the ASSOCIATION shall compensate the CITY at $100.00 per hour. Compensation checks will be made payable to "City of Bremerton ", and tendered to the CITY OF 911 Park Ave, Bremerton, WA 98337, within 10 days of receiving an invoice from the CITY office PROVIDED HOWEVER, if the CITY representatives appear at a race vent to provided services call for herein, and if the races are cancelled for any reason, or rained out, compensation shall be paid to the CITY at $100 00 per hour, with a minimum of 2 hours 4 Orientation by ASSOCIATION From time to time, the ASSOCIATION shall conduct orientation at Bremerton Raceway at times mutually agreeable to the ASSOCIATION and CITY, to allow CITY personnel who are new to the facility to familiarize themselves with the different types of race cars and their characteristics, and the services they may be called upon to provide On March 12 and April 9 from 10 a in to 3 p m , the ASSOCIATION will conduct extended technical inspections at Bremerton National Airport parking lot CITY personnel may Inspect and orient themselves to all types of race cars participating in the ASSOCIATION events 2011 BASIC LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN BREMERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AND HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION Page 3 of 8 5. Location of CITY personnel and equipment on race dates One each race date, the ASSOCIATION shall provide a safe area for the City's equipment to be located and it's personnel and it' equipment on immediate response route to access racing equipment and spectators. 6. ASSOCIATION representative An ASSOCIATION representative shall be designated and available throughout each race day event on which CITY services are provided, to meet with CITY personnel to answer any questions and address any concerns the CITY personnel may have The ASSOCIATION representative designated on race date shall seek to diligently solve any concerns raised by CITY personnel to the satisfaction of the CITY personnel 7 Insurance coverage Handlers Racing Association shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may anse from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the City, its agents, representatives, and employees Before beginning work on the project described in this Agreement, the Consultant shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing 1 Commercial General Liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit per Occurrence and general aggregate for personal injury, bodily Injury and property damage and 2 Property coverage Insurance with limits not less than $500,000 limit per occurrence /claim The City shall be named as an additional Insured on the Commercial General Liability Insurance policy, and a copy of an endorsement that Is acceptable to the 2011 BASIC LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN BREMERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AND HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION Page 4 of 8 City, which names the City as an additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The City reserves the right to receive a certified copy of all the required insurance policies and endorsements The City further reserves the right to reject any unacceptable policies and/or endorsements. The Consultant's insurance shall be primary insurance as respects the City and it shall be an affirmative obligation upon Consultant to advise the City's Risk Manager by fax at (360) 473 -5161, or by certified mail, return receipt requested to City of Bremerton, attn. Risk Management, 345 6 Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, WA 98337 witlun two days of the cancellation, suspension or substantive change of any insurance policy set out herein, and failure to do so shall be construed to be a breach of this Agreement 8 Hold Harmless: Handlers Racing Association shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including all legal costs and attorney fees, ansing out of or in connection with the performance of this Agreement, except for that portion of the injuries and damages caused by the City's sole negligence Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject To RCW 4 24 115, then, in the event of liability for damages ansing out Of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, the Consultant's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence 2011 BASIC LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN BREMERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AND HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION Page 5 of 8 The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement 9 Termination This Agreement, and the services to be provided by the CITY herein, except as provided below, shall terminate at the conclusion of the last race date event on October 2, 2011 Provided, however, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, either party may terminate this Agreement and services and obligation contained herein by providing the other party with written advance notice of it's intent to terminate this Agreement at least ten (10) days prior to the termination date All said termination notices, and other written notices, shall be directed to the parties at the following address: Handlers Racing Association at P O Box 34, Burley WA 98322, and to City of Bremerton at 911 Park Ave, Bremerton, WA 98377. 10 Cooperation of the parties The parties hereto shall strive to cooperate with one another at all times so that the terms and spirit of this Agreement may be fully implemented in a safe and harmonious manner. 11 Complete Agreement This agreement constitutes the full and complete Agreement of the parties and shall supersede any prior verbal or written agreements and understanding of the parties regarding the matters contained herein Any changes or amendments hereto shall be in writing and signed by all parties 2011 BASIC LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN BREMERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AND HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION Page 6 of 8 12 Authority to sign The Individuals signing this document in a representative capacity, hereby warrant and represent that they possess full legal authority to bind their respective organization to terms hereof The CITY approved the terms of this Agreement at its CITY commissioners meeting held on the day of , 2011. CITY Date of signing April , 2011 By Its: Date Approved as to form Attest Bremerton City Attorney City Clerk 2011 BASIC LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN BREMERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AND HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION Page 7 of 8 HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION Date of signing. April , 2011 By GORDON E HOWELL President By BARBARA F HOWELL Secretary/Treasurer PRINCIPALS IN ASSOCIATION. By Date of signing April , 2011 GORDON E. HOWELL Address 2219 SW Pine Rd Port Orchard, WA 98367 Phone no (360) 340 -4462 By Date of signing April , 2011 BARBARA F. HOWELL Address 2219 SW Pine Rd Port Orchard, WA 98367 Phone no. (360) 340 -4463 2011 BASIC LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN BREMERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AND HANDLERS RACING ASSOCIATION Page 8 of 8 DATE SUBMITTED April 6' 2011 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SLC ■■ eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee SUBJECT: Lions Park Tree Planting Grant Committee Meeting Date. Apnl 13` ,2011 Agreement with Dept. of Natural Resources COUNCIL MEETING Date April 20' 2011 Department Parks and Rec Presenter: Wyn Birkenthal Phone- 473 5752 SUMMARY: The attached Community Forestry Assistance Grant Agreement with the Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources will help pay for the cost of shade and habitat trees at Lions Park. The $10,000 grant is timely in that a January windstorm severely damaged a number of existing park trees necessitating their removal. The local match for this grant originates from a mixture of previously allocated Lions Park renovation funds and volunteer labor. The tree planting is expected to be complete by May 31 ATTACHMENTS: Grant Agreement FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount). $16,172 (mcl $2,502 volunteer labor value) APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY- FINANCE DIRECTOR• MAYOR. COMMITTEE CHAIR C COUNCIL PRESIDENT CONSENT AGENDA GENERAL BUSINESS ❑ PUBLIC HEARING ❑ RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve Community Forestry Assistance grant agreement with the Wash State Dept of Natural Resources and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF Caring for Natural Resources your natural resources Peter Goldmark Commissioner of Public Lands now and forever March 1, 2011 Wyn Birkenthal Bremerton Parks and Recreation Department 680 Lebo Blvd Bremerton, WA 98337 Dear Wyn Congratulations) The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Urban and Community Forestry Program Is pleased to award your community forestry assistance grant proposal The grants were very competitive, and I commend you on your strong project Your accepted project, Lions Park Tree Planting Project, is a "one -year special project " The amount of the grant will be $10,000 It must be completed by June 30, 2012 Please be advised that no extensions are possible with these funds Funding assistance is provided by the USDA Forest Service As you move forward with your project, you will need to acknowledge both the Washington DNR and the USDA Forest Service on all project materials Detailed information will be provided after the contract is fully executed The mission of the Urban and Community Forestry Program is to provide leadership to create self - sustaining urban and community forestry programs that preserve, plant, and manage forests and trees for public benefits and quality of life Your project is helping to carry forward that mission Within a month, Department staff will draw up a contract, and they may be calling you with questions Please do not start your project until you have a signed, written agreement with us If you need additional information from us, feel free to call Sarah Foster at (360) 902 -1704 We want to be involved in your project and assist with whatever expertise we can My staff and I look forward to working with you in what we know will be a success Sincerely, A&".* Joseph P Shramek Resource Protection Division Manager RESOURCE PROTECTION DIVISION 1 1111 WASHINGTON ST SE 1 M547037 1 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 -7037 TEL(360)902-1300 I FAX(360)902-1757 I TTY(360)902-1125 1 TRS 711 I WWW DNR WA GOV a EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER RECYCLED PAPER SPA WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF Natural Resources PETER GOLDMARK - Commissioner of Public Lands INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT WITH THE Bremerton Parks and Recreation Department Agreement No. I4A- 11- 278/K244- 08 -DG-014 USDA Forest Service CFDA Number 10.664 This Agreement is between the Bremerton Parks and Recreation Department and the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Resource Protection Division, referred to as DNR DNR falls under authority of RCW Chapter 43.30 of Washington State, Department of Natural Resources. DNR and the Bremerton Parks and Recreation Department herein after referred to as the Grantee, enter into this agreement under Chapter 39 34, Inter -local Cooperation Act The purpose of this Agreement is to plant trees to help slow down and temporarily store runoff, provide habitat, stabilize the shoreline, and filter unpunties in runoff water through the tree's root system to reduce pollutant loading in Puget Sound. IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED THAT: 1.01 Statement of Work. The Grantee shall furnish the necessary personnel, equipment, material and/or services and otherwise do all things necessary for or incidental to performing work set forth in the Attachment "A ". 1.02 The Grantee shall produce a mid -report by January 15, 2012, and a final report upon project completion summarizing work performed and evaluating the performance and results of this agreement. 2.01 Period of Performance. The period of performance of this Agreement shall begin upon final execution by both parties, and end on June 30, 2012, unless terminated sooner as provided herein. 3.01 Payment. Pay for the work provided is established under RCW 39 34.130. The parties estimate that the cost of accomplishing the work will not exceed ten thousand dollars $10,000. Payment for satisfactory performance of work shall not exceed this amount unless the parties mutually agree to a higher amount before beginning any work that could cause the maximum payment to be exceeded Pay for services shall be based on the rates and terms described in Attachment `B ". 1 of 7 Agreement No I4-A- 11- 278/K244 -08 -DG -014 4.01 Billing Procedures. The Grantee shall submit invoices no more than 4 tunes during the period of performance stated in section 2 01. Payment to the Grantee for approved and completed work will be made by warrant or account transfer within 30 days of receivin g invoice When the contract expires, any claim for payment not already made shall be submitted within 30 days after the expiration date or the end of the fiscal year, whichever is earlier 5.01 Records Maintenance. The Grantee shall maintain books, records, documents and other evidence, to sufficiently document all direct and indirect costs incurred by the Bremerton Parks and Recreation Department in providing the services. These records shall be available for inspection, review, or audit by personnel of the DNR, other personnel authorized by the DNR, the Office of the State Auditor, and federal officials as authorized by law. The Grantee shall keep all books, records, documents, and other material relevant to this Agreement for six years after agreement expiration The Office of the State Auditor, federal auditors, and any persons authorized by the parties shall have full access to and the right to examine any of these materials during this period Records and other documents in any medium furnished by one party to this agreement to the other party will remain the property of the furnishing party, unless otherwise agreed The receiving party will not disclose this material to any third parties without first notifying the furnishing party and giving it a reasonable opportunity to respond. Each party will use reasonable security procedures and protections to assure that records and documents provided by the other party are not erroneously disclosed to third parties. 6.01 Rights to Data. Unless otherwise agreed, data originating from this Agreement shall be "works for hire" as defined by the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976 and shall be owned by the DNR and the Grantee Data shall include, but not be lunited to, reports, documents, pamphlets, advertisements, books, magazines, surveys, studies, computer programs, films, tapes, and/or sound reproductions Ownership includes the right to use, copyright, patent, register and the ability to transfer these rights 7.01 Independent Capacity. The employees or agents of each party who are engaged in performing this agreement shall continue to be employees or agents of that party and shall not be considered for any purpose to be employees or agents of the other party. 8.01 Amendments. This Agreement may be amended by mutual agreement of the parties. Amendments shall be in writing and signed by personnel authorized to bind each of the parties 9.01 Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement by giving the other party 30 days prior written notice. If this Agreement is terminated, the terminating party shall be liable to pay only for those services provided or costs incurred prior to the termination date according to ' the terms of this Agreement. 10.01 Termination for Cause. If for any cause either party does not fulfill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under this Agreement, or if either party violates any of the terms and conditions, the aggrieved party will give the other party written notice of the failure or violation The aggrieved party will give the other party 15 working days to correct the violation or failure. If the failure or violation is not corrected within 15 days, the aggrieved party may immediately terminate this Agreement by notifying the other party in writing I 2 of 7 Agreement No IAA- 11- 278/K244 -08 -DG -014 11.01 Disputes. If a dispute arises, a dispute board shall resolve the dispute like this Each party to this agreement shall appoint a member to the dispute board These board members shall jointly appoint an additional member to the dispute board. The dispute board ,shall evaluate the facts, contract terms, applicable statutes and rules, then determine a resolution The dispute board's determination shall be final and binding on the parties As an alternative to the dispute board, either of the parties may request intervention by the Governor, as provided by RCW 43.17 330. In this case, the Governor's process will control the dispute resolution 12.01 Governance. This contract is entered into the authority granted by the laws of the State of Washington and any applicable federal laws The provisions of this agreement shall be construed to conform to those laws. If there is an inconsistency in the terms of this Agreement, or between its terms and any applicable statute or rule, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order (1) Applicable State and federal statutes and rules; (2) Statement of Work, and (3) Any other provisions of the agreement, including materials incorporated by reference 13.01 Assignment. The work to be provided under this Agreement and any claim ansing from this agreement cannot be assigned or delegated in whole or in part by either party, without the express prior written consent of the other party. Neither party shall unreasonably withhold consent 14.01. Waiver. A party that fails to exercise its rights under this agreement is not precluded from subsequently exercising its rights A party's rights may only be waived through a written amendment to his agreement 15.01 Severability. The provisions of this agreement are severable If any provision of this Agreement or any provision of any document incorporated by reference should be held invalid, the other provisions of this Agreement without the invalid provision remain valid 16.01 Insurances. The Grantee and DNR are part of the State of Washington and are protected by the State's self - insurance liability program as provided by Chapter 4 92 RCW These agencies have entered into this agreement to provide /perform the Lions Park Tree Planting Project described therein This agreement will terminate on the date listed in the period of performance The agencies agree to share responsibility equally for losses that anse out of this agreement (1) General Insurance Requirements At all times during the term of this agreement, the Contractor shall, at its cost and expense, buy and maintain insurance of the types and amounts listed below Failure to buy and maintain the required insurance may result in the termination of the agreement at DNR's option. All insurance shall be issued by companies admitted to do business in the State of Washington 3 of 8 Agreement No IAA- 11- 278/K244 -08 -DG -014 and have a rating of A -, Class VII or better in the most recently published edition of Best's Reports unless otherwise approved by DNR. Any exception must be reviewed and approved by the DNR Risk Manager or in the absence of, the Contracts Specialist at FMD, before the contract is accepted. If an insurer is not admitted, all insurance policies and procedures for issuing the insurance policies must comply with Chapter 48.15 RCW and 284 -15 WAC. Before starting work, Contractor shall furnish DNR, with a certificate(s) of insurance, executed by a duly authorized representative of each insurer, showing compliance with the insurance requirements specified in the bid/proposal, if applicable, and Agreement Said certificate(s) shall contain the Contract number IAA- 11- 278/K244 -08 -DG -014, name of DNR Project Manager, a description, and include the State of Washington, DNR, its elected and appointed officials, agents, and employees as additional insured on all general liability, excess, umbrella and property insurance policies Contractor shall include all subcontractors as insureds under all required insurance policies, or shall finish separate certificates of insurance and endorsements for each subcontractor Subcontractor(s) must comply fully with all insurance requirements stated herein. Failure of subcontractor(s) to comply with insurance requirements does not limit Contractor's liability or responsibility. All insurance provided in compliance with tlus contract shall be primary as to any other insurance or self - insurance programs afforded to or maintained by DNR. Contractor waives all rights against DNR for recovery of damages to the extent these damages are covered by general liability or umbrella insurance maintained pursuant to this Agreement. DNR shall be provided written notice before cancellation or non - renewal of any insurance referred to therein, in accord with the following specifications I (1) Insurers subject to Chapter 48.18 RCW (Admitted and Regulated by the Insurance Commissioner) The insurer shall give DNR 45 days advance notice of cancellation or non - renewal If cancellation is due to nonpayment of premium, DNR shall be given 10 days advance notice of cancellation. i (2) Insurers subject to Chapter 48 15 RCW (Surplus lines): DNR shall be given 20 days advance notice of cancellation. If cancellation is due to nonpayment of premium, DNR shall be given 10 days advance notice of cancellation In lieu of the coverages required under this section, DNR at its sole discretion may accept evidence of self - insurance by the Contractor, provided Contractor provides the following: Contractor shall provide a statement by a CPA or actuary, satisfactory to DNR that demonstrates Contractor's financial condition is satisfactory to self - insure any of the required insurance coverages DNR may require Contractor to provide the above from time to time to ensure Contractor's continuing ability to self -insure If at any time the Contractor does not satisfy the self - insurance requirement, Contractor shall immediately purchase insurance i 4 of 8 Agreement No IAA- 11- 278/K244 -08 -DG -014 1 _ as set forth under this section By requiring insurance herein, DNR does not represent that coverage and limits will be adequate to protect Contractor and such coverage and limits shall not limit Contractor's liability under the indemnities and reimbursements granted to DNR in this contract The limits of insurance, which may be increased by DNR, as deemed necessary, shall not be less than as follows. (1) Commercial General Liability (CGL) Insurance Contractor shall maintain general liability (CGL) insurance, and, if deemed necessary as determined by DNR, commercial umbrella insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000 per each occurrence and $2,000,000 for a general aggregate limit. The products - completed operations aggregate limit shall be $2,000,000 CGL insurance shall be written on ISO occurrence form CG 00 01 (or substitute form providing equivalent coverage) All insurance shall cover liability ansing out of premises, operations, independent contractors, products - completed operations, personal mjury and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract (including the tort liability of another assumed in a business contract), and contain separation of insureds (cross liability) conditions. (2) Employers Liability (Stop Gap) Insurance. If Contractor shall use employees to perform this contract, Contractor shall buy employers liability insurance, and, if deemed necessary as determined by DNR, commercial umbrella liability insurance with limits not less than $1,000,000 each accident for bodily injury by accident or $1,000,000 each employee for bodily mjury by disease. (3) Business Auto Policy (BAP) Insurance: Contractor shall maintain business auto liability and, if deemed necessary as determined by DNR, commercial umbrella liability insurance with a limit not less than $1,000,000 per accident Such insurance shall cover liability ansing out of "any Auto." Business auto coverage shall be written on ISO form CA 00 01, or substitute liability form providing equivalent coverage If necessary, the policy shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage and cover a "covered pollution cost or expense" as provided in the 1990 or later editions of CA 00 01 Contractor waives all rights against DNR for the recovery of damages to the extent they are covered by business auto liability or commercial umbrella liability insurance (4) Workers' Compensation Insurance Contractor shall comply with all State of Washington workers' compensation statutes and regulations. Workers' compensation coverage shall be provided for all employees of Contractor and employees of any subcontractor or sub - subcontractor Coverage shall include bodily injury (including death) by accident or disease, which arises out of or in connection with the performance of this contract Except as prohibited by law, 5 of 8 Agreement No IAA- 11- 278/K244 -08 -DG -014 Contractor waives all rights of subrogation against DNR for recovery of damages to the extent they are covered by workers' compensation, employer's liability, commercial general liability or commercial umbrella liability insurance Contractor shall mdemmfy DNR for all claims arising out of Contractor's, its subcontractor's, or sub - subcontractor's failure to comply with any State of Washington workers' compensation laws where DNR incurs fines or is required by law to provide benefits to or obtain coverage for such employees. Indemnity shall include all fines, payment of benefits to Contractor or subcontractor employees, or their hews or legal representatives, and the cost of effecting coverage on behalf of such employees. Any amount owed to DNR by Contractor pursuant to the indemnity may be deducted from any payments owed by DNR to Contractor for performance of this Contract (5) To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless DNR, its officials, agents and employees, from and against all claims arising out of or resulting from the performance of the Agreement. "Clain" as used in this agreement means any financial loss, claim, suit, action, damage, or expense, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, attributable for bodily mjury, sickness, disease or death, or mlury to or destruction of tangible property including loss of use resulting therefrom Contractor's obligation to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless includes any claim by Contractor's agents, employees, representatives, or any subcontractor or its employees. Contractor expressly agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless DNR for any claim arising out of or incident to Contractor's or any subcontractor's performances or failure to perform the Agreement. Contractor's obligation to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless DNR shall not be eliminated or reduced by any actual or alleged concurrent negligence of DNR or its agents, agencies, employees and officials. Contractor waives its immunity under Title 51 RCW to the extent it is required to mdemmfy, defend and hold harmless DNR and its agencies, officials, agents or employees 17.01 Complete Agreement in Writing. This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties No other understanding, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the parties 18.01 Contract Management. The Project Coordinator for each of the parties shall be the contact person for this agreement All communications and billings will be sent to the project coordinator. 6 of 8 Agreement No IAA- 11- 278/K244 -08 -DG -014 19.01 Project Coordinators. (1) The Project Coordinator for the Agency is Wyn Birkenthal Telephone Number 360- 473 -5752 (2) The Project Manager for DNR is Sarah Foster Telephone Number 360 - 902 -1704 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement. Grantee Dated. , 20_ By Title Address Phone STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Dated , 20_ By Joseph P Shramek Title Division Manager Address 1111 Washington St SE Olympia, Wa 98504 -7037 Interagency Agreement Approved as to Form 9/29/97 By the Assistant Attorney General State of Washmgton 7 of 7 Agreement No IAA- 11- 278/K244 -08 -DG -014 l ATTACHMENT A 2011 Community Forestry Assistance Grant Proposal APPLICATION FORM Project name (five words or less) Lions Park Tree Planting Protect Location (City) Bremerton Tree City USA ® Y ❑ N Name of Applicant (Organization) Bremerton Parks and Recreation Department Daytime Phone # 360- 473 -5752 Applicant's Federal I D Number 91- 600 -1231 Address of Applicant 680 Lebo Blvd City Bremerton State WA Zip 98337 Contact Person Wyn Birkenthal, Parks Director Phone # 360 -473 -5752 Fax #360-473-5882 E -mail Address wyn birkenthalO -)ci bremerton wa us Brief Description of Project and Objective The Lions Park Tree Planting Project will fund the planting of approximately 200 trees to help slow down and temporarily store runoff, provide habitat, stabilize the shoreline, and filter impurities in runoff water through the tree's root system to reduce pollutant loading in Puget Sound Is this project currently funded through another entity? ❑ Yes ® No Was this project previously funded through another entity? ❑ Yes ® No DNR funds requested from budget work sheet $ _2_4<66 I v Applicant share provided from budget work sheet $ 27 75t6 lt✓? (� 70 In -kind share from budget work sheet $ 2,502 Cash donations from budget work sheet $ Total amount of project from budget work sheet $ 54,092 By signing this grant proposal application form the undersigned agrees that all information is accurate to the best of their knowledge V/V'\ & pc�fv Name and Title of Representative Da e Signature o uthq ed F&presentative Da e , l Lions Park Tree Planting Project Providing Shoreline Enhancement for Puget Sound Applicant Mission Statement Bremerton Parks and Recreation is committed to enriching the lives of Bremerton citizens with recreation opportunities for all ages and abilities, and to provide safe, attractive, parks, natural areas and facilities for health, fitness, play and enjoyment Project Overview The purpose of the Lions Park Tree Planting Project is to improve the water quality of Dyes Inlet (an inlet of Puget Sound) and restore the shoreline habitat that had been previously disturbed by invasive non - native plant species, pollution from stormwater runoff and placement of asphalt paving in the near -shore area The Lions Park Tree Planting Project will fund the planting of approximately 200 trees to help slow down and temporarily store runoff, provide habitat, stabilize the shoreline, and filter impurities in runoff water through the tree's root system to reduce pollutant loading in Puget Sound Lions Park is a 1970's -era urban waterfront park located along 1,950 feet of Puget Sound shoreline This 17 -acre park formerly included over 2 acres of asphalt parking on the shoreline reducing recreational access to the waterfront and causing degradation of the adjacent waterway The park is at the low point of a 350 -acre hillside comprised of ultra -urban commercial and residential development During periods of moderate to heavy rain, stormwater carrying petroleum products and bacterial pollutants migrate down the hillside and across the width of the park into Puget Sound This project is the last phase of a larger construction project to carry out the Lions Park Master Plan adopted by City Council in June 2009 The earlier phase of construction was funded primarily by Department of Ecology and has included removal of over 2 acres of asphalt parking lot along the shoreline, installation of porous pavement and vegetated roof, eradication of invasive species, and installation of woody debris, large rocks, and native shrubs and groundcovers (See attached site plan ) Tree planting remains the final step Trees reduce stormwater runoff by intercepting rainfall in the canopy and absorbing precipitation through their leaf system, allowing evaporation back into the atmosphere Rainfall that is not intercepted by the tree's canopy is taken in and held onto by the root structure, then absorbed and then transpired back to the air In addition to reducing stormwater runoff, trees planted at Lions Park will play an important role in shading paved areas, lowering air temperatures, absorbing harmful air pollutants such as carbon monoxide, and providing wildlife habitat Lions Park Tree Planting Project Page 1 Project Benefits to Puget Sound Fecal coliform sampling of Dyes Inlet during a recent TMDL study indicates untreated stormwater is a major influence contributing to the pollutant loading of the waters in the vicinity of Lions Park (See attached Water Quality maps) These waters are designated primary contact waters owing to park use, fishing, boating, wading, shellfish gathering and water related tourism The overall quality of the water is poor and the Department of Health has closed the park's beach area to shellfish gathering This portion of Dye's Inlet is used for Suquamish Tribe subsistence fishing and is Habitat for federally protected Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and East Kitsap Coho, a candidate species Puget Sound Orcas also spend time in Dyes Inlet feeding on Salmon and marine mammals This project will restore and enhance habitat by re- vegetating the shoreline to absorb and filter storm water borne pollutants, establish habitat to protect the integrity of the food chain and stabilize the shoreline area through the growth of the tree root system The end product will result in a reduction of bacteria, heavy metals and hydrocarbons entering Puget Sound through stormwater runoff The improvement of water quality at the Park's saltwater beaches will increase recreation value of Lions Park and help transform the park into an environmentally responsible recreation facility Project's Congruence with Organization's Goals Bremerton has been a Tree City USA for 15 consecutive years and takes great pride in the opportunity to expand the urban forest through tree planting in an area where water quality, habitat and passive recreational opportunities will each receive benefit The City is matching over 100% of this grant request with in -kind labor, wages, equipment, volunteer hours and services to be procured by a Certified Arbonst This project aligns with Bremerton Parks and Recreations short and long -range goals The Department's adopted long range Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan contains the following goals (pages 13 -16) that are consistent with the project (1) "Protect the environment and enhance the quality of life including air and water quality, and the availability of water' (2) Manage vegetation to enhance or maintain native plant species, habitat function and other ecological values Remove and control invasive species (3) Develop management and restoration plans for significant green spaces and facilitate community -based volunteer restoration Lions Park Tree Planting Project Page 2 (A link to the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan can be found at http / /www ci bremerton wa us /displayphp ?id =980 The City has contracted with both Biologists and Arbonsts to produce reports and management plans specific to Lions Park Sound Urban Forestry developed a tree report in Jan 2008 evaluating the physical condition of the formerly planted Lombardy Poplars (which were diseased and structurally unsound), recommending removal and replacement with various tree species well - suited to the shoreline environment A link to the report can be found at http / /www1 a bremerton wa us /forms /parks /LionsPark ArbonstReport Pdf Biologists from GeoEngineers developed a Shoreline Habitat Management Plan in Jan 2010 which included a Lombardy Poplar and Invasive /Noxious Species Removal Plan, Site Preparation Plan, Native Planting Plan and Shoreline Maintenance Plan (See attached) Native tree species recommended for planting along the shoreline include Douglas Fir, Shore Pine, Cascara, Pacific Madrone, Bigleaf Maple, Vine Maple, Serviceberry, and Pacific Willow In addition, a small grouping of Cherry trees are designated for an upland section of the park to offer cultural diversity by paying homage to Bremerton's sister city of Kure, Japan Project Management & Schedule The Bremerton Parks and Recreation Department is experienced in administering state and federal grants ranging in size from less to 25k to over one million dollars The Department has successfully implemented similar projects funded by Department of Natural Resources including several tree planting projects and a 1997 City of Bremerton Master Urban Tree Plan The Project Team that will oversee and manage the work included in this project is as follows Colette Berna, Park Development Planner, will serve as Project Manager, Lead Designer and Construction Oversight on the project As a Registered Landscape Architect, Ms Berna contributes design, technical, project management and construction administration experience gained from a broad range of public and private projects for over a decade in the Pacific Northwest Kevin McFarland, Certified Arborist with Sound Urban Forestry, will provide technical oversight during tree delivery, planting, and post - project inspection Tom Cressman, Park Maintenance Manager, will assist in Construction Management and provide Record Keeping and Facility Maintenance oversight upon the project's completion Mr Cressman's 15 years of experience with Bremerton Parks & Recreation have included a range of successful projects The labor required for this project will be provided primarily by Parks Crew using rented backhoe equipment and volunteers The Parks Department regularly Lions Park Tree Planting Project Page 3 engages community volunteer groups and service clubs in projects and has received letters of support for this project from the Bremerton Central Lions Club, Washington State University Shoreline Stewards and Native Plant Advisors, Sustainable Bremerton, Council member Jim McDonald, and the Parks and Recreation Commission The Project Schedule will be as follows March 1, 2011 Notice of Award March 2011 Finalize Tree Planting Plan Source Trees Schedule Volunteer Tree Planting Workshops April 2011 Conduct Volunteer Tree Planting Workshops Complete Project Trees will be watered by a newly installed automatic irrigation system and will be maintained by the Parks & Recreation Maintenance Staff during daily patrols funded by the City of Bremerton's general fund Project Recognition and Educational Outreach Lions Park is destined to become an environmental and educational showcase for the citizens of Kitsap County and beyond The project will bring a great deal of visibility to the urban forestry program as the shoreline restoration takes place in a heavily used park adjacent to a popular waterfront pedestrian trail The project will include signage depicting the park prior to the shoreline enhancement, a summary of the goals achieved by the undertaking and provide recognition to Department of Natural Resources Urban and Community Forestry Program as a key funding source The project will also be publicized through the City's web -site and through news releases to the Kitsap Sun and Bremerton Patriot newspapers The park is currently used by the Beach Watcher Program (coordinated by Washington State University Kitsap Extension and Washington Sea Grant) as a "Beach Walk" location and Shoreline Steward Volunteers are committed to helping with the tree planting In addition, the site was recently selected by the Audubon Society as one of 8 best places to go birding in Kitsap County based on a series of criteria including public access and safety In September 2011, the Audubon Society will publish a map and provide signage to further promote Lions Park as a site for birding I Tree planting funded by this project will further increase the site's educational, k environmental and recreational value to the large number of people who use Lions Park in conjunction with improving the water quality of Puget Sound i f Lions Park Tree Planting Project Page 4 ATTACHMENT B BUDGET WORKSHEET Applicant Bremerton Parks and Recreation Department r Project Name Lions Park Tree Planting Proiect ITEM Grant Share Applicant in -Kind TOTAL Landscape Architect, 20 $1,080 $1,080 hrs @ $54/hr Trees — Large, (60) 2 5° $10,000 $10,000 caliper @ $166 66 /each Certified Arborist, 10 hrs $750 $750 $75/hr Project Foreman, 60 hrs $3,720 $3,720 $62 /hr Parks Laborer(s), 180 $6,120 $6,120 hrs Q $34/hr Backhoe Rental, 100 hrs $2,000 $2,000 20 /hr 2 Planting Workshops — Approx. 120 Volunteer $2,502 $2,502 Hours @ $20 85 /hr I I A i i i ( I I TOTAL $10,000 $13,670 $2,502 $26,172 I DATE SUBMITTED April 4, 2011 ` AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL ■■ mmenumessomedesse��a�r�� SUBJECT: Award Contract for ORC Committee Meeting Date: Apnl 13, 2011 Injection at Former Chevron Property to COUNCIL MEETING Date Apnl 20, 2011 ESN Northwest Inc. Department- PW &U Engineering Presenter. Tom Knuckey Phone: 473 -2376 SUMMARY: Sealed bids for construction of the project titled "ORC Injection at Former Chevron Property" were opened on April 5, 2011 The engineer's estimate for this project is $120,000. 2 bids were received for this project. ESN Northwest Inc. was the lowest responsive, responsible bidder with a bid of $92,728 11 (including sales tax). ATTACHMENTS: 1 ) Council Summary, 2 ) Agreement, 3.) Plan Sheet and 4.) Bid Tabulation FISCAL IMPACTS• The project is funded at 90% by a Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) Remedial Action Grant and is included in the 2011 budget. APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR- CITY ATTORNEY. MeMA - 7 FINANCE DIRECTOR- MAYOR: COMMITTEE CHAIR D'G✓Le� COUNCIL PRESIDENT: CONSENT AGENDA GENERAL BUSINESS ❑ PUBLIC HEARING ❑ RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award a contract in the amount of $92,728 11 (including sales tax) to ESN Northwest Inc for construction of the project titled "ORC Injection at Former Chevron Property" and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the necessary the agreement with substantially the same terns and conditions as presented COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action CONTRACT (page 1 of 3) THIS CONTRACT is dated the day of in the year 2011 by and between City of Bremerton (hereinafter called CITY) and (hereinafter called CONTRACTOR) CITY and CONTRACTOR, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, agree as follows ARTICLE 1. WORK. CONTRACTOR shall comklete the WORK as specified or indicated in the CITY's Contract Documents entitled ORC Injection at Former Chevron Property ARTICLE 2. CONTRACT TIMES. The WORK shall obtain Substantial Completion within 30 calendar days from the commencement date stated in the Notice to Proceed Time is of the essence as to each and every deadline set forth in this contract This provision has been specifically negotiated ARTICLE 3. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES CITY and the CONTRACTOR recognize that time is of the essence of this Contract and that the CITY will suffer financial loss if the WORK is not completed within the time specified in Article 2 herein, plus any extensions thereof allowed in accordance with Section 1 -08 8 of the Standard Specifications which may be modified by the Special Provisions They also recognize the delays, expense, and difficulties involved in proving in a legal proceeding the actual loss suffered by the CITY if the WORK is not completed on time Accordingly, instead of requiring any such proof, the CONTRACTOR shall pay the CITY liquidated damages in the amount of $1000 for each day that expires after the time specified in Article 2 herein and Special Provision 1 -08 5 for Substantial Completion and Final Completion of the WORK in accordance with Section 1 -08 9 of the Standard Specifications as may be modified by the Special Provisions ARTICLE 4. CONTRACT PRICE. CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR for completion of the WORK in accordance with the Contract Documents in the amount set forth in the Bid Proposal, which shall include sales tax as provided in Section 1 -07 2(2) of the Special Provisions i ARTICLE 5. PAYMENT PROCEDURES 4 CONTRACTOR shall submit Applications for Payment in accordance with Section 1 -09 9 of the Standard Specifications which may be modified by the Special Provisions Applications for Payment will be processed by ENGINEER as provided in the Special Provisions Contractor Initials City of Bremerton CF -1 ORC Injection at Former Chevron Property April 2011 CONTRACT (page 2 of 3) ARTICLE 6. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The Contract Documents which comprise the entire agreement between CITY and CONTRACTOR concerning the WORK consist of this Contract (pages CF -1 to CF -7, inclusive) and the following attachments to this Contract o Notice Inviting Bids, o Bidders Checklist, o Bid Proposal including the Proposal Forms, Information Required of Bidder, Bid Bond, and all required certificates and affidavits, o Performance Bond, o Payment Bond, o Standard Specifications, o Special Provisions, o Contract Plans, o Addenda numbers to , inclusive o Change Orders which may be delivered or issued after Effective Date of the Contract and are not attached hereto I There are no Contract Documents other than those listed in this Article 6 The Contract Documents may only be amended by Change Order as provided in Section 1 -04 4 of the l Standard Specifications which may be modified by the Special Provisions I ARTICLE 7. INDEMNIFICATION. The CONTRACTOR and CITY acknowledge and agree that they have negotiated the following in accordance with the requirements of RCW 4 24 115 and the CONTRACTOR specifically waives his immunity under industnal insurance under Title 51 RCW To the fullest extent permitted by Laws and Regulations, the CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the CITY, ENGINEER, their consultants, subconsultants, and the officers, directors, employees, and agents j of each and any of them, against and from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including all legal costs and attorney fees, all claims and liability arising under, by reason of, related, or incidental to the Contract Documents or any performance of the WORK, but not from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the CITY and /or the ENGINEER as further defined in the Contract Documents The provisions of this section shall survive the termination of the contract I i Contractor Initials City of Bremerton CF -2 ORC Injection at Former Chevron Property Apn12011 I I CONTRACT (page 3 of 3) ARTICLE 8 ASSIGNMENT No assignment by a party hereto of any rights under or interests in the Contract Documents will be binding on another party hereto without the written consent of the party sought to be bound, and specifically but without limitation monies that may become due and monies that are due may not be assigned without such consent (except to the extent that the effect of this restriction may be limited by law), and unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under the Contract Documents The CITY, in its sole discretion, may refuse to allow the CONTRACTOR to assign any or all of its duties, rights and /or responsibilities under the Contract, except with regards to an assignment of funds for security purposes In the case of an assignment for security purposes the CITY may condition its approval to the extent it deems necessary to assure that there will be adequate funds to complete the WORK and to pay a subcontractors and suppliers CITY and CONTRACTOR each binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives in respect of all covenants, agreements and obligations contained in the Contract Documents IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and CONTRACTOR have caused this Contract to be executed the day and year first above written CITY City of Bremerton CONTRACTOR By By [CORPORATE SEAL] j Attest Attest 1 Address for giving notices Address for giving notices i i i License No 1 Approved as to Form i Agent for service of process (Signature) (Title) i City of Bremerton CF -3 ORC Infection at Former Chevron Property Apnl 2011 CITY OF BREMERTON BID TABULATION BID TITLE JiI err luyz G� �1?Ci BY NED Carol Etaen DATE j �I t TIME / RECORDED OPENED I OPENED �,(,� BY J LCfX/� NAME OF BIDDER BOND BID SALES TOTAL TAX -.i. yeA / SD . !� S 130 2hSo �o ye S 3 S. 3Y3. 92 72 0. I i I I ; i 1 I i I SUMMARY APPARENT LOW BIDDER Engineer's Estimate S �Z®l� SECOND LOW BIDDER EnYr/vn 1 THIRD LOW BIDDER ZA ; I C ITY C -. ) .F R E A66016TSAP WAY SUREA �i BREMERTON WASWNGTON BB312 I T M3T16014 F 3604195961 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES ® R CTM INJECTION AT Ci e Engin Bremerton ® Englneering Department FORMER CHEVERON PROPERTY PROJECT SITE SHEET INDEX EAST SHT NO DWG NO DESCRIPTION BREMERTON GI COVER SHEET LlsiJ �� 2 Cl INJECTION PLAN EAST LAJ [l�. S� BREMERTON © _ M PROJECT BREMERTON [ � LOCATION �� r sm s� WEST a BREMERTON - 6 O6T�9 ` iAA91 .99 11 2,111 U NPSNS 2M BI CL�1R INL$T 1 � LAtR ��4 asN ° 5 A A SIIN ° VICINITY MAP LOCATION MAP s'� srEg�G TONAL � CALL .a°e BEFORE SITE ADDRESS 1310 HIGHLAND AVENUE you DIG E TAX PARCEL 1 D 3709 - 001 -003 -0102 G D SET 1 -800- 424 -5555 "a �^ REVISIONS . 1 r• MOD Boat CITY OF BREMERTOW I Na maE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 6 UTILITIES ORC ° INJECTION AT —.0 9xEET S ENGINEERING DIVISION FORMER CHEVRON PROPERTY G1 scnLE Na oeA«N BESMx w BB amavn er COVER SHEET AND VICINITY MAP F (`. 1gPoi WA VErrt I✓A GI DA7E 11 P4W1 P.E. / OME 02/II WA44 PL / OIGE LEGEND / - -�— EOSTING CHAIN LINK FENCE _ - FORMERSOILMI INGARNI QM5\ 28 EOSTIRGMONnDRMVMI CONTRACTOR LAY DOWN AREA GEOTECHNICAL \�\ ISNANNON a WILSON JANUARY 2010) KEY NOTES MWYR` PRESERVE MONITORNGWELL.TYP Y \ MW 13R �� 1 2 EXISTING' WATER BERWCEW /FIOSE BR _ f _� � POI AXED S POINT YOTHERS (108 POINTS TOTAL) / ^- A- _ POINTS WAXED BY OTHERS •)„t _ . #!CO sT i F' _. �g.�_. _. J - "�+r}+� O4 LEV i EL MEA WYSE USED FOR CONTRACTOR HAW 45 EA IAYDONM AIID PERSONAL VEHICLE )IxT IL \ \\ PARKING ADJUST POINTS IN ' _-•-� A ll / -- _ _ _ ` \ _ -_ _ _ _ - \ 5 SEPARATION FROM H STORM DRAI PIPE ,ACTUAL •_1-4- , I � ( - _ iO � � LOCATION OF PIPE TO BE STARED SYOTHERS 1 A 21R a 6 ` ti T +- • -�` a f l- SEWER PUAIPSTATION 7 ( I `� •. 1\\ -- CCC �� - - - - _ /I _ __ _ _ - - - -- - - -_ " -- `•` a \ . n • I }- • -,�-_• -�- ' -,�) ;o'_ GENERAL NOTES OR `� i CONTOUR DATUM NAVOW r 1� T /� 1 \ �`•� • `•'. • a'ri \•` ;? 7` `a ` - 1 C 1 I MW 19R 1 ` - I ) 1 4 3. 2 TREATMENT ZONE 611' EACH PONT A/ ' / •. �` A � J7 � ` - 1 -R 1 11 J //- 5 I 1 OOBNO RATE 10.88IBSORC"PER �_ �"" � ,� L4`S ' ��. 4 `,� / • � �• �,� `• 1 • �) • J y, I S4 1 I I , .1 ' VERTICALFOOTTRFATMENTZNE uR / a A PROJECT TOTAL OF TAM ISSOF ORD' � Anv J \ _ _ -� �I ♦\ B2 •✓`0 ` `•Q �`•� S �� . II r - - - � � � � � SHALL BE INJECTED It f- ,.K\ \Q\ '' 1 1_ �- ( `~` • p I I _ � >'1"�^ tUR _ `, \\ \ .. / � ri' n ``` HIGHLAND D DI WAS �MGh 35014 �p �� x ^ ` PLAN K SCALE N FELT Z O® MD -SCAT REVISIONS • + _ i°D BO/K CITY OF BREMERTON I� arsaaPlHrnH ODE tl ® DEPARTMEN OP vueue WORKS a 1ITLLITIEB ORC'" INJECTION AT 5Y l "T j Y ENGINEERING DMBION FORMER CHEVRON PROPERTY C.� _ 6E SCALE °R"TN N oPwtiaH m ocs1lN en oHD o¢cH Eo Hm INJECTION PLAN �: , ManlL I �Yd YFIR N/A HATE R2/ /I !1M PEI OME II IEIWL PL / OMB 4 DATE SUBMITTED Apn1 13, 2011 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON (oA CITY COUNCIL ■■ eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoeeeeeei SUBJECT: Closed record hearing for Committee Meeting Date. N/A Bremerton Investment Group, LLC proposed COUNCIL MEETING Date 4/20/2011 site specific rezone at the northeast corner of Department DCD 15'' and Cambrian Presenter JoAnn Vidmhar Phone- 473 -5297 SUMMARY: See attached staff Summary Memo contained in Attachment II ATTACHMENTS: Attachment I — Summary Memo with Attachments A - E containing the rezone public record FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount) - None I APPROVALS: CITY ATTORNEY CONSENT AGENDA ❑ GENERAL BUSINESS ❑ PUBLIC HEARING Rr RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to find that the proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan - If the motion passes, the rezone application will be remanded to the Department of Community Development for further processing and review. i - If the motion fails, the rezone application is denied. 1 i COUNCIL ACTION: El Approve El Deny F1 Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action i i I Office of the City Attomey Roger A Lubovich, City Attomey Memorandum 044 oQ o ° O 11 T0; City Council FMM: Roger A Lubovich, City Atto B0: Summary of Proposed Site Specific Rezone - Closed Record Hearing 0810: April 14, 2011 The action before Council is to hold a closed record hearing on an application for a site specific rezone for property located at the northeast comer of 15th and Cambrian. The applicant, Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, requests a rezone of 0 34 acres from Neighborhood Center Core to Low Density Residential (R -10 *) The Comprehensive Plan designation for the site is Neighborhood Center Department of Community Development staff reviewed the application and recommended denial of the rezone A site specific rezone application is processed as a Type IV City Council decision pursuant to the 1 provisions set forth in the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) BMC 20 58 040 requires City Council to act on the proposal after the Admnustrahve Hearing Exammer holds an open record public hearing and makes a recommendation to the City Council The Hearing Examiner recommended that The City Council review the Comprehensive Plan, the City's 2005 Zoning Map where the R- 10* is described, and the rezone application to determine of the rezone request from NCC to R- 10* is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan If so, it is recommended that the Council remand the application to the Department of Community Development to analyze the remaining criteria for approval of rezone to determine if the request should be granted If not, then the rezone request would be denied and the Council need not take further action at this time f A site specific rezone application is a "quasi judicial" matter, and as such City Council members shall i not have any ex parte communication with City staff or the Applicant regarding this matter Each party shall be entitled to a five -minute presentation to Council, whereby the Applicant will have the opportunity to present first, followed by the City, followed by a rebuttal by the Applicant The parties may not introduce new evidence into the record The Council must make a determination on the proposal based on the record The following page contains a table of contents of the public record The action before the City Council is whether or not the proposed rezone is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan - If the proposed rezone is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the rezone application will be remanded to the Department of Community Development for further processing and review - If the proposed rezone is not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the rezone application is denied i MEMORANDUM (Rezone Proposal) Apnl 15, 2011 Page 2 A summary of the actions taken to date are: 1. Hearing Examiner open record public hearing held on February 28, 2011 (see Attachment A of this memo that contains Exhibits 1 -9, presented at the February 28, 2011 open record hearing Additionally, an audio recording of the public hearing is available for review at the City Council Office). 2. Hearing Examiner recommendation issued on March 8, 2011 (see Attachment B of this memo) 3 City staff made a Request for Reconsideration to the Hearing Examiner on March 15, 2011 (see Attachment C of this memo). 4. The applicant responded to the City's Request for Reconsideration on March 15, 2011 (see Attachment D of this memo). 5 The Hearing Examiner denied City staffs Request for Reconsideration on March 31, 2011 (see Attachment E of this memo). R VxgaNLegaI\MemosURoger\2011\ .Summary of Proposed Site Specific Rezone - Closed Record Hearing doc Bremerton Investment Group, LLC Rezone Application Number: BP 10 00066 EXIIIBIT LIST Item / DOC. TYPE /SUBJECT DATE Divider 1 Rezone Application December 2, 2010 2 1970 Zoning Map 3 1988 Zoning Ma 4 2005 Zoning Ma 4a 2005 Aerial Ma 5 2004 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Ma 6 Letter regarding Rezone January 28, 2011 7 Notice of Application and Public Hearing with Affidavit of Mailing, Site Posting, and Publication 8 City Staff Repo February 17, 2011 9 Applicant Response to City Staff Repo February 24, 2011 i i I I I �+aclnn��►+ � �p to Coot,- City of Bremerton Department of Community Development 4; 345 - 6 Street, Suite 600 Bremerton, WA 98337 -1873 RBMVEO CR • • • Phone: (360) 473 -5275 Fax: 360 473 -5278 DEC 0 2 20M " r-_'" 14 APPLICATION FOR C=mu *DVVeWM wt ( C '` - ' `� Z `' ^ ZONE RECLASSIFICATION (Rezone) FEE A ZONE RECLASSIFICATION (Rezone) of property from one zoning district to another may be approved by the City Council following a recommendation by the Hearing Examiner. One or more public neighborhood meetings to gather information and ensure adequate opportunities for public comment may be necessary. To apply for a REZONE, please complete this application form with as much detail as possible about your proposal and submit it along with the required attachments and application fee 1. APPLICANT: Name: &we.-4 , Address: Po 60 s'iq City 6M State: kk Zip: Q g 3 o�- Telephone. Work: 3(00 - -6 �'Q Home I i 2. CONTACT PERSON: (If other than applicant). Name. V LTv� f= I�R 6�7r — 1"j Mu�Ge7L i Telephone Work: 3 b o -731 - 5SSa Home 3. TITLE HOLDER: (If other than applicant). Name. Address. City: State Zip Telephone. i 4. PROPERTY LOCATION: Address: _u 15 X C.*m m. A J aff General Location (intersecting streets, etc ). ivy aaAfa 7 t s r C04-7& lam u i Application For Zone Reclassification (Rezone) Page 1 of 3 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: rva rK6 C'm P fl 6. SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATION: N 7. CURRENT ZONING: 1'V 8. REQUESTED ZONING: R - D 9. ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): (Parcels to be Rezoned) Lor l� 1 * 779 - 0o6 — )7 —youL- 1.0r I raw# 3 - 7 7 1 4 — 006 - wg— ooz 10. COVENANTS, EASEMENTS OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS: Briefly describe here and also show on map. N bAT LvAb 11. BASIS FOR REQUEST: State clearly and completely the reasons or rationale for this REZONE request Attach additional pages as necessary OF Arib 774 E w o v L D CeLIM AV j qtA4 Mr 3 yJ.X7W 450*a7b&J 5 X RDMM - 11- 5 fbM-J- t-M aL a Ut t I / - �D tit -t.v l�F,d�19�"�(� l � &�j*m eVLCW So�nr JjE7 1444 7-Re7 MATR Tf of atAa 6apa 60 U14 1 M SU q STlM*l, $t � 3 LOTS 44,6 s,sano -t,� W 3 Z- q 3l9-t � y �esS1 0n 1b Tq E � M_� 8D r ,mi &,..l mac,, &L, CM F c)etlz e r.r - z Mr Do r S rvdr A R - fizf3 ovr 4 146 e"An E 4r W I� �7E N f � i4�nrvI ) - 6 t ne o- rrr 7'{ C a? 2, Aa M, I5 ` PI Ate=ti v dEi� 9 f�R MsC� i)Em Ann? . '.c'r svAA DO 1' Acir w11�9Z SrMrtF t� SF/L 1 5 ' Mo2F PrPP2� � Nfw CoMsi/L�I.�iwv SuJG��«'v -T- L-4A/ �JI�� 0fW . QpnWKJ&LL1AY.- M�waft &e V1*6L'F (7VA- �O2��f12��1fiyl I A-f ller > t MDT FAT oN A4 5�' PSI- over^( A/ y `� ' � /2.0D F - 1i ig A%FA "1 lrD lwb' of If " G +weft rl b1ir�M2zc iA L , gdlag - � d vI-4S So�TtF . Application for Zone Reclassification (Rezone) Page 2 of 3 12. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL: This REZONE request can be approved by the Hearing Examiner only if all of the following can be answered "YES"• 1. Is the proposed Rezone consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? (See Bremerton Municipal Code, Section 21, Figure 090, "Plan/Zonmg Consistency" of this code) 2 Is the Rezone justified one or more of the following reasons? , • It is in the public interest to approve the Rezone to accommodate needed changes within the immediate vicinity or neighborhood pvch.Ivr It will correct a zone classification or boundary that was inappropriate when established �•bS5 =�� It is planned step in a phasing process o gradually bring zoning into consistency with the 20 -year Comprehensive Plan when appropriate i ,� • It will place or remove an overlay zoning designation without affecting the v ' underlying zoning designation without affecting the underlying zoning 3 Is there a public need for the proposed Rezone that will clearly benefit the local nel and/or the co unity of Bremerton? vvse, w c, n-cJ 4 Are all ess�pu�ities and services available and adequate, or can be made available, to serve the types and levels of development permitted in the requested zone? Ye6 5. Will the area being proposed for rezoning become part of a larger zoning district or form a new district which will not be considered an isolated "spot zone" ? 1� I * Please provide below (or on a separate piece of paper) a detailed explanation to show as clearly as possible how your REZONE request is consistent with each of the above criteria: Rf v = e.j Wes, u.� e-i -or w► � a Go � Loo c)o,-j LJ I .o,.., 1 — '�e.. (�,/(.r js — b! S (l S Li Z � l� -�t l� L�J•vh nv,(/+,� U r s �1 , 2 � t ' y 10 t 64,, �„� soi� �� Sfi�i.l� 1Sv13' hewn - .e.,u• Application for Zone Reclassification (Rezone) Page 3 of 3 1/ C n y� IrYJ �.�s" (/ X1"'1 7 ` � r � •,) 5 � x '�- r(�''J� � S?'� 4 ,11 l v-zrl� tip �"'CS - �-s✓o } f 7/.� S Q �'' �' S' �3-M L f CL j �"y'y� �L � � I t� I�� ''^L� U ! 51 .� �! S� Z d su� �,� ��/ �, z U / E J I "�r+ :r R-I SINGLE FAMILY a DUPLEX 1 7 R-2 MULTIPLE FAMILY P 3 �t 1 11294 u '9T B-I BUSINESS, LIGHT r °� K B -2 BUSINESS, MEDIUM * ,.� '� (w� r � u•Y -- i I � I e B-3 BUSINESS, HEAVY C BUS'INtSS, HEAVY1 1K ILlliJ JQAh !? /' I I I I I I a° • ° M MANUFACTURING 10 3DC ! — KITSAP COUNTY— aI K I r O I ;I I I • �• It �[ ] _ R 75 SINGLE FAMIfY 11 J — 11 A R r2 ZONING MAP • n 1 ti for • -i u� �TJ Thic moo Ic la 0e used as a golds for Iha par pose I I � *, n of convoy apDroamale zone du t• and °i r - - 1 I /'� • , q e �I i choald not 0e hold old la be an offielol map • 1 I t •� �� • � 1 I i IjI H Aom v AV6 1170 lCNOO I I I J I I = i 0 \ I I I J r I I ^ \ I I I w I J �) °� ° 123 '_'off' - ', - L r voo L c.004 _ \ ,L%L Ig < I I i o I I I I Iyi i <r-- 1 voo _ • ��- a ,�, n I I 1 2 h - p nric ,hnx lace g'rREET IIVlDEX MAP , Is ' 1 'II ;Z F� � NFV IG TOW EMER j - cx, ;�� evlsed CITY OF 6R I idp -- I 1 � ir ir•�r -I �I I r r- ~ I T f FI visco KITSAP COUNTY WASHINGTON I •� F I ` l y l0 j/_ =K` 'vpt�GT'EFr v I 1 I Y.� IZ rN � 1 �♦ It UnnWNG nuwBEH t� -• •11 ° y �� } r- GMT 17 �''^"'�'^�° I� L 10 , r y I rllr ENGIeEFh� - -� ��• 3 _ M ` I 1 r - � - - - - - - — R 1 ' T"' t JL_. J I � m "� _� I L: -000 �co C - - - _ Y y l � Q C i p l e I I I i0 __ r--• -^ s T I p Y.� T r - - - --- i r 2 0 d� a I I F NovY - � 2 0 ' - � y 1. w I I 3 gvENIE I I °I -�• o < •- l— �� < wu Li pG L_-- �� r- - - -- I - __ °•� F w - ..zf srHOC J 01 I '1 I I Ilo I I • � 7 ' - - -- �y ��" ojc ' ^ ' ' t i ° I� - I 2� ° i '� l I I o 1 I ,' ! r _ 7:� 4� �i —J o� 1= i st., r L iT.. I � TL� r 1 y r-p — Iv �, I R ' ; I7 0f1 �: 12> ! "E � �...e2_?3 ° -- $ - ] � - 'A.:c Ji`e.oel ` ' ll.�. c )� 1 to n t 'G ri J �I ti- 2 - - -- v -- - -- � - -- �c.00� (a 3 I � l • tl Z r►rDOK r ) I �...� �LJ l_! ,.. .�_ i_ A PAIP 1 r- jI AL 0 .0 w LL 7r ' 1 (� rr • - I f- ly o >Q1: _ w' wn<^ 1 A 0 �' ' i ' 1�'I '� y >' '� , r � �•� ', :, , v«� _. _� T _ r -l� Z .F 9 No • // 014 • ° I I t c y v1 7 ° - - ; _Lq °_F �e` ) •� C !`!_Y r ' • , Av6NUI I / I f 11 �..L _ - -- I_ L 1 i �� , gcwo --J _ / C____� p�,�f�O01 la �1t�01 t.p • �t�2� c t o- L �� l 1 , t CL L r ca 40 4 LL t 1 1 .- =1L 1 f N) vi r t 1 a F 1 - j 1? 1 - t ��T CL sx 1 1 1 U-J &Q L" 1 I JT `J 4 �j m i th _Q 1 i � t z 1 + ' ' City of Bremerton 1988 Zoning Map i � + Legend ® FC Freeway Corridor DC - Downtown Core CC Commercial Corridor - DIN - Downtown Waterfront — ,,,J WWRC Wheaton Redev Carr BC - Business Core LC - Limited Commercial MR - Muthple Residential P NB - Neighborhood Business DCC -Dist Center Core - I Industrial NCC - Neigh Center Core IP - Industrial Park a EC' - Employment Center g� MI Marine industrial 8 J MD - Master Development Inst - Institutional 3 R 10 -Low Density Res CUL City Utility Lamas R -10' - Low Density Res Downtown Regional Center CCR - City Core Res WS Watershed Ise low eTt.lt FuMmedpreonerttowd, arifielpaW Naval Shipyard fit. upm o ;;Mean .1 subarea Plain" 0 wi.. 0 o+n sse . 1106 — a �MIIlt•i .... ■ = r.= =I_Z%�n– II ■ II a –:i– e ■ s y = u II— tt,r , •triter a = = it 11 +t t �► R -10" i C � — etntn • ��l III tin ; 11 Subject �'_� II ■ 9 11 Property 11 " ■ 8 n ■ It =_ ■ R -10 '° ='_= mmiiiiiiiiiii ■'_-__ — - - -- _■== is =:. == i =:t ■ � o ` O `G war N o ®� 'cQ 3 CD ,. _0 o • • .r Alk W tow * " I • • � 4. r � �,.,��. �� • V .• ,,.may;+{ cy - r T4� , � ®.' �� iJ .tom_ 1•1f t y 71 i A jig ►� . -�� ABM. 5� S Ir �- A w " . rte.. ,• ��" r 1 y G I n sow � ■• i r trn '�� I a-• - '1 l.ir. w ►• .VV+ !`... -�.._. ' y r i : {..li i , _ ' - i ti 1 . e + ■A.■ y +wI r r �•� T ..i ,� ., r'rR � ��1 ,p,�� • � V - S fr r R I��l r _ •- �. r ir ' Y � as,� •' -mow y: t U '�. M - 40 -1M . ♦n �� r i a t FTW y.'� ow tn�I -Am� ILL 4 �+� S . : �� w �r,.rar�a�. s. b. x > r ai.iiet r _ .IiF irk._ CITY OF BREMERTON LAND USE District Center �] Freeway Corridor Neighborhood Center [ Industrial r ' 1J �] Employment Center ♦�; ' � a • •' C7 industrial Park Sub Area Plan Marine Industrial t' © Central Kitsap UGA Low Density esidential d Y r�� °i Higher Education City Core Residential L Open Space p p 0 Commercial Corridor Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Wheaton Way Redevelopment Corridor Public Sector Redevelopment Site Limited Commercial Watershed °1 C � Neighborhood Business City Utility Lands [� �. Bremerton City Limit ° Mlles '� ♦ �� UGA Boundary C 05 2 .......... 2SMb C�YN[kagNm Carrah+novv 94rmca 4911 ---- — E Brem pl _ _-- -- _ _. _ -- Caitl�va tlrw 4rnebl 7pM 9rdnq,W ASIA! 211UY kwKVIbt f4nt NOn Cy,rn ntkgp,�„ VGA I l W Brem l UGA ♦ E Brem L_ UGA 1 WBre UGA 5, ! t rem 1 7 0 i 1N Bra 9 d GA t r , f 1; City of Port Orchard UGA 1 7 ' r , I 1 i " Port Orchard UGA I w � • i � 0=1 ....� L..... c ULID #6 UGA ., r 7 sKIAUGA Urban Growth Area Land Use (Kitsap County) Urban Low Density Residential ` 0 Urban Medium /High - Density Residential Urban Low - Intensity Commercial /Mixed Use 0 Urban High- Intensity Commercial /Mixed Use Urban Industrial ... Industrial Multi- Purpose Recreational Area Military _ . Mineral Resource Overlay 0 Public Facility Note Land Use designations in Urban Growth Areas (UGA) to be amended with City designations pursuant to Urban Growth Area Ery Management Agreements Interim Land Use designations In UGAs s ^•� determined pursuant to Kitsap County Comprehensive Plan X' /3 p /6 _ Ada a6 QlyafBremeito® Date: Jan 13, 2011 JAN $8 2011 To: City of Bremerton DCD Depainiatof From: Victor Targett, and neighbors of 15 and Cambrian. DeMopmot Re: Rezone to R- 10(from NCC), of the 3 lots at the NE corner of 15 and Cambrian. Owned by Bremerton Investment Group,LLC. The owner desires to build 3 Single family homes on the 3 lots(1 per lot). Under current NCC zoning this is not allowed. In 2004 a citywide comp plan was adopted, and with that, talk of future planning. Here we have a competent owner wanting to develop property that would enhance our neighborhood. The neighbors hereby SUPPORT the applicant in his quest to achieve the rezone and welcome the building of three new homes in our neighborhood. Ni9 n- 0 A;2cq S • POTIF 2� Pkaao n+ AVe 133rC4V% 9& Li�l 14&� P Y(,Pt —OT) I Q � l i Of: & - Aea MOP, rrL 7575 BuCtMJo� ��E ��,. +IA Aycs 11121LE� I to 1�otk 2--+--Zo • �-ly -� I Q �M (E[HS 1126 ll I �X� 5 CL4 LA) AJ6 q9311 2 161 OUCV)oma, tit" Rd, • - 3L Vs- lba 0. ?4 via, 7 vagA" r � �-A-4I /1 f r, �\ r r� co) 11 ' - s'K , ,e 4 S7, 4"tj c /- Y7-1-L a� �s 33-� 2 31 5M Its • • 0 ■ - f . vlqq... � -7 wil, ;g 'q Ck I ILI i 7TTT:} . J " r V r t Rf gn 7.4i ti pl T l � I - •• • • 4 • $i• I I ■ T C O 11 _ ■ a Q Ji a s o Q p 76TH STREET I SER � � ll F !i • n If ♦ - 1 I •', Wi ou - • II a = a W _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ � 4 c = o = w = c c c w • W a ' a W = ~ J W = Q Q 3 W • E F 131• STREET = ��q, ®� e R R 17TH STREET � 11 i m J O w Legend CC Commercial Con id or DC - Downtown Core WWRC -Wheaton Redev Cot DW - Downtown Waterfront LC - Limned Commercial BC - Business Core NB - Neighborhood Business MR - Multiple Residential I - Industrial DCC - Dist Center Core IP - Industrial Park t _ NCC - Neigh Center Core; MI -Marine Industrial EC' - Employment Center Inst - Institutional MD - Master Development CUL - City Utility Lands R -10 - Low Density Res j Sub Area Plan R -10• - Low Density Res Downtown Regional Center CCR - City Core Res WS - Watershed FC - Freeway Corridor Naval Shipyard Future adjustment to zoning anticipated O files upon comp of Subarea Plannlno 0 n 195 .i _. :X ET :y a SF r� V 4 ljd pi iy ka 4 -S9.fi iP - ••'�T c 1 �j 'Y' l abl_ c S 'f F`1'x ap ,3 ? M I wel 3 .-M F City of Bremerton Department of Community Development NOTICE OF APPLICATION & NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Proposal: Rezone the following parcels (1) 3774 - 006 - 016 -0106, 3774 - 006 -017 -0006, 3774 -006 - 018 -0005 Applicant: Bremerton Investment Group, LLC Location: (1) N.E comer of 15' and Cambrian File Number: BP10 00066 An application for rezone was submitted on December 2, 2010 by the City of Bremerton Notice of application is hereby given for the rezone proposal. Consistent with the provisions of Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) 20.10100 a twenty -eight (28) day comment period will be utilized to obtain comments on the Notice of Application Any person may provide public comment on the application to the DCD staff contact Per WAC 197.11 600 existing environmental documents are being used to evaluate the environmental impacts of this proposal A Final EIS for the Comprehensive Plan was adopted January 20, 1986, with two SEIS adopted on February 21, 1995 and December 1, 2004. Notice is hereby given that The City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner will conduct a Public Hearing on the date and time listed below The purpose of this hearing is to consider public testimony for and against the rezone proposal You are invited to attend the hearing and make oral and written comments If you are unable to attend, written comments or other exhibits on the application may be submitted to the address below before the hearing date All information and documents related to this proposal are available to the public on request to the staff contact, and any questions may be directed to the staff contact Staff Contact: Lindsey Sehmel (360 )473.5845 345 6 t ' Street, Suite 600 Bremerton WA, 98337 E-mail: Lindsey.Sehmel @ci.bremerton wa.us Date of Application: December 2, 2010 Application Completeness: December 16, 2010 Notice of Rezone Application: December 30, 2010 Comment Period Deadline: January 27, 2011 Public Hearing Date & Time: February 28, 2011, 9AM — 345 6 Street, Bremerton AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Account #37922 AD #(268086) 20108599 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KITSAP I, Laura Wessels, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says That she is now, and at all tunes embraced in the publication herem mentioned was the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of KITSAP SUN, that said newspaper has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the County of Kitsap, in which County it is published and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of the publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Bremerton, Kitsap County, Washington, a weekly newspaper in Kitsap County, Washington and is now and during all of said tune, was printed in an office maintained in the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper, that the following is a true text of an advertisement as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplement form) of said newspaper on the following date, to wit And on December 30, 2010 such newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period The full amount of the fee charged for the foregoin pubhcation is the sum of $106 31 Tins amount has not been paid m full (Signature of Principal Clerk) Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of December 30, 2010 • • • • • Notary Public m ty -(' lt and for the State of Washington, Kitsap Co g • • • .��`j'•,,� Y 0 �tl �� •�l�'�': a • jut $2012 � Z- City of BremertonNj,•� I , UBL �C •: Department of Community Development �.'qj� •. .• �.� NOTICE OF APPLICATION ••••• '•�U�111111 `� %�,,,, & NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Proposal Rezone the following parcels (1) 3774 - 006 - 016 -0106, 3774 - 006 - 017 -0006, 3774 - 006 - 018 -0005 Applicant Bremerton Investment Group, LLC Location (1) N E comer of 15th and Cambrian File Number BPI 0 00066 An application for rezone was submitted on December 2, 2010 by the City of Bremerton Notice of application is hereby given for the rezone proposal Consistent with the provisions of Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) 20 10 100 a twenty-eight (28) day comment period will be utilized to obtain comments on the Notice of Application Any person may provide public comment on the application to the DCD staff contact Per WAC 197 11 600 existing environmental documents are being used to evaluate the environmental impacts of this proposal A Final EIS for the Comprehensive Plan was adopted January 20, 1986, with two SEIS adopted on February 21, 1995 and December 1, 2004 Notice is hereby given that The City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner will conduct a Public Hearing on the date and time listed below The purpose of this hearing is to consider public testimony for and against the rezone proposal You are invited to attend the hearing and make oral and written comments If you are unable to attend, written comments or other exhibits on the application may be submitted to the address below before the hearing date All information and documents related to this proposal are available to the public on request to the staff contact, and any questions may be directed to the staff contact Staff Contact Lindsey Sehmel (360 )473 5845 345 6th Street, Suite 600 Bremerton WA, 98337 E -mail Lindsey Sehmel @ci bremerton wa us Date of Application December 2, 2010 Application Completeness December 16, 2010 Notice of Rezone Application December 30, 2010 Comment Period Deadline January 27, 2011 Public Hearing Date & Time February 28, 2011, 9AM - 345 6th Street, Bremerton December 30, 2010 Ad #20108599 1 2 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING 3 4 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss 5 COUNTY OF KITSAP ) 6 COMES NOW, Lindsey Sehmel, who, being first duly sworn upon oath, deposes and says 7 1 I am an employee in the Department of Community Development for the City of 8 Bremerton 9 2 On the r cO day of 20 �� , I posted the attached NOTICE OF 10 SITE SPECIFIC REZONE, File Number BP10 00066 on the property at 11 N E CORNER OF 15 & CAMBRIAN 12 Tax # 3774 - 006 -016 -0106, 3774 - 006 - 017 -0006, 3774 - 006 -018 -0005 13 14 Print Name hmAsey Sehmel 15 SIGNED AND SWORN to before me this te—' day of 6& v1&4f 20 /0 by 16 LINDSEY SEHMEL i 17 18 8y t7l r �y� ' Notary Public in and for State of Washington, / +`~� ° °�• ar�Ji � residing at e 1�� l 19 m , , My appointment expires /S / ..�« : S 20 ,v s Z to 21 22 23 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING - 1 24 j 25 i 1 2 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING 3 4 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss 5 COUNTY OF KITSAP ) 6 COMES NOW, Lindsey Sehmel, who, being first duly sworn upon oath, deposes and says 7 g 1 I am an employee in the Department of Community Development for the City of Bremerton 9 2 On the day of �2C�hn� 20 (C' I mailed a copy of the attached NOTICE OF APPLICATION, File No BP 10 -00066 the attached individuals via regular mail, postage 10 prepaid, deposited in the United States mail in Bremerton, Washington, on the date above- mdicated m 11 12 13 14 15 rent Name Ni8 sey Sehmel 16 f SIGNED AND SWORN to before me this day of ��V 20 by 17 LINDSEY SEHMEL 18 � ``��g °� , 19 a ZA0�� `L 4 �O if Notary Public in and f e State of Washington, 20 .v _ ... residing at ' DG✓IP�� ?�li� /� c /8� �� t A a s My appointment expires 21 y �i 9 �i'`d Z 22 23 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING - 1 24 25 66 Parcels Found Parcel ' situs • 377400 Peterson Nell J Family LLC PO Box 1081 Poulsbo WA 98370 002 37740060190004 1510 N Cambrian Ave Scheel Scott C & Teah A PO Box 5378 Bremerton WA 98312 0 02 37740050150000 2906 15th St Ness, Thomas B Jr 2906 15th St Bremerton WA 98312 -2838 003 37740050130002 1509 N Cambrian Ave Whitlock C L 1509 N Cambrian Bremerton WA 98312 003 37740050120003 1513 N Cambrian Dennis Linda PO Box 184 Ave Sequim WA 98382 0 03 37740060110002 1519 N Wycoff Ave Harer Frank & Ward Jacob 418 S 59th St Tacoma WA 98408 003 37740060120001 1513 N Wycoff Ave Maner Leslie G 1513 N Wycoff Bremerton WA 98312 003 37740060210000 1518 Aembrian v Whitson Richard H & Erin T 6565 Island Center Rd Balnbrldge Island WA 0.03 98110 37740070280001 1348 N Cambrian Ave Wright Rober L 1348 Cambrian Ave N Bremerton WA 98312 003 37740050110004 1517 Ave Cambrian Shadley Diana C 1517 N Cambrian Ave Bremerton WA 98312 0.04 37740050100005 1519 N Cambrian Ave Sealer Antoinette 1519 N Cambrian Ave Bremerton WA 98312 0 04 37740060100003 1521 N Wycoff Ave West Jonathan T 2008 Vandaila Ave Bremerton WA 98310 0 04 37740060220009 1520 N Cambrian Ave Washburn Daniel J & Lorie 1520 N Cambrian Ave Bremerton WA 98312 0 04 37740070010002 1349 W Wycoff Ave Deam Dustin 0 & Ybarra Kandyse V 1349 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 0 04 37740080010000 2905 15th St Custodio Salud B 2905 15th St Bremerton WA 98312 0.04 37740050090008 1523 ACambrian Woodard Beryle A 1523 N Cambrian Bremerton WA 98312 005 37740060090006 1525 N Wycoff Ave Contreras Lori A 1525 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 005 37740060230008 1522 N Cambrian Ave Crawford Gundersen Karen 2036 NW Luoto Rd Poulsbo WA 98370 005 37740060240007 1524 N Cambrian Washin Ave gton David A 445360 7993 Vanessa PI NW Silverdale WA 98383 005 37740050160108 2920 15th St Bagley Deirdre K 61073 Ferguson Ct Bend OR 97702 005 37740050170008 1506 A efayette Edenbo Cheryl L 1506 Lafayette Ave Bremerton WA 98312 0 05 37740050180007 1514 Aefayette Mckelvy Rhonda 1514 N Lafayette Ave Bremerton WA 98312 005 37740070020001 1343 N Wycoff Ave Whittaker Ronald E 1343 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 005 37740070270002 1338 N Cambrian Ave Schneider Loxi M 1338 N Cambrian Ave Bremerton WA 98312 005 37740070040009 1337 N Wycoff Ave Campion Giles B 1337 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 005 37740080020009 1341 N Cambrian Ave Stepp Shannon E & Michelle L PO Box 146 Yamhill OR 97148 005 15240110672008 1508 N Wycoff Ave Strassburg S R 1812 S Marine Dr Bremerton WA 98312 005 15240110662009 2720 15th St Clayton Mary & Yoxsimer Heidi & Lowell 1132 Hewitt Ave Bremerton WA 98337 005 37740050070000 1527 N Cambrian Ave Perkins Sandi 1527 N Cambrian Bremerton WA 98312 006 37740060070008 1533 N Wycoff Ave Hughes Brian J 1901 Marine Dr Bremerton WA 98312 006 37740050190006 1518 N Lafayette Winn Francis M 119708 Ave 1518 N Lafayette Ave Bremerton WA 98312 0.06 37740050210002 1520 A efayetce Patten Rands 1520 N Lafayette Ave Bremerton WA 98312 006 37740060250006 1526 N Cambrian Ave Chriesman Shane S 1526 N Cambrian Bremerton WA 98312 006 37740070260003 1336 N Cambrian Eriandsen Jane E Ave 1536 Madrona PT Dr Bremerton WA 98312 006 37740070050107 1335 N Wycoff Ave Foiles David & Denise 2125 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 006 37740070250004 1330 N Cambrian P1gato Nino F & Liane 3232 Ridgevlew Dr NE Bremerton WA 98310 006 Ave 37740080050006 1335 N Cambrian Bybee Lance G Ave 1335 N Cambrian Ave Bremerton WA 98312 006 1339 N Cambrian 377400800400071 Ave I 13 '". ambrian Land Trust _ _ 1339 N Cambrian E erton WA 98312 006 37740080270109 2915 15th St _ Dour Mary Jane 625 Alabama Or LL -line CA 93545 006 15240110692006 1518 N Wycoff Ave Darstein Richard 1518 N Wycoff Bremerton WA 98312 006 15240110682007 1514 N Wycoff Ave Nye Brian T & 3ulie A 6250 Minnig Ln NW Seabeck WA 98380 006 15240110652000 2712 15th St Yoxsimer Heidi 3 & Lowell E & 2720 15th St Bremerton WA 98312 006 15240111742008 1350 N Wycoff Ave Yoxsimer Heidi 3 & Lowell E & 2720 15th St Bremerton WA 98312 006 37740050230000 1530 N Lafayette B� Carol & Richard C PO Box 241 Tra Ave cyton WA 98393 007 37740050060001 1533 N Cambrian Krouse Aaron M 1533 N Cambrian Ave Bremerton WA 98312 0 07 Ave 37740050220001 1526 A Lafayette Coons Scott D 1526 N Lafayette Bremerton WA 98312 007 37740060260005 1528 N Cambrian Ave Fowler Russell E 1528 N Cambrian Bremerton WA 98312 007 37740060050000 1537 N Wycoff Ave Mueller Bernard Alfred 1537 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 007 37740070050206 1333 N Wycoff Ave Foiles David & Denise 2125 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 007 15240111772005 1338 N Wycoff Ave Haworth Connie & Dana 3632 Mccall Blvd Bremerton WA 98312 007 37740070240005 1328 A Cambrian Poirier Chad & Wilson Aimee 1328 N Cambrian Ave Bremerton WA 98312 007 15240110642001 2710 15th St Strassburg Sid 1812 S Marine Or Bremerton WA 98312 0 07 15240110702003 1524 N Wycoff Ave Wallis Gary E & Lori L 1524 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 007 15240111752007 1342 N Wycoff Ave Hemmingson Bradley 1342 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 007 37740050040102 1537 N Cambrian Ave Smith Arthur P 1537 N Cambrian Ave Bremerton WA 98312 008 37740050250008 1536 A efayette Mason George F 1536 N Lafayette Bremerton WA 98312 008 15240111782004 1334 N Wycoff Ave Clark Daryl E 4455 NW Shelley Dr Silverdale WA 98383 008 37740070070006 1331 N Wycoff Ave Nelson Dustin L 1331 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 008 37740080250002 1330 N Lafayette Ave Spatter Properties LLC PO Box 3993 Silverdale WA 98383 008 37740080260001 1336 N Lafayette Ave Mahannah Harold F 5214 66th PI Kenosha WI 53142 008 37740080060005 1329 N Cambrian Ave Mckenzie Tyler B 1329 N Cambrian Ave Bremerton WA 98312 008 15240111762006 Trout Jeremy D & Angela C 1336 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 008 15240110712002 1530 N Wycoff Ave Levine Monte 1536 N Wycoff Ave Bremerton WA 98312 008 15240110612004 1513 N Callow Ave Voldrich Elmer & Betty 1513 N Callow Ave Bremerton WA 98312 008 15240111732009 1347 N Callow Ave Powell Robin B 1246 Station Circle Port Orchard WA 98367 008 15240110722001 1536 N Wycoff Ave Levine Monte Frank 1536 N Wycoff Bremerton WA 98312 009 CITY OF BREMERTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS & CONCLUSION Hearings Examiner Public Hearing February 28, 2011 Requested Action: Site specific rezone of property zoned Neighborhood Center Core to R -10 *. GENERAL INFORMATION (Application — Exhibit #1) 1. File Number: BPI 0-00066 2. Applicant: Bremerton Investment Group, LLC 3. Location: On the northeast corner of 15' & Cambrian. 4 Assessor Tax Account Numbers: 3774- 006 - 016 -0106; 3774 -006 -017 -0006; 3774 - 006 - 018 -0005 5 Comprehensive Plan Current Designation: Neighborhood Center 6. Current Zone Classification: Neighborhood Center Core 7 Requested Zone Classification: Low Density Residential (R -10 *) 8. Project Permit: Type IV Decision, Hearing Examiner conducts an open - record hearing and provides recommendation to the City Council (BMC 20.02 Table 040) 9. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA): Adoption of Existing Environmental Document issued December 1, 2004 — for the Comprehensive Plan Update SITE DESCRIPTION 1. Legal Description: Lots 16, 17, and 18, Block 6, Midway Addn, according to the plat recorded in Volume 4 of plats, page 70, in Kitsap County, WA 2. Lot Size: Approximately .34 acres in total. 3. Development: The parcels are currently undeveloped vacant land. 4. Surrounding Land Uses: Direction Zoning AcO North Low Density Residential R -10* Single Family Residences South Low Density Residential R -10* Single Family Residences East Neighborhood Center Core (NCC) Warehouse, Restaurant, Bakery, Etc. West Low Density Residential R -10* Single Family Residences 2011 Bremerton Investment Group, LLC Rezone 1 of 4 NOTICE Notice pursuant to BMC Section 20.02. 100 was provided as follows. Date of Application: December 2, 2010 Notice of Completeness: December 16, 2010 Notice of Application & Hearing: December 30, 2010 BACKGROUND INFORMATION The properties requested for a rezone have a long history of commercial zoning; the 1970 Zoning Map designates the properties as Heavy Commercial (Exhibit #2), and the 1988 Zoning Code designated the properties as Neighborhood Business (Exhibit #3). During the update of the Comprehensive Plan in 2004 the land use designation was maintained as commercial, followed by the 2005 Zoning Code Update (Exhibit #4), which designated the properties as Neighborhood Center Core. Extensive community input was solicited and garnered in the Comprehensive Plan update that continued these areas as commercial. Pursuant to the GMA mandates the City sent public mailings, held charette workshops, and over a dozen public hearings with the City of Bremerton's Planning Commission prior to adoption with the Bremerton City Council in December of 2004, at that time planning staff, citizens, Planning Commission and City Council found this site to be best utilized as a neighborhood center. The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed properties within the Haddon Neighborhood Center (Exhibit #5). This Center is nestled in an established single - family area and is intended to provide neighborhood commercial and professional services to residents in the neighboring areas. The properties within the Haddon Neighborhood Center are currently zoned either Neighborhood Center Core (NCC) or Low Density Residential (R -10 *). CRITERIA OF APPROVAL Bremerton Municipal Code 20.58.040 Site - Specific Rezone establishes the Criteria of Approval. The City's Rezone Application states that the REZONE request can be approved by the Hearing Examiner only if all of the following can be answered "YES": 1. Is the proposed Rezone consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? No. The requested rezone to R -10* is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Although the Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Consistency Figure 20.40(b) identifies Low Density Residential (R -10) and Neighborhood Center (NCC) as consistent with Neighborhood Centers (NC) the Low Density Residential has two zoning classification, R -10 and R -10 *. Therefore, R -10 and NCC is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan but R -10* is not. The R -10* is a placeholder classification for future Sub Area planning, which is different than the Low Density Residential (R -10). The R 10* classification is intended for centers designations, allowing for higher density development to occur. The City would need to complete a full build out analysis for the Center to determine the future needs including the appropriate density through a Sub Area Plan. 2011 Bremerton Investment Group, LLC Rezone 2 of 4 The intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the Neighborhood Center is to focus significant portions of new development into high quality urban centers providing services to a surrounding neighborhood in a pedestrian oriented, mixed use environment. The uses within the Center are predominately convenience businesses providing basic services to neighborhood residents within a one mile diameter surrounding the center. The 20 year Comprehensive Planning horizon for the Haddon Neighborhood Center anticipates a 10% growth with 108 new residents and 35 new jobs by 2024. Since the adoption of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan there have been two new businesses established in the NCC compromising of 5 new employees. The area has met 14% of the intended employment growth for the 20 year period. 2. Is the Rezone justified for one or more of the following reasons? • 'Is it in the public interest to approve the Rezone to accommodate needed changes within the immediate vicinity or neighborhood? No. Currently the Haddon Neighborhood Center has available property in both the NCC and the R -10* zones to meet the needs of the neighborhood. The long terms needs of the Center will require this property to maintain its commercial designation to meet the employment targets designated in the Comprehensive Plan. Without the subject properties it would be difficult for the Center to meet the employment targets and the vision of the community. • Will it correct a zone classification or boundary that was inappropriate when established? No. The properties border the corner of 15 and Cambrian Street. The proximity of the property on the corner is appropriate for commercial uses with the available utilities and pedestrian access. • Is it a planned step in a phasing process to gradually bring zoning into consistency with the 20-year Comprehensive Plan when appropriate? No, this rezone takes away from the areas current consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and detracts from the 20 year growth strategy. A Sub Area plan is required for the neighborhood center to fully understand the future impacts. • Will it place or remove an overlay zoning designation without affecting the underlying zoning designation without affecting the underlying zoning? No. An overlay or underlying zoning designation has not been requested. 3. Is there a public need for the proposed Rezone that will clearly benefit the local neighborhood and/or the community of Bremerton? No. The NCC zone in the Haddon Neighborhood Center is currently 1.86 acres in size. The proposed three parcels equate to .34 acres or 18% of the NCC zone. The prop rezo would reduce the area available for commercial development by almost one fifth, therefore reducing the opportunities for employment growth and reducing the ability to meet the employment target of the Comprehensive Plan. The properties prominent setting on a prime 2011 Bremerton Investment Group, LLC Rezone 3 of 4 comer location provides good site access for commercial uses which would benefit the neighborhood through the meeting of employment targets A letter of support (Exhibit #f) with 37 signatures was received on January 28, 2011 (one day after the public comment deadline). Although this letter represents some of the local neighbors it serves as a small percentage of the local neighborhood and/or the community of Bremerton. The letter does not negate the efforts set forth through the public mailings, workshops, and hearings for the 2004 Comprehensive Plan and the previous zoning process (back to the 1970 zoning). 4. Are all essential public facilities and services available and adequate, or can be made available, to serve the types and levels of developmentpermided in the requested zone? Yes, the intent of the Comprehensive Plan is to establish Centers in areas with available and adequate essential public facilities and services to allow for high density and commercial type developments. 5. Will the area being proposed for rezoning become part of a larger zoning district or form a new district which will not be considered an isolated "spot zone "? No. Although theXroperty would be part of the larger zoning district it would break up the street block of 15 Street between Cambrian Avenue and Wycoff. SUMMARY: • The area has been zoned commercial since the early 70's. • The growth targets outlined in the Comprehensive Plan conflict with the proposal. • The request for a down -zone to R -10 *, a placeholder classification does not achieve the full potential of the Haddon Neighborhood Center. • The location of the property on the comer of 15 and Cambrian is a prime location for commercial usage and provides a continuous connection between the street block and zoning designation • The requested rezone classification is reserved for future Sub Area Planning. RECOMMENDATION The City recommends denial of the rezone as the proposal does not meet the intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan and would drastically impact the commercial growth of the Haddon Neighborhood Center. END OF STAFF PORT a1/71a Nl JOAO V dinhar, Assistant Director Date Depirtment of Community Development 2011 Bremerton investment Group, LLC Rezone 4 of 4 February 24, 2011 To Hearing Examiner City of Bremerton Applicant Bremerton Investment Group, LLC Attn Victor F Targett, Manager 3042 Marine Dr Bremerton WA 98312 File # BP10 -00066 — Rezone of 3 small lots (Totaling 34 Acre) NE comer of 15"' & Cambrian Response to the City of Bremerton DCD Staff Analysis & Conclusion dated February 17, 2011, received by Applicant on February 18, 2011 (10 days before the heanng date of February 28, 2011) In order to attempt to keep this process as clear as possible and make this easy to understand, I will utilize the DCD staff report and respond to each page so we can hopefully make sense out of something simple that I have full neighborhood support for, and that which staff (it appears) has decided to attempt to make this appear complicated BACKGROUND INFORMATION Staff notes a long history (since 1970) of the property being zoned commercial and I agree it has been Note that with it being zoned commercial for the last 41 years, it has never been built on I wonder why, could it be that commercial isn't viable at this location because you have a very large commercial district (the Charleston district) beginning about 2 blocks to the south'? The Charleston area is almost 30 -50% vacant and has always had a high vacancy rate Perhaps we need more residential to support the existing commercial sites so that they are viable Staff notes extensive input was gathered in the area If this is so then why do I have 100 percent support from the neighborhood If staff is supporting the will of the people, they should be supporting this rezone Could it be that the extensive input was City -wide and people in this area were flexible and easy to work with and thus the City interpreted and aligned what they I wanted and mandated it accordingly? I was involved in this Comp Plan update and was on the 13 member board that reported to the Planning Commission 7 and 8 years ago so I do know and that is why I know that single family residential is a great fit for this property Was the current Director or the Assistant Director of DCD involved with this process? I don't think so as they were not even employed by the City at that time I have been involved with the City and land use for over 15 years One hundred percent of my projects to this day are still viable I j have always developed with the thought in the back of my head Am I leaving the area better i than I arrived This has always been important to me, and will continue to be CRITERIA OF APPROVAL 1. Is the proposed Rezone consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? Yes The zones consistent with the Comp plan are R- 10/R -10 *, or NCC. I am asking for R -10 (R -10 *), they are the same to me They are both R -10, its dust that the * denotes that it may be revisited in more depth when the city or the community want to its been 7yrs they per their signatures support the R- 10 /R -10* designation The City does not need to do an analysis as this is a total of 34 acre, is supportive by the community and is VERY consistent with the Comp plan The city can adjust the center when they someday do a subarea plan They can go to the north, south or east at the time they think they need to—if they need to, which I doubt they will Another point is by allowing this small center you erode the larger Charleston Commercial District that exists 2 blocks south —well within the dcd staffs 1 mile radius By looking at the vacancy of 30 -50% in the Charleston area it is logical to think that adding 3 residential single family homes is more viable for the area, including the Charleston District and it is in keeping with the wants and desires of the residential neighborhood in question The talk of the fobs created is foolishness That is all on that point 2. Is the Rezone justified for one or more of the following reasons? Yes • Is it in the public interest to approve the Rezone to accommodate needed changes within the immediate vicinity or neighborhood? Yes The 34 Acre subs are will not ruin the vision of the community It will embrace it • Will it correct a zone classification or boundary that was inappropriate when established? Yes The property zoned for 41 yrs as commercial and never built on says the story. • Is it a planned step in a phasing process to gradually bring zoning into consistency with the 20 year Comprehensive Plan when appropriate? Yes Single family development will add more owner residents. We do not need more rentals in the area, or vacant commercial buildings Put in the residences and the commercial will come It is not the other way around • Will it place or remove an overlay zoning designation without affecting the underlying zoning designation without affecting the underlying zoning? Yes Zoning of R- 10/R -10* is consistent with the comp plan It is also what surrounds the subJ property on 3 of its 4 sides 3. Is there a public need for the proposed Rezone that will clearly benefit the local neighborhood and/or the community of Bremerton? Yes, yes, yes This is clearly shown by the neighborhood participation with over 30 signatures and over 18 of them from this direct neighborhood All of the community is in strong support of 3 single family homes versus a commercial structure To date no one from the neighborhood has voiced or written any opposition of my rezone so I can build 3 sf homes They are tired of seeing dead cars towed from the site, garbage dumped off and people living in cars and campers on the site, until they are removed legally There are lots of vacant commercial buildings exist 2 blocks to the south and we don't need more Traffic counts are very low making commercial development completely unfeasible The staff talks of the small size of the center, and if I am zoned R -10 /R- 10* it may make the center unfeasible, Reallly? If and when the city or area decides to do more planning then the center can very easily morph to the north , the east, or the south I seriously doubt it will happen in the next two decades , but if it does then at that time the center can be adjusted as needed, Just like it did in 1970, 1988, and 2005 As it relates to not meeting the deadline for public comment, this is because the City is now only open part time and I forgot that Although the City has cut its hours by 20% my taxes have not been reduced accordingly I was not the only bell tapper as I received the staff report on feb 18 10 days before the hearing examiner hearing) with the hearing to be on the 28 The workshops the City cites were City-wide This neighborhood has a lot of transient people and were not represented well at these workshops I was there in 2004 -2005 participating We need 3 sf homes in that area We are not negating the efforts done in 2004/2005 We are merely moving in the direction that time did not allow for in 2004/2005 4. Are all essential public facilities and services available and adequate or can be made available, to serve the types and levels of development permitted in the requested zone? Agree with staff report that all services are available for residential or commercial, typical of most parts of Bremerton 5. Will the area being proposed for rezoning become part of a larger zoning district or form a new district which will not be considered an isolated "spot zone "? The question is asking if it's a spot zone or not? I am surrounded on 3 sides by R- 10/R -10* This isn't even close to a spot zone Clearly meeting the comp plan SUMMARY • Allowing the rezone to R- 10/R -10* enhances the residents and the existing commercial We have too much Commercial property available • The growth targets are miscalculated They state 108 new residents and the rezone would add 3 households to that total It is unrealistic for the Haddon center to create 35 new fobs without taking them from somewhere else • The center is not landlocked If desired in the future, expand by .34 acres either north, south or east The full potential for this center is decades away and this rezone will add to the 10% growth anticipated in the Comp Plan for this area • After 41 years as currently zoned it clearly shows that commercial is not viable for this property • Applicant is requesting R- 10/R -10* it is understood by applicant that R- 10/R -10* is R -10 and that R -10* is an internal placeholder for staff R -10 should be granted RECOMMENDATION Recommend the rezone of the property to R -10* The Rezone does not create any non - conforming use what so ever The DCD staff has not spoken of any law of any kind that it would be violating, because there isn't one It is allowed under the laws It also clearly meets the intent and vision of both the Comp Plan and the neighborhood It is private development of 3 -single family homes that would help the neighborhood and the City It would also help the adjoining subject center, and the commercial District of Charleston to the South It will no doubt help to enhance the area It is strange to see a developer ask for a downzone It should speak volumes as to the reality of this property as best suited for residential, and not a use that has been allowed for about 41 years Respectfull Submitted, actor F Tawgett-!Vlafiager Date Bremerton Investment Group, LLC BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF BREMERTON In the Matter of the Application of ) No BP 10 -00066 Bremerton Investment Group, LLC ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION For Approval of a Rezone ) SUMMARY OF RECORD Request Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, requests a rezone of 0 34 acres on the northeast corner of 15` Street and Cambrian Avenue from Neighborhood Center Core (NCC) to Low Density Residential (R -10 *), in Bremerton, Washington The Comprehensive Plan designation is NC, Neighborhood Center Hearing Date The City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner held an open record hearing on the request on February 28, 2011 Testimony The following individuals presented testimony under oath at the open record hearing JoAnn Vidmhar, Director, Department of Community Development Victor Targett, Applicant Representative Exhibits The following exhibits were admitted into the record 1 Application for Zone Reclassification, dated December 2, 2010 2 City of Bremerton, 1970 Zoning Map, dated August 1970 3 City of Bremerton, 1988 Zoning Map 4 City of Bremerton, 2005 Zoning Map a Site Specific Rezone Aerial View I 5 City of Bremerton Official Land Use Map, dated November 17, 2009 j 6 Letter from Victor Targett, and neighbors of 15` and Cambrian to City of Bremerton DCD, dated January 13, 2011 (3 pages), Parcel search map, portion of 2005 Zoning Map, house plan 7 Notice of Application & Notice of Public Hearing a Notice of Application & Notice of Public Hearing, dated December 30, 2010 b Affidavit of Publication, dated December 30, 2010 c Affidavit of Posting, dated December 30, 2010 d Affidavit of Mailing, dated December 28, 2010, with mailing list 8 Staff Analysis & Conclusions (Staff Report), dated February 17, 2011 e Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation I City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BP 10 -0006 i Page 1 of 8 9 Applicant's response to City Staff Report, dated February 24, 2011 The Hearing Examiner enters the following Findings and Conclusions based upon the testimony and exhibits admitted at the open record hearing FINDINGS Application and Notice 1 Bremerton Investment Group, LLC (Applicant) requests a rezone of 0 34 acres from Neighborhood Center Core (NCC) to Low Density Residential (R -10 *) The property is located on the northeast corner of 15` Street and Cambrian Avenue, in Bremerton, Washington 1 Exhibit 1, Exhibit 8, Staff Report, page 1 2 The City of Bremerton (City) received the rezone application on December 2, 2010 The City determined that the application was complete on December 16, 2010 The City gave combined notice of the application and the open record hearing associated with the application by posting the property and publication in the Kitsap Sun on December 30, 2010 On December 28, 2010, the City mailed notice to surrounding property owners An open record hearing was held on the application on February 28 Exhibit 7 Environmental Review 3 The City acted as lead agency in reviewing the environmental impacts of rezoning the Applicant's property as required by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) SEPA rules allow existing environmental documents to be used to evaluate proposed actions WAC 197 11 600 The City adopted its December 2004 Comprehensive Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement as the environmental review of the proposed rezone Exhibit 7, Exhibit 8, Staff Report, page I Comprehensive Plan Designation 4 The Applicant's property is designated Neighborhood Center (NC) under the City's Comprehensive Plan adopted in December 2004 The property is part of the 27 -acre Haddon Neighborhood Center The City Comprehensive Plan notes that the Haddon Neighborhood Center surrounds a relatively small core area at the intersection of Callow Avenue and North 15 Street that will provide mixed use structures of two or three stories with residential uses above commercial street -level uses City Comprehensive Plan, page LU -10, Exhibit 8, Staff Report, pages 1 and 2 5 The City Comprehensive Plan's discussion of the Neighborhood Center land use designation includes the following description The Applicant's property is identified by tax parcel numbers 3774- 006 - 016 -0106, 3774 - 006 - 017 -0006, and 3774 - 006 - 018 -0005 Exhibit 7, Exhibit 8, Staff Report page I A legal description is provided as part of the Staff Report Exhibit 8, Staff Report, page I ' Callow Avenue is two blocks to the east of Cambrian Ave Exhibit 4 Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BP10 -0006 Page 2 of 8 Neighborhood Centers are mixed -use environments with an emphasis on mixed use structures, pedestrian oriented design, mixed and varied housing types, and the provision of neighborhood scale commercial, professional, and community services The size and scale of a Neighborhood Center is such that it provides a focus and services for an area of approximately one mile in diameter surrounding the center Neighborhood centers have an identifiable central area with building heights of at least two or three stones with retail or office uses at ground level and residential above Away from the central focus area, residential uses may predominate City Comprehensive Plan, page LU -48 The Comprehensive Plan also states that "Neighborhood Centers provide a focus for a single neighborhood area of approximately one square mile Moderately intense residential use is incorporated above the commercial spaces, within mixed use structures and near a center's core to create a busy, pedestrian- onented area " City Comprehensive Plan, page LU -9 City Zoning 6 The Applicant's property is currently vacant and zoned Neighbor Center Core (NCC) Property to the east is also zoned NCC and contains a warehouse, restaurant and bakery A total of 186 acres between Cambrian Avenue and Callow Avenue, north of 15 Street, is zoned NCC Property to the north, west, and south contain single family residences on property zoned R -10* Exhibit 8, Staff Report, pages 1 and 2, Exhibit 4 7 The Zoning Code describes the intent of the NCC zone as one "to establish base threshold standards for the central core of the neighborhood centers that preserve future opportunity for full realization of the centers concept The NCC designation assumes that future amendments to the zoning code will more fully implement the centers intent " Listed permitted uses within the NCC zone include residential as a secondary use to commercial development on the same property BMC 20 66 010, -020 8 The BMC Zoning Designation chart identifies a Low Density Residential R -10 zone, but not an R -10* zone Chapter 20 40, Figure 20 40(a) The City Staff Report describes the R -10* zone as a placeholder classification for future subarea planning Exhibit 8, Staff Report, pages 1 and 4 The City's 2005 Zoning Map identifies the residential properties surrounding the Applicant's property to the north, east and south as R -10* - Low Density Residential The legend of this zoning map describes R -10* as "R -10* - Low Density i Res * Future adjustment to zoning anticipated upon completion of Subarea Planning " This is the only descnption of the R -10* zone anywhere within the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code Exhibit 4 9 The Zoning Code describes the intent of the Low - density R -10 zone as one "to accommodate single - family housing by mfillmg at a range of lot sizes consistent with urban growth patterns Some attached single - family housing may be appropriate when Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BPIO -0006 I Page 3 of 8 responding to sensitive areas or with innovative design Residential development at higher densities is encouraged at the edge of designated centers " BMC 20160 010 The BMC Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Consistency chart lists both Low Density Residential (R -10) and Neighborhood Center Core (NCC) zoning districts as consistent with the Neighborhood Center (NC) Comprehensive Plan designation 3 Chapter 20 40 BMC, Figure 20 40(b) 10 Zoning classifications must be consistent with City Comprehensive Plan land use designations as described in Chapter 20 40 BMC, Figure 20 40(b) Low Density Residential (R -10) and Neighborhood Center (NCC) are both described as consistent with the Neighborhood Center designation as detailed in Figure 20 40(b) The R -10* designation does not appear in Figure 20 40(b) RCW Chapter 36 70A, BMC 20 40170 11 In its Staff Report, the City's Department of Community Development (DCD) states that the rezone application is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as the R -10* zone does not appear in Figure 20 40(b) DCD also determined that the rezone request failed to meet six additional criteria identified in its Staff Report 4 The City does agree that one criterion would be met there would be adequate essential public facilities and services are available and adequate for the rezone request The Staff Report contains a recommendation of denial of the rezone request The Staff Report notes that the property received its current zone of NCC to accommodate fob growth in the City as envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan and that any change would reduce the chances of meeting that vision The City also notes that a rezone would result in a `break up' of the street block of 15` Street between Cambrian and Wycoff with residential development Exhibit 8, Staff Report, pages 2 -4 Testimony 12 At the hearing, JoAnn Vidinhar, Department of Community Development Director, testified that the R -10* designation means that subarea planning is needed before zoning designations can become final She characterized the R -10* designation as a `placeholder' until further review by the City is complete She notes that the City has 12 centers where subarea plans are needed, and that only five subarea plans are completed 3 The Application for Zone Reclassification (Exhibit 1, page 3) listed criteria for approval including "I Is the proposed Rezone consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? (See Bremerton Municipal Code, Section 21, Figure 090, `Plan /Zoning Consistency' of this code )" The existing BMC no longer contains this code citation The Hearing Examiner has identified Chapter 20 40 BMC, Figure 20 40(b) as the current figure containing the Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Consistency 4 In its Staff Report, DCD used criteria for review that are different from those in the City ordinance governing rezone requests It appears that DCD relied upon criteria on the application form that differ from those in the code The City determined that the rezone request is not in the public interest to accommodate needed changes within the immediate vicinity or neighborhood, will not correct an inappropriate zone classification when established, is not a planned step in a phasing process to bring zoning into consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, is not an overlay or underlying zoning designation request, does not meet a public need that would clearly benefit the local neighborhood or community, and is not part of a larger zogmg district Exhibit 8, Staf pages 2 -5 Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BP10 -0006 Page 4 of 8 She acknowledged that the City does not know when subarea planning for the Haddon Neighborhood Center would begin, but testified that development could occur within that area without the necessity of a rezone Either Low Density Residential, (R -10 *) or Neighborhood Center Core (NCC) development can take place in the NC designation without waiting for future subarea planning She noted that residential use is allowed in the NCC zone as a secondary use, but understands that the Applicant prefers to build single family houses rather than a mixed use development She acknowledged he would need a rezone to R -10 to do that She recommends denial of the rezone request, however, in order to preserve an area for commercial development within the NC zone until such time as subarea planning can occur and to allow for future commercial development to occur Testimony of Ms Vidinhar 13 Victor Targett, Applicant Representative, testified that although the application requests a rezone from NCC to R -10 *, he views the R -10* designation as the same as Low Density Residential R -10, as the asterisk merely signifies that future subarea planning may occur Despite past zoning for commercial uses, the property has been vacant for 41 years He submitted testimony and documents in support of the rezone request, including a petition with 37 signatures of support for the rezone 5 He notes that the property has remained vacant in part because the Charleston Commercial District exists two blocks to the south and is not fully occupied with commercial uses He also argues that the R -10 zoning designation is allowed under the Comprehensive Plan designation of NC, and that it has been seven years since the NCC zone was applied to the property Mr Targett suggests the City can adjust the NCC zone during the Subarea Plan review, and move it north, south or east at the time the City further reviews the area Finally, he notes that adding more residential development to the area would assist the existing businesses in the area, by placing more residents in the area commercial development will come Exhibit 1, Exhibit 6, Exhibit 9, Testimony of Mr Targett CONCLUSIONS Jurisdiction The Hearing Examiner has authority to conduct an open record hearing on a rezone request and to issue a recommendation on the request to the Bremerton City Council BMC 2 13 070, BMC 2 13 080(3), BMC 20 02 040(d) and (e), Table 040, BMC 20 58 040(b) Criteria for Review The City may grant a site - specific rezone only if it finds that j (1) The rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, (2) The rezone will advance the public health, safety, or welfare, and will not have adverse impacts on adjacent properties, (3) The rezone is necessary because either 5 The Hearing Examiner notes that a petition for approval — or denial — of the request cannot alone be a reason for a decision on a rezone application See, Parkridge v Seattle, 89 Wn 2d 454 (1978) Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner j Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BP 10 -0006 Page 5 of 8 (i) Conditions in the immediate vicinity or neighborhood have so markedly changed that it is in the public interest to approve the rezone, or (ii) The rezone will correct a zone classification or zone boundary that was inappropriate when established, and (4) The rezone is in the public interest BMC 20 58 040(d) 6 Conclusions Based on Findings 1. There is insufficient information in the record to determine if a request for a rezone from NCC to R -10* is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; the Council alone must make that determination. This matter comes before the City Council without a clear recommendation because the Applicant and the Department of Community Development (DCD) have a good faith disagreement about the significance of the asterisk in the R -10* designation, and there is nothing in the record that can clearly resolve this disagreement Figure 20 40(b) specifies what zoning designations are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation The chart shows that both NCC and R -10 zoning are consistent with the NC designation specified in the Comprehensive Plan While DCD is correct that the R -10* designation does not appear in Figure 20 40(b) as a zoning designation consistent with the NC comprehensive plan designation, the Applicant points out that the R -10* designation may be the same as an R -10 designation, as it is nowhere defined in the code The City Council must therefore make a decision on this rezone as the only body empowered to do so Lutz v City of Longview, 83 Wn 2d 566 (1974) Resolution of the dispute involves the meaning of the asterisk The only guidance offered as to the meaning of asterisk is the legend on the 2005 Zoning Map that describes the asterisk to mean that "future adjustment to zoning (is) anticipated upon completion of subarea planning " There is nothing in the code language itself or in the Comprehensive Plan to further define what the asterisk means There is no legislative history offered that can help determine if the asterisk on the R -10 zone is intended to be a de facto moratorium prohibiting any rezone until such time as subarea planning occurs, or if it is intended as a `heads up' that the zoning may change Only the City Council can determine if the requested rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan One way the Council may do this is by looking at the plain meaning of the phrase on the Zoning Map to determine what an R -10* zone means See, Development Services of America, Inc v City of Seattle, 138 Wn 2d 107, 117 (1999) The plain meaning of the phrase describing the asterisk on the R -10 zone is that a certain zone may not last, nothing in the phrase leads one to believe that a rezone would not be allowed There is some question as to the timing of any zoning changes, as the phrase states that 6 Although the City Staff Report (Exhibit 8) references BMC 20 58 040(d), the Staff Report and the Application for Zone Reclassification (Exhibit 1) contain criteria for approval that are similar but not identical to that provided in BMC 20 58 040(d) It appears the criteria referenced in the Staff Report are outdated, but remained in the template for the Staff Report Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BPI 0-0006 1 Page 6 of 8 I � I adjustments are anticipated "upon completion of subarea planning " This does not state that there would be no adjustments prior to then, but that rezones are likely to occur after that DCD reads the asterisk as a placeholder, meaning rezones should not occur prior to subarea planning, the Applicant reads the asterisk as a statement that rezones are likely to occur after subarea planning, but not as a prohibition against rezones prior to that time The Hearing Examiner's reading of the plain meaning of the phrase describing the asterisk is that a rezone may occur prior to subarea planning, and that there will likely be rezones following subarea planning There is nothing in the plain meaning of the phrase that would prohibit a rezone prior to subarea planning Therefore, a request for a rezone from NCC to R -10* could be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of NC and could be allowed as consistent with Figure 20 40(b) The ongoing asterisk means that the zone may be re- examined again at the time of subarea planning However, the fact that the R -10* zone does not appear in Figure 20 40(b) could evidence an intent of the Council to not allow a rezone to that designation, as argued by DCD Findings 6 -11 The Comprehensive Plan provides some guidance as to the meaning of the NC designation, which may be helpful in determining if a rezone should be granted The NC designation is clearly is intended to embrace both NCC and R -10 zones, in order to accomplish a mix of commercial and higher density residential development There is a need for both zones within a NC designated area, as certain types of commercial development do best when surrounded by residential development It is the balance of those uses that is the challenge with this rezone request The Applicant notes that no commercial development has occurred on his property in over 40 years and that it is unlikely to occur in the future The City, on the other hand, believes that the property should remain NCC to allow for future commercial development as part of the mix envisioned in the neighborhood center The City Council is in the best position to resolve the differing views of what is appropriate for this particular property in an area designed by the Comprehensive Plan as a Neighborhood Center, when it is now zoned NCC but that the Applicant wishes to rezone to R -10* in order to develop the property with single - family homes There appears to be no practical difference between an R -10 zone and an R -10* zone, with the exception of the language on the Zoning Map It may have been an oversight to not include the R -10* zone in Figure 20 40(b) or it may have been the intent of the Council to exclude that designation from Figure 20 40(b) Only the Council can make that i determination i 2 If the Council determines that R -10* is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the Council should remand the application to the Planning Department for review using i the criteria for rezones established by the Council. The criteria for rezone approval in the rezone application form differ from those criteria established by the City Council when adopting the current Zoning Code in 2005 BMC 20 58 040(d) requires the Council to make specific findings prior to approving a rezone application It must find that Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC Rezone, No BP10 -0006 Page 7 of 8 (1) The rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, (2) The rezone will advance the public health, safety, or welfare, and will not have adverse impacts on adjacent properties, (3) The rezone is necessary because either (►) Conditions in the immediate vicinity or neighborhood have so markedly changed that it is in the public interest to approve the rezone, or (u) The rezone will correct a zone classification or zone boundary that was inappropriate when established, and (4) The rezone is in the public interest If the City finds the request to rezone from NCC to R -10* within an area designated as a Neighborhood Center in the 2004 Comprehensive Plan is consistent with that Comprehensive Plan, it is recommended that the Council remand the application to DCD for review of consistency with the remaining criteria within a specified time The professional planners within DCD have not had the opportunity to review the application with reference to the current criteria for approving a rezone, as the criteria in the application form differ from that in the City code Any decision on the rezone request could be viewed as inconsistent with law if the governing criteria were not used in making that decision The prudent course to follow is to refer to the governing cnte from the inception of review of the rezone request If, however, the Council determines that the rezone request is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, there is no need to conduct an analysis of the remaining criteria as failure to meet any one of the criteria provides an adequate basis for denial of the request RECOMMENDATION Based on the preceding Findings and Conclusions, the Hearing Examiner recommends that the City Council review the Comprehensive Plan, the City's 2005 Zoning Map where the R -10* is described, and the rezone application to determine if the rezone request from NCC to R -10* is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan If so, it is recommended that the Council remand the application to the Department of Community Development to analyze the remaining criteria for approval of rezone to determine if the request should be granted If not, then the rezone request would be denied and the Council need not take further action at this time Recommended this day of March 2011 THEODORE PAUL HUNTER Hearing Examiner Sound Law Center Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BPIO -0006 Page 8 of 8 I C CU P 2 3 4 5 f 6 CITY OF BREMERTON ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING EXAMINER 7 In the Matter of the Application of Case No.. BPI 0-00066 8 Bremerton Investment Group, LLC CITY OF BREMERTON' S REQUEST 9 FOR RECONSIDERATION OF 10 For Approval of a Rezone HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS it 12 Comes Now the City of Bremerton ( "the City ") pursuant to BMC 2 13 120 and 13 respectfully requests for reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's Findings, Conclusions, 14 and Recommendations dated March 8, 2011 and for a recommendation that the rezone 15 application be denied. 16 I. INTRODUCTION 17 The Hearing Examiner's decision contains errors of law and errors of fact that 18 necessitate reconsideration. The errors of law are as follows 1) that the meaning of the 19 in the R - 10* designation is significant in the adjudication of the application for rezone', 2) 20 21 that there is insufficient evidence presented at the hearing to support a recommendation 22 that the rezone application be rejected, and 3) that the Hearing Examiner erroneously 23 shifted the burden of proof from the applicant to the City 24 The errors of fact are as follows. 1) that DCD planners "have not had the 25 opportunity to review the application with reference to the current criteria for approving 26 1 Hearing Examiner Recommendation at 6 -7 Bremerton's Request for Reconsideration - I ROGER A LUBOVICH BREMERTON CITY ATTORNEY _ _ _ 1 345 6th Street, Suite 600 Bremerton, Washington 98337 �^ PhnnP 160 - { -7'1d5 Rix 16"71 -5161 A 1 rezone" 2 , 2) that DCD holds the position that the proposed rezone should not occur prior to 2 subarea planning 3 , 3) that DCD interprets an R -10* designation to be a "de facto 3 moratorium prohibiting any rezone until such time as subarea planning occurs' , and 4) 4 that DCD argues that "the fact that the R -10* zone does not appear in Figure 20.40(b) 5 could evidence an intent of the Council to not allow a rezone to that designations 6 7 If the errors of law and fact are corrected and the Hearing Examiner bases its 8 decision on the evidence in the record and the appropriate law, the Hearing Examiner 9 would have no choice but to recommend that the rezone application be denied. 10 II. Reconsideration is necessary because the Hearing Examiner's recommendation is based on errors of law and fact. I1 12 BMC 2 13.120 authorizes reconsideration of a Hearing Examiner's 13 recommendation when the recommendation is based on erroneous procedures, errors of 14 law or fact, or the discovery of new evidence. The City seeks reconsideration because the 15 recommendation is based on errors of law and fact. 16 A. The Hearing Examiner erred in failing to conclude as a matter of law that the applicant has the burden of proof to show that a rezone is appropriate 17 The Hearing Examiner does not make any legal conclusions regarding which party 18 bears the burden of proving each of the elements of a rezone application. However, by 19 recommending a potential remand to DCD, the Hearing Examiner has placed the burden 20 on the City. In a hearing on an application for a site - specific rezone, the party proposing 21 the rezone bears the burden of proving "(1) that conditions have changed since the original 22 zoning, or that the proposed rezone implements policies of the comprehensive plan; and 23 (2) that the rezone bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals, or 24 25 2 Hearing Examiner Recommendation at 8 26 ° Hearing Examiner Recommendation at 7 4 Hearing Examiner Recommendation at 6 5 Hearing Examiner Recommendation at 7 Bremerton's Request for Reconsideration - 2 ROGER A LUBOVICH BREMERTON CITY ATTORNEY 345 6th Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, Washington 98337 Phnne 360.471 -7145 Fm WU71A I / t I welfare" In addition to any requirements under local ordinance. Woods v Kittitas County, 2 130 Wn.App. 573, 584,123 P.3d 883 (2005), citing Citizens for Mount Vernon v City of 3 Mount Vernon, 133 Wn.2d 861, 874 - 75 P.2d 1208 (1997). 4 The record before the Hearing Examiner is extensive, including nine exhibits and 5 testimony from DCD staff and the applicant. Since the applicant bears the burden to show 6 that each criterion of BMC 20.58.040(d) is established, if the record fails to establish any 7 such criterion, the application must be denied. The Hearing Examiner recommends that the 8 "prudent course" is to have the City Council determine whether the proposed rezone is 9 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and if necessary, remand the application to DCD 10 for further review. However, DCD has already reviewed the application and determined 11 that the application should be denied. The burden is on the applicant during the open - 12 record hearing to present evidence to meet the criteria for a rezone. Since the applicant 13 failed to present such evidence, the Hearing Examiner should recommend that the 14 application for rezone be denied. 15 B. The Hearing Examiner erred in concluding that the meaning of the " *" in the R -10* designation is significant in the adjudication of the application for 16 rezone. 17 The applicant seeks a rezone of his property from NCC to R -10* in order to build 18 three single family houses NCC permits residential housing, but only as part of a mixed - 19 20 use structure with commercial street -level uses, not as a single family house. Therefore, the 21 applicant is not permitted to build single family houses as his property is currently zoned. 22 R -10* and R -10 permit single family houses. The " *" in R -10* indicates that the area is 23 subject to future planning based on a subarea plan; it is a placeholder to provide notice to 24 the public that the uses In R -10* may change in the future The City does not argue that the 25 proposed rezone is prohibited because it would become an R -10* The City's position is 26 that the proposed rezone is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan because the Bremerton's Request for Reconsideration - 3 ROGER A LUBOVICH BREMERTON CITY ATTORNEY 345 6th Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, Washington 98337 Ph--- lAn-A71 91AC C.... 14A A" GILT I Comprehensive Plan has certain growth targets and goals that would be thwarted if single 2 family homes are allowed to be built where a commercial building is intended. 3 The intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the Neighborhood Center is to 4 focus significant portions of new development into high quality urban centers providing services to a surrounding neighborhood in a pedestrian 5 oriented, mixed use environment.... The 20 year Comprehensive Planning horizon for the Haddon Neighborhood Center anticipates a 10% growth 6 with 108 new residents and 35 new jobs by 2024. Since the adoption of the 7 2004 Comprehensive Plan there have been two new businesses established in the NCC comprising of 5 new employees. The area has met 14% of the 8 intended employment growth for the 20 year period. 9 Exhibit 8 at 3 1 The proposed rezone would reduce the amount of property zoned for commercial 11 uses and increase the amount of property zoned for residential uses This would not be 12 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan The change of the use of the applicant's property 13 from commercial to residential is the relevant factor in determining whether the proposed 14 rezone would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Whether the property would be 15 16 designated R -10* or R -10 is not relevant. Therefore, the Hearing Examiner erred in 17 recommending that the City Council interpret the R -10* designation. Whether the 18 proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan may be determined without the 19 benefit of City Council's interpretation of R -10* 20 C The Hearing Examiner erred in concluding that there is insufficient evidenc 21 presented at the hearing to support a recommendation that the rezone application be denied. 22 There is sufficient evidence to support a recommendation that the rezone 23 24 application be denied. An applicant for a site - specific rezone has the burden of showing 25 that each of the four criterion in BMC 20 58 040(d) is met Woods at 584 If the applicant 26 Bremerton's Request for Reconsideration - 4 ROGER A LUBOVICH BREMERTON CITY ATTORNEY 345 6th Street, Suite 600 Bremerton Wa%hmgton 98337 Phnne ' M- A71 -71AI P.m 16"71 -Slhl I fails to establish any one of the four criterion, the application must be denied. The criteria 2 are as follows- 3 Criteria for Approval. The City may grant a site- specific rezone only if it is 4 found that: (1) The rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; 5 (2) The rezone will advance the public health, safety, or welfare, and will not have adverse impacts on adjacent properties; 6 (3) The rezone is necessary because either: (i) Conditions in the immediate vicinity or neighborhood have so markedly changed that it is in the public interest to approve the rezone; or 8 (11) The rezone will correct a zone classification or zone boundary that was inappropriate when established; and 9 (4) The rezone is in the public interest. 10 BMC 20.58.040(d) (emphasis added). 11 As explained above, the City maintains that the proposed rezone is not consistent 12 with the Comprehensive Plan. However, even assuming that the applicant proves that the 13 rezone is consistent, the applicant has not proven any of the other criteria. The applicant 14 15 presented no evidence that the rezone would advance the public health, safety or welfare, 16 and he failed to present any evidence that the rezone would not have adverse impacts on 17 adjacent properties See BMC 20 58.040(d)(2). 18 Moreover, the applicant failed to present any evidence of the necessity of the 19 rezone as required under BMC 20.58.040(d)(3) In fact, the applicant's testimony was that 20 the condition of the neighborhood has not changed in the last 40 years In addition, there 21 was no evidence presented that a zone classification or boundary was inappropriate when it 22 was established. The applicant failed to produce any evidence to support the required 23 24 criterion under BMC 20 58 040(d)(3) 25 The evidence weighs heavily in favor of denial of the application with respect to i 26 the public interest While the applicant provided a few signatures of residents in favor of i Bremerton's Request for Reconsideration - 5 ROGER A LUBOVICH BREMERTON CITY ATTORNEY 345 6th Street, Suite 600 Bremerton, Washington 98337 Ph— lAO-A72 -72d5 F .nx 2An1 172 -5161 1 the rezone, that is not dispositive of the issue The public interest weighed heavily when 2 the Planning Commission and City Council updated the Comprehensive Plan in 2004, 3 designating this neighborhood as the Haddon Neighborhood Center and designating the 4 lots at issue as NCC (i.e. commercial) Exhibit 8 at p. 2. The input of the community, City 5 6 staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council should not be overturned because of 7 a few signatures. The public interest as expressed in the 2004 Comprehensive Plan update g clearly favors a denial of the rezone application. 9 D. The Hearin Examiner erred in finding that DCD.planners "have not had the opportunity to review the application with reference to the current criteria to for approving - rezone". 11 The Hearing Examiner correctly found that the City's application for rezone does 12 not present a word - for -word recitation of the criteria that an applicant must meet for a site - 13 specific rezone as set out in BMC 20 58.040(d). However, the application for rezone 14 15 presents the gist of the criteria in a question format BMC 20.58.040(d) states as follows: 16 Criteria for Approval. The City may grant a site - specific rezone only if it is found that- 17 (1) The rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, (2) The rezone will advance the public health, safety, or welfare, and 18 will not have adverse impacts on adjacent properties; (3) The rezone is necessary because either. 19 (1) Conditions in the immediate vicinity Or neighborhood have so markedly changed that it is in the public interest to approve the rezone; or 20 (ii) The rezone will correct a zone classification or zone boundary 21 that was inappropriate when established; and (4) The rezone is in the public interest 22 BMC 20 58 040(d) 23 24 The application presents questions that address these criteria The first question on 25 the application states "Is the proposed rezone consistent with the Comprehensive Plan ?" 26 This question clearly addresses BMC 20.58.040(d)(1). The second question on the Bremerton's Request for Reconsideration - 6 ROGER A LU13OVICH BREMERTON CITY ATTORNEY 345 6th Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, Washington 98337 Phnnr 7hn.d72 -72dc F— l�f1�72_cl�l I application states, "Is the rezone Justified for one or more of the following reasons. Is it in 2 the public interest to approve the rezone to accommodate needed changes within the 3 immediate vicinity of neighborhood ?" This question clearly addresses BMC 4 20 58.040(d)(3)(i) and 20 58 040(d)(4) The application also asks the question: "Will it 5 6 correct a zone classification or boundary that was inappropriate when established ?" This 7 question clearly addresses BMC 20.58.040(d)(3)(ii). Finally, the application asks, "Is there 8 a public need for the proposed rezone that will clearly benefit the local neighborhood 9 and/or the community of Bremerton ?" This question raises issues set out in BMC 10 20.58.040(2) related to advancing the public health, safety, and welfare and concern of 11 negative impacts on neighboring properties 12 While the application and the staff report address the rezone criteria in question 13 form, the application and the staff report clearly analyze the criteria. Moreover, the 14 15 extensive testimony at the hearing provided additional evidence that DCD in fact analyzed 16 the rezone based on the cntena in BMC 20.58 040(d). The Hearing Examiner erred when 17 it found that DCD did not review the current criteria for a rezone application. Since DCD 18 has reviewed the applicable criteria, there is no reason for recommending a remand to 19 DCD The Hearing Examiner should analyze all of the criteria in BMC 20.58.040(d) based 20 on the record and provide a recommendation to the City Council. 21 E The Hearing Examiner erred in finding that DCD holds the position that the 22 proposed rezone should not occur prior to subarea planning, 23 DCD does not hold the position that the proposed rezone should not occur prior to 24 subarea planning. DCD's position has always been that the applicant must meet the criteria 25 set forth in the Code. DCD's position in its staff report and in testimony at the hearing is 26 G This questions also raises issues related to the public interest requirement of BMC 20 58 040(d)(4) Bremerton's Request for Reconsideration - 7 ROGER A LUBOVICH BREMERTON CITY ATTORNEY 345 6th Street, Suite 600 Bremerton, Washington 9K337 Mint- 1ACI- 171 -71dS 17— Un-A71A I M I that the R -10* designation is a placeholder, providing notice to the public that future 2 subarea planning is contemplated The fact that future subarea planning is intended does 3 not prohibit an otherwise permissible rezone under BMC 20.58.040(d). The Hearing 4 Examiner should not base its decision on this erroneous fact. 5 F. The Hearing Examiner erred in finding that DCD interprets an R -10* 6 designation to be a "de facto moratorium prohibiting any rezone until such 7 time as subarea planning occurs ". 8 As stated in the previous section, DCD staff did not testify or argue that an R -10* 9 designation prohibits a site - specific rezone. If an applicant meets the criteria of BMC 10 20.58 040(d), then a rezone would be approved regardless of the R -10* designation. 11 G. The Hearing Examiner erred in finding that DCD argues that "the fact that 12 the R -10* zone does not appear in Figure 20.40(b) could evidence an intent of the Council to not allow a rezone to that designation" 13 There is no evidence to support the Hearing Examiner's finding that the City 14 15 believes that the City Council could interpret the R -10* designation as disallowing a 16 rezone As stated above, the City reviews a rezone application based on the criteria set 17 forth in the Code A rezone to an R -10* does not, by itself, prohibit a rezone. The Hearing 18 Examiner should not base its decision on this erroneous fact. 19 III. CONCLUSION 20 The Hearing Examiner based its recommendation on errors of law and fact. The 21 Hearing Examiner should reconsider the recommendation, correct the errors of law and 22 fact, and recommend that the rezone application be denied 23 24 25 26 Bremerton's Request for Reconsideration - 8 ROGER A LUBOVICH BREMERTON CITY ATTORNEY 345 6th Streit, Suite 600, Bremerton, Washington 98337 Phnne+ 1A(LA71_?U t=ar 1AILA71A101 I Respectfully submitted this 15 day of March, 2011 2 ROGER A. LUBOVICH 3 Bremerton City Attorney 4 By: - M I �� Mark E. Koont , WSBA #26212 5 Attorney for City of Bremerton 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Bremerton's Request for Reconsideration - 9 ROGER A LUBOVICH BREMERTON CITY ATTORNEY 345 6th Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, Washington 98337 Ahnne IMU71 -71dS FnY 16"TLIlhl March 15, 2011 Theodore Paul Hunter Hearing Examiner Sound Law Center Sent via email tphCaD-soundlawcenter com RE In the Matter of the Application of Bremerton Investment Group, LLC For Approval of a Rezone Dear Mr. Hunter Late yesterday I received notice that the City of Bremerton filed a Request for Reconsideration of your Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations. I don't know if I have the opportunity to respond to their request but submit this letter for your consideration I disagree that there is evidence to support a recommendation that the rezone application be rejected The City admits that a rezone can be approved prior to the sub area planning process It also admits that R -10 is the same at R -10* I am requesting a rezone to R -10 and am not requesting the Comprehensive Plan be revisited R -10 or R -10* is permitted in the NC zoning as noted in the attached Figure 20 40(b). The City is arguing the rezone is not appropriate because it thwarts certain growth targets and goals My answers in my application refute that claim Since the final sub area plan is not finished for this zoning district there is no conclusion that can be drawn that approving this rezone would reduce the amount property zoned for commercial use My property is surrounded on 3 sides by residential uses consistent with R- 10/R -10 *. The City argues in page 4 of their Request that the proposed rezone consistency with the Comp Plan may be determined without the benefit of City Council interpretation and I agree for the reasons stated in this letter, in my response to the original hearing and in my application I submitted the Application for Zone Reclassification as required by the City. That application has 5 questions to which I answered yes. The City says that the questions listed in BMC 20.58.040(d) are all incorporated into the 5 questions they ask in their application They in fact are not The questions are different Although I answered yes to the 5 questions they asked, I could still answer yes to the 4 questions referenced in BMC 20 58 040(d) had they asked those questions. My application affirmatively answered all the questions in the application My rezone should have been granted Should you choose to reconsider, I would urge you to reconsider to recommend approval of my rezone Sincerely, of, Victor F. Targett Manager Bremerton Investment Group, LLC -� lt. x yE� '& r: 1 ,� � • 6� � �n a,��{+ .�s °s�'�` az s � Ff*'r,`.' 4z'. ri c,-fn. �s� d t a t,::f �yi•: }ti .zt 4 .t _ al :.I;t.:T: . iri l ,tt;ir t 1$ f fl�'it iie {�t S7ct� .Nr5�� t. M irwtrtM�i. M :?I M } .1�« :..r .:s- i aal 6 �'..1�1• -: C 5!i i 1� ini itu: '[tea t;wii : CJ y. {. t t :- iiil t ' ,•i'ti11 ::1t �5f /i:! l t 'f ,:�:I:i iF � r:.a :tt•:^7� �i:i F': r:; 1 tr ' ti' 1, 71 1 1� 1 k / S_ 'r »F.F.t:i:�i�l:l • "i r; ES i� .FFf t;f Ftt i� = t 1:-tt; [ '. falls. [ j �+ kf:l -i �:l�t: lo t, iil ':i .: x m od em s l� r Fef Y... 'f...;.�;,tit -n a: `iri '::.�` t .,, rp. : , ::!tt • - a: a. if a.: 1 •5f!:;i.A iii i (t ?i l �i°:� ai t �f t /� V�o- tt �� FFnVUSis,a :: F; f A F k t ai•G- U A o { :-aF;u (t' 01 b i .pi:; � nr nta .raii:*I,tPr•r a:uw; c ' fr. Fa,u:. !it Cki;no:Y�l :.1 71 k! :a t ,a BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF BREMERTON In the Matter of the Application of ) No BP 10 -00066 Bremerton Investment Group, LLC ) DECISION ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION For Approval of a Rezone TO Mr Victor F Targett, on behalf of Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Applicant Via Facsimile to 360 - 479 -7255 Mr Mark E Koontz, Attorney for City Via Facsimile to 360 - 473 -5161 Ms Janet Lunceford, City of Bremerton Via Facsimile to 360 - 473 -5278 [For file] BACKGROUND On March 5, 2011, the Hearing Examiner issued a recommendation on a request to rezone property owned by the Applicant from NCC to R -10 *. The property is in an area designated as "NC" in the City's Comprehensive Plan The recommendation notes that the Zoning Code does not include an R -10* designation, and that zone is not listed on the chart adopted by the City Council which defines which zones are consistent with specified Comprehensive Plan designations. The Hearing Examiner recommended that the City Council make a determination of whether an R -10* zone is consistent with the NC designation If the Council determined that it was, the Hearing Examiner recommended that the application be remanded to the Department of Community Development for analysis of the remaining criteria for review of a rezone request, as the criteria used by DCD were different from those adopted by the City Council If the Council decided an R -10* zone is not consistent with the NC plan designation, the rezone request would be denied by the Council and the inquiry would end j On March 15, 2011, the City filed a Request for Reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation On March 15, 2011, the Applicant submitted a response to the City's request The Hearing Examiner issued a Notice of Request for Reconsideration stating that the Hearing Examiner would review the record and take further action as authorized in BMC 2 13 120 i After review of the entire record, including transcribed testimony and consideration of the Motion of the City and the Applicant Response, the Hearing Examiner issues the following I Decision on Motion for Reconsideration I Decision On Motion For Reconsideration RECEIVED City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner C dyof Bremerton i Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BPIO -00066 1 APR 0 4 2011 Pa I of Deportment of AwAcHmemr t=- 'numtyDevelopment SUMMARY OF DECISION The Hearing Examiner has deep respect for the professionalism of the City Attorney, and takes very seriously its allegations of errors Therefore, he carefully reviewed the City's three allegations of errors of fact and four allegations of errors of law He did this by reading the City's motion several times, the response to the motion from the Applicant, the exhibits submitted during the hearing, and transcriptions of testimony given at the hearing The alleged errors appear to be misunderstandings of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation as the Hearing Examiner finds no support in the record for changing a fact or re- interpreting the law as suggested by the City The Hearing Examiner regrets the misunderstanding, and will provide a response to each allegation of the City in hopes of clarifying the legal and factual basis for his recommendation to the City Council Ultimately, an application for a rezone must be decided by the City Council. The role of the Hearing Examiner is to provide a record to the Council and a recommendation based upon the record for Council review Here, the record fails to provide a sufficient basis for making a determination on whether the request for an R -10* zone would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation City ordinances do not define an R -10* designation except for a legend on the Zoning Map which suggests areas zoned R -10* may be rezoned following completion of a subarea plan The R -10* zone does not appear in the chart adopted by the City Council which defines which zones are consistent with specified Comprehensive Plan designations Absent this information, the Hearing Examiner recommended that the City Council determine if a rezone request from NCC to R -10* in an area designated as NC can be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan when no subarea plan has yet been prepared REVIEW OF MOTION City's Motion The City's Request for Reconsideration alleges three errors of law and four errors of fact The City alleges the following errors of law 1) A specific allegation that the Hearing Examiner erred in deciding that the meaning of the " *" in the R -10* designation is significant in the adjudication of the application for rezone 2) A general allegation that there is insufficient evidence presented at the hearing to support a recommendation that the rezone application be rejected' 3) An allegation that the Hearing Examiner erroneously shifted the burden of proof from the applicant to the City 2 ' The Hearing Examiner recommended refection only if the City Council determined the R -10* zoning designation is mconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the Hearing Examiner recommended a remand to evaluate the additional criteria in the code if the Council determined it could be consistent Decision On Motion For Reconsideration City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BPIO -00066 Page 2 of 8 i The City alleges the following errors of fact 3 1) That the Hearing Examiner erred in noting that DCD planners "have not had the opportunity to review the application with reference to the current criteria for approving rezone " 2) That the Hearing Examiner erred in stating that DCD holds the position that the proposed rezone should not occur prior to subarea planning 3) That the Hearing Examiner erred in noting that DCD interprets an R -10* designation to be a "de facto moratorium prohibiting any rezone until such time as subarea planning occurs " 4) That the Hearing Examiner erred in stating that DCD argues that "the fact that the R -10* zone does not appear in Figure 20 40(b) could evidence an intent of the Council to not allow a rezone to that designation " Applicant Response The Applicant submitted a response to the City's Request for Reconsideration by letter dated March 16 The Applicant states he disagrees with the City's motion, and argues that there is evidence to support approval of the rezone request Specifically, the Applicant points out that the City admits that a rezone can be approved prior to a subarea plan and that an R -10 zone is the same as an R -10* zone as both are permitted in the NC designated area under the Comprehensive Plan The Applicant further argues that, since zoning is not complete for this subarea, there can be no credible argument by the City that approval of the rezone application would reduce the amount of land designated for commercial development The Applicant agrees that no further City Council interpretation of the Comprehensive Plan is needed, as the City can choose to zone other areas in the neighborhood as commercial even while approving a rezone to R -10 of the Applicant's property Finally, the Applicant argues that the criteria evaluated by the City are not the same as those in the code but that he could comply with those in the code as well Authority of Hearing Examiner Section 2 13 120 of the Bremerton Municipal Code describes the role of the Hearing Examiner when he receives a Request for Reconsideration It provides that the "the Administrative Hearing Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he or she deems proper 2 The Hearing Examiner did not address the burden of proof explicitly in his recommendation, but the City apparently believes it was inappropriately saddled with this burden The Hearing Examiner acknowledges that an applicant always has the burden of proof to demonstrate an application should be approved 3 Curiously, the City does not cite to any Findings of the Hearing Examiner when alleging errors of fact The "Findings" section of the recommendation is where the Hearing Examiner sets forth factual determinations It appears that the alleged `errors of fact' are disagreements with the Hearing Examiner's interpretation of information presented at the hearing This is addressed in this decision under `Reconsideration of the Record' Decision On Motion For Reconsideration City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BP10 -00066 Page 3 of 8 If a request for reconsideration is accepted, a decision is not final until after a decision on reconsideration is issued " The Hearing Examiner has determined that it would be fair and reasonable to both the City and the Applicant to review the entire record following the request for reconsideration to determine if there is ment to the allegations of errors of law and fact Therefore, each allegation is addressed below REVIEW & RECONSIDERATION OF THE RECORD Response to Alleged Errors of Law Alleged Error 1 -- Burden of Proof The City admits as to its first allegation that the Hearing Examiner does not make any legal conclusion about the burden of proof However, the City argues that the potential for a remand inappropriately places this burden on the City The City misunderstands the reasoning behind the potential for a remand The purpose of a remand would be to provide the professional staff of the City an opportunity to address the criteria for a rezone specified by the City Council, which must be relied on by the City Council when it approves or denies a rezone request The City Council adopted specific criteria for review of a rezone request in the 2005 Zoning Code The City admits that it did not analyze the criteria specified in BMC 20 58 040(d) when reviewing the request for a rezone, but argues that it presented the `gist' of these criteria in its application and in its staff report The criteria adopted by the City Council and those used by city staff to review the rezone application are not the same The Code provides four criteria with two sub - sections, the application and staff report list five criteria with four sub - sections Although the City argues in its motion that these are essentially identical, some of the criteria listed in the application and staff report are markedly different from those in the Code For example, one criterion used by the City to analyze this application asks if there is "a public need for the proposed Rezone that will clearly benefit the local neighborhood and/or the community of Bremerton" There is nothing similar to this in the Code Similarly, the Code criteria ask if the proposed rezone will "advance the public health, or welfare, and not have adverse impacts on adjacent properties" The criteria used in the application and in the staff report say nothing about an impact on adjacent properties These and other differences can be clearly seen when comparing the criteria 4 4 BMC 20 58 040 (d) presently reads "The City may grant a site - specific rezone only if it is found that (1) The rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, (2) The rezone will advance the public health, safety, or welfare, and will not have adverse impacts on adjacent properties, (3) The rezone is necessary because either (i) Conditions in the immediate vicinity or neighborhood have so markedly changed that it is in the public interest to approve the rezone, or (n) The rezone will correct a zone classification or zone boundary that was inappropriate when established, and (4) The rezone is in the public interest " The criteria recited in the Application and Staff Report read Decision On Motion For Reconsideration City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BPI 0-00066 Page 4 of 8 The Hearing Examiner recommended that the City Council remand the application to the agency charged with analysis of the rezone application to determine consistency with these criteria, but only if the City Council determines that the rezone request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan The reason for this is that any findings and conclusions by the City Council on the rezone application based upon the `gist' of criteria specified in its own code would put any decision of the Council at risk for reversal if reviewed by the Courts The chance of an appeal to Superior Court of a City Council decision increases significantly if a decision adverse to an applicant is not supported by reference to the specific criteria in the City Code The Hearing Examiner did not commit an error of law when recommending that the City Council remand the application for review consistent with the criteria in the Code if it finds that the application is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Alleged Error 2 --The Significance of the* The City argues in its motion that the Hearing Examiner erred when he decided that only the City Council can determine the meaning of the on the R -10 zoning designation and that it is important that it do so The City argues that "whether the property would be designated R -10* or R -10 is not relevant" Request for Reconsideration, page 4, lines 15 -16 This statement in its motion differs significantly from the City's statements in its staff report submitted at the hearing The staff report concludes that the R -10* zoning designation is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, while the R -10 zoning designation is consistent Page 2 of the staff report states that The requested rezone to R -10* is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Although Figure 20 40(b) identifies Low Density Residential (R -10) and Neighborhood Center (NCC) as consistent with Neighborhood Centers (NC), the Low Density Residential has two zoning classifications, R -10 and R -10* Therefore, R -10 and NCC is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan but R -10* is not Staff Report, page 2 1 Is the proposed Rezone consistent with the Comprehensive Plan 2 Is the Rezone ,justified for one or more of the following reasons • Is it in the public interest to approve the Rezone to accommodate needed changes within the immediate vicinity or neighborhood? • Will it correct a zone classification or boundary that was inappropriate when established • Is it a planned step in a phasing process to gradually bring zoning into consistency with the 20 -year Comprehensive Plan when appropriate • Will it place or remove an overlay zoning designation without affecting the underlying zoning designation without affecting the underlying zonmg 3 Is there a public need for the proposed Rezone that will clearly benefit the local neighborhood and/or the community of Bremerton 4 Are all essential public facilities and services available and adequate, or can be made available, to serve the types and levels of development permitted in the requested zone 5 Will the area being proposed for rezoning become part of a larger zoning district or form a new district which will not be considered an isolated "spot zone" 9 Decision On Motion For Reconsideration City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BP10 -00066 Page 5 of 8 It is precisely this confusion about the meaning of R -10* that prompted the Hearing Examiner to recommend that the City Council determine if the absence of R -10* from Figure 20 40(b), which lists those zones consistent with comprehensive plan designations, was intentional or an oversight It is presumed that any action of the City Council is taken for a reason It would be inappropriate for the Hearing Examiner to speculate as to why the Council did not include the R- 10* designation on Figure 20 40(b) The Hearing Examiner did not commit an error of law when recommending that the City Council determine the reasons for the R -10* zone and whether its absence from Figure 20 40(b) means that it would not be consistent with the NC plan designation. Alleged Error 3 -- Insufficient Evidence The City alleges that the Hearing Examiner erred when he did not find sufficient evidence to recommend denial of the rezone The City argues that there is sufficient evidence to support denial of the rezone request In his recommendation, the Hearing Examiner concluded that there was no evidence in the record on what the City Council intended when it adopted the R -10* zoning designation The R- 10* designation appears nowhere in the code, but is on the 2005 Zoning Map with a reference to a map legend that states "future adjustment to zoning (is) anticipated upon completion of subarea planning " While the City now argues that the R -10 designation is the same as the R -10* designation, the Hearing Examiner is of the opinion that only the City Council can determine if an asterisk on a zoning designation really has no meaning whatsoever There is insufficient evidence in the record for the Hearing Examiner to make a determination as to whether the R- 10* designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan The Hearing Examiner did not commit an error of law when recommending that the City Council determine if the R -10* designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as only it can do so Response to Alleged Errors of Fact It should be noted that the City does not cite to any errors in the Hearing Examiner's Findings in its motion for reconsideration The Findings of the Hearing Examiner are his factual determinations upon which he bases Conclusions The City alleges four `errors of fact', but these allegations appear to focus on statements in the Hearing Examiner's conclusions where he i discusses the reasons for his recommendation Therefore, because the City does not cite to any error in any finding, the Hearing Examiner determines that he comrnitted no errors of fact in lus recommendation However, as a courtesy to the City he will respond to each allegation of the City in an effort to clarify the reasoning in his recommendation Alleged Error 1 -- Opportunity for DCD Review The City states that the criteria used by DCD to review the application, while not identical to those in the Code, capture the gist of the Code criteria adopted by the City Council However, as discussed above, the criteria used by DCD jdiffer in some significant ways from those adopted by the Council It is the Council that makes a final decision on a rezone application and it should have the benefit of the analysis of the agency charged with review of rezone applications with reference to the criteria the Council adopted and must rely upon when making a final decision There was no error in recommending a remand to i I Decision On Motion For Reconsideration City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BPIO -00066 Page 6 of 8 i i allow DCD to do this if the Council finds the R -10* rezone request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan If the Council determines that the R -10* request is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation, the Council's inquiry would end and the application would be denied Alleged Error 2 -- DCD's Position on a Rezone Prior to Subarea Planning The City's position at the hearing was that the R -10* designation is a `placeholder' for those areas within Neighborhood Centers where future zoning changes are anticipated The City testified that twelve centers exist, and that five subarea plans are underway The City testified that the R -10* designation is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan because the R -10* designation "is for future analysis through a subarea plan " The Hearing Examiner interpreted these statements of the City — that R -10* is a placeholder and that there would be future analysis of that zone through a subarea plan — as a statement that no rezone could occur as requested by the Applicant without completion of a subarea plan If the Hearing Examiner was incorrect in this interpretation, the City Council can correct it upon review of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation The Hearing Examiner did not commit an error of fact, but may have misinterpreted the City's position at the rezone hearing. If so, no harm has occurred as the Council can correct any misinterpretation upon review of the recommendation Alleged Error 3 -- DCD's Interpretation of the R -10* Designation The City expresses concern about the Hearing Examiner's comment that an R -10* designation may be a de facto moratorium until a subarea plan is prepared The Hearing Examiner did not attribute this statement to anyone in the City, but merely offered it as one interpretation of the asterisk on the R -10 designation The statement, in context, reads "There is no legislative history offered that can help determine if the asterisk on the R -10 zone is intended to be a de facto moratorium prohibiting any rezone until such time as subarea planning occurs, or if it is intended as a `heads up' that the zoning may change " Hearing Examiner Recommendation, page 6 The City did not take this position; it was put forth as only one possible interpretation suggested by the Hearing Examiner The Hearing Examiner did not commit an error of fact as alleged by the City Alleged Error 4 --The Meaning of the Absence of R -10* in Figure 20 40(b) In its motion, the City states that "there is no evidence to support the Hearing Examiner's fording that the City believes that the City Council could interpret the R -10* designation as disallowing a rezone " City's Motion, page 8 The Hearing Examiner did not make this finding In the ' recommendation, it is pointed out that the R -10* zoning designation does not appear in Figure 20 40(b) and that this could evidence an intent of the Council to not allow a rezone to that designation But the fact that it does not appear (which is undisputed by the City) did not lead 1 the Hearing Examiner to conclude that a rezone to an R -10* designation is disallowed Rather, the Hearing Examiner clearly states that only the City Council can determine which zoning designations are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan when there is lack of clarity in the code for making this determination His recommendation is that the Council decide whether a rezone request from NCC to R -10* is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as it is the only body Decision On Motion For Reconsideration City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BPIO -00066 Page 7 of 8 i given authority to do so The Hearing Examiner did not commit an error of fact as alleged by the City DECISION ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Following review of the City's Request for Reconsideration, the response received from the Applicant, and a review of the entire record the Hearing Examiner has determined that there were no errors of law and no errors of fact in his recommendation to the City Council Therefore, the Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED The recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be forwarded to the City Council for its decision consistent with the criteria established by the Council in BMC 20 58 040 DECIDED this day of March 2011 - 2 THEODORE PAUL HUNTER Hearing Examiner Sound Law Center Decision On Motion For Reconsideration City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner Bremerton Investment Group, LLC, Rezone, No BPIO -00066 Page 8 of 8 DATE SUBMITTED March 16, 2011 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 7A SUBJECT: Pacific Avenue Improvements Committee Meeting Date- ft er 1, a3, a t from 6` Street to I I' Street — Underground COUNCIL MEETING Date- A g 6 ( ;v, 201 Conversion Department- PW &U Presenter: Larry Matel Phone: X5342 SUMMARY: The proposed improvements on Pacific Avenue between 6` Street and I 1 ` Street are part of an urban redevelopment of Pacific Avenue that includes sustainability and the latest in environmental practices with landscaping and scenic enhancement. As it is deemed vital for scenic enhancement, the underground conversion of the overhead lines will provide tangible benefits to this goal The underground conversion will be performed according to Puget Sound Energy (PSE) Tariff G Schedule 74. ATTACHMENTS: Council Summary, Design Cost Estimate FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount). The total cost for completion will be approximately $100,000 coming from the Project budget. APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR CITY ATTORNEY: FINANCE DIRECTOR MAYOR- COMMITTEE CHAIR ` • - U y� COUNCIL PRESIDENT CONSENT AGENDA ❑ GENERAL BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING ❑ RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve proposed Schedule 74 Conversion with Puget Sound Energy and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the Design ;; Agreement p dAcupAntspela ty 111:1.112:&: 11112011: COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action COUNCIL SUMMARY PACIFIC AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS: 6 TH STREET TO 11 STREET UNDERGROUND CONVERSION OF OVERHEAD LINES Summary The proposed improvements on Pacific Avenue between 6 tH Street and 11 Street are part of an urban redevelopment of Pacific Avenue that includes sustainability and the latest in environmental practices with landscaping and scenic enhancement As it is deemed vital for scenic enhancement, the underground conversion of the overhead lines will provide tangible benefits to this goal The underground conversion will be performed according to Puget Sound Energy (PSE) Tariff G Schedule 74 To complete the Schedule 74 Conversion, the City will be required to initiate an agreement with PSE for design and construction of the underground infrastructure The agreement is a 60-40 split between PSE and the City for costs associated with completion of the work Fiscal Summary The City received an initial cost estimate for design of the improvements, in the amount of $23,194 37, of which the City's share will be $9,277 78 An overall rough estimate for the project including design and implementation is approximately $250,000, of which the City would be responsible for approximately $100,000 The overall City cost for completion of the underground conversion will be funded from the project budget of $450,000 i PUGET SOUND ENERGY The Energy To Do Great Things March 1, 2011 Mr Eduardo Aban, PE City of Bremerton 3027 Olympus Drive Bremerton, WA 98310 Office 360 -473 -2317 Fax 360 -473 -5398 Eduardo Aban @ci bremerton wa us Re: PSE Sch 74 Conversion Design Cost Estimate Proposal for Project Order #101069305 for the City of Bremerton on Pacific Ave. between 6 th and 11 Streets Dear Eduardo Puget Sound Energy's (PSE) proposal for converting overhead primary and secondary power lines to underground facilities for the above referenced project These items are for your review and approval, PSE's (A) estimate to perform the Design Work for this underground conversion project (the Design Cost Estimate), and (B) proposed schedule to complete the Design Work (the Design Schedule). The estimate is based on the scope of work developed by PSE for conversion of the existing overhead electrical distribution facilities within the conversion area Below is PSE/Potelco response that includes the information that we currently have available that was provided by the City of Bremerton and Parametrix The items listed below are the major factors that have been requested from PSE There are a few assumptions and contingencies as shown below 1 City of Bremerton Project Description Pacific Ave from 6 th St to 11 St including adjacent areas necessary to support conversion of PSE's electric distribution system 2 PSE 100% opportunity None 3 Schedule This Design Quote is valid for 90 calendar days from the date of this letter Per the contractual agreement Preliminary Design (fit -no -fit) with any necessary additional Operating Rights, submitted to the City within 25 business days after Notice to Proceed is provided The final design is to be submitted to the City within 65 business days after the City approves the preliminary design It is noted that the City has requested that the design be completed and submitted by April 8th 2011 4 This design estimate is based on City plans that were delivered on 2/16/11 and are referred to as 30% They are very preliminary 5 Installation of Vault and Ducts The City plans to install the duct and vaults PSE Design Cost Estimate for Schedule 74 * City of Bremerton Pacific Ave from & St to 11 "' St in Bremerton, Washington Puget Sound Energy * 6522 Kitsap Way * Bremerton, WA 98312 * 360 -475 -7020 6 Assumptions and Contingencies • This proposal is to provide two plan sets that meet PSE specifications It does not include additional design or information to meet requirements of others or review of PSE design that may be incorporated into other's plan sets 7 Vaults that are flush with grade will be placed in the sidewalk and vaults with surface mounted equipment will be placed outside the sidewalk area 8 Potelco Design Quote is $23,194 37 with added sales tax, PSE Overheads & PSE charges it comes to $30,800.00. If this cost estimate meets with your project budget please provide PSE with a formal Notice To Proceed with the design phase of the conversion project Please don't hesitate to contact me at 360 -475 -7020 if you have any question or concerns Sincerely, r Thomas M Brobst Municipal Liaison Manager Puget Sound Energy 360 -475 -7020 Cc T Quann PSE Design Cost Estimate for Schedule 74 * City of Bremerton Pacific Ave from 6th St to 11 St in Bremerton, Washington Puget Sound Energy * 6522 Kitsap Way * Bremerton, WA 98312 * 360 -475 -7020 SCHEDULE 74 UNDERGROUND CONVERSION Project Design Agreement Project Name Pacific Avenue Improvements 6 th Street to 11 Street Project Number 10216 THIS Agreement, dated as of this day of , 2011, is made by and between City of Bremerton, a City (the "Government Entity"), and PUGET SOUND ENERGY, Inc, a Washington Corporation (the "Company ") RECITALS A The Company is a public service company engaged in the sale and distribution of electric energy and, pursuant to its franchise or other rights from the Government Entity, currently locates its electric distribution facilities within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Government Entity B The Government Entity is considering conversion of the Company's existing overhead electric distribution system to a comparable underground electric distribution, as more specifically described in the Scope of Work (as defined in paragraph 2, below) furnished to the Company by the Government Entity (the "Conversion Project') C The Government Entity has requested that the Company perform certain engineering design services and otherwise work cooperatively with the Government Entity to develop a mutually acceptable Project Plan (as defined in paragraph 6, below) for the Conversion Project, in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement (the "Design Work") D The Government Entity and the Company wish to execute this written contract in accordance with Schedule 74 of the Company's Electric Tariff G ("Schedule 74") to govern the Design Work for the Conversion Project AGREEMENT The Government Entity and the Company therefore agree as follows 1 Unless specifically defined otherwise herein, all terms defined in Schedule 74 shall have the same meanings when used in this Agreement 2 The Government Entity shall, within ten (10) business days after the date of this Agreement, provide the Company with a written scope of work for the Conversion Project which includes, among other things, (a) a reasonably detailed description of the scope of the work required for the Conversion Project, (b) a list of the key milestone dates for the Conversion Project, (c) reasonably detailed drawings showing any associated planned improvements to the Public Thoroughfare, and (d) a statement as to whether the Government Entity desires to install the ducts and vaults for the Conversion Project (the "Scope of Work'). The Government Entity shall provide the Company two (2) hard copies of the Scope of Work and a copy of the relevant electronic file(s) in a mutually agreed electronic format 3 Within ten (10) business days of its receipt of the Scope of Work, the Company shall prepare and submit to the Government Entity (a) a reasonably detailed, good faith estimate of the cost to perform the Design Work (the "Design Cost Estimate'), and (b) a proposed schedule for completion of the Design Agreement, Attachment "A" to Schedule 74, Page 1 [Pacific Avenue Improvements 6 th Street —11 Street] Design Work which, to the extent reasonably practicable, reflects the applicable key milestone dates specified in the Scope of Work and provides for completion of the Design Work within ninety (90) business days from the date the Company receives the Government Entity's notice to proceed under paragraph 5, below (the "Design Schedule") The proposed Design Cost Estimate and the proposed Design Schedule shall be based upon the then - current Scope of Work Unless otherwise specified in the Scope of Work, the Design Work shall not include negotiation or acquisition of third party property rights but shall include preliminary planning between the Company and the Government Entity regarding their respective obligations for negotiating and acquiring third party property rights 4 Within ten (10) business days after the Government Entity's receipt of the proposed Design Cost Estimate and the proposed Design Schedule from the Company, the Government Entity and the Company shall meet in order to (a) review the proposed Design Cost Estimate, (b) review the proposed Design Schedule, (c) review the Scope of Work, and (d) make any changes necessary to create a final Scope of Work, final Design Cost Estimate, and final Design Schedule that are reasonably acceptable to both parties If the parties are unable to agree upon a final version of the Scope of Work, Design Cost Estimate, and/or Design Schedule, then either party may, by written notice to the other party, submit the matter for resolution pursuant to the dispute resolution procedures in paragraph 16, below. The final Scope of Work, Design Cost Estimate and Design Schedule, once determined in accordance with this paragraph 4, may thereafter be changed or amended only in accordance with the change procedures set forth in paragraph 13, below 5 The Government Entity shall, within ten (10) business days after determination of the final of the Scope of Work, Design Cost Estimate, and Design Schedule, issue (a) a written notice to proceed which shall delineate the final Scope of Work, Design Cost Estimate, and Design Schedule, or (b) a written notice to terminate this Agreement without cost to the Government Entity if the Government Entity terminates this Agreement, the costs incurred by the Company in preparing and submitting the Design Cost Estimate and the Design Schedule shall not be reimbursable to the Company, and the rights and obligations of the parties under this Agreement shall be terminated in their entirety and without liability to either party 6 Following the Company's receipt of the notice to proceed, and within the applicable time period specified in the Design Schedule, the Company shall, with the cooperation and assistance of the Government Entity as outlined in this Agreement, prepare a project plan for the Conversion Project (the "Protect Plan") which shall include, among other things, the following (a) a detailed description of the work that is required to be performed by each party and any third party in connection with the Conversion Project (the "Construction Work'), (b) the applicable requirements, drawings, and specifications for the Construction Work, (c) a description of any operating and other property rights that are required to be obtained by each party for the Conversion Project (and the requirements and specifications with respect thereto), (d) a detailed estimate of the costs to be incurred by each party in its performance of the Construction Work, and (e) a detailed schedule for completing the Construction Work (including, without limitation, the dates for delivery of the ducts and vaults and other materials for use at the site of the Construction Work) 7 The Government Entity shall be responsible for coordinating the Design Work with all other design work to be performed in connection with the Conversion Project and any associated planned improvements to the Public Thoroughfare The parties shall work together in an effort to mitigate the costs of the Conversion Project to each party, including, without limitation, identifying ways to accommodate the facilities of the Company to be installed as part of the Conversion Project within the Public Thoroughfare 8 Within the applicable time period specified in the Design Schedule, the Company shall prepare and submit to the Government Entity a proposed initial draft of the Project Plan The parties understand and acknowledge that the proposed Project Plan submitted by the Company shall be preliminary in nature and shall not include, without limitation, information required to be supplied by the Design Agreement, Attachment "A" to Schedule 74, Page 2 [Pacific Avenue improvements 6 th Street —11 Street] Government Entity (e.g., scope and estimate of the cost of the Construction Work to be performed by the Government Entity) 9 Within the applicable time period specified in the Design Schedule, the Government Entity shall (a) review the proposed Project Plan submitted by the Company, (b) complete any information required to be supplied by the Government Entity, (c) make any changes required to conform the proposed Project Plan to the Scope of Work and this Agreement, and (d) return the amended Project Plan to the Company 10 Within the applicable time period specified in the Design Schedule, the Company shall review the amended Project Plan submitted by the Government Entity and notify the Government Entity in writing of either the Company's acceptance of, or the Company's specific objections to, the amended Project Plan if the Company makes any objection to the amended Project Plan, and the parties are unable to resolve the objections and mutually agree upon the Project Plan prior to the final design date specified in the Design Schedule, then either party may, by written notice to the other party, submit the matter for resolution pursuant to the dispute resolution procedures in paragraph 16, below The Project Plan, as mutually agreed upon by the parties or established through the dispute resolution process, shall be attached to and incorporated in a Project Construction Agreement substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Construction Agreement") which is to be signed by the parties prior to commencement of the Construction Work 11 The parties intend and agree that the Design Work and the Project Plan in its final form shall conform to the following requirements (a) The Project Plan shall, if requested by the Government Entity in its initial Scope of Work, specify that the Government Entity shall install the ducts and vaults for the Conversion Project, provided that (i) the parties mutually agree upon and set forth in the Project Plan (A) the costs of such installation work to be included in the Cost of Conversion, and (B) the specifications and standards applicable to such installation work, and (ii) such installation work is accomplished by the Government Entity in accordance with the applicable design and construction specifications provided by the Company and set forth in the Project Plan (b) Each estimate of the costs to be incurred by a party shall, at a minimum, be broken down by (i) the design and engineering costs, (iQ property and related costs, including any costs of obtaining operating rights, and (iii) construction costs, including and listing separately inspection, labor, materials, and equipment (c) All facilities of the Company installed as part of the Conversion Project shall be located, and all related property and operating rights shall be obtained, in the manner set forth in the applicable provisions of Schedule 74 The Project Plan shall describe in detail the location of such facilities, any related property and operating rights required to be obtained, and the relative responsibilities of the parties with respect thereto (d) The schedule set forth in the Project Plan for completing the Construction Work shall include, at a minimum, milestone time periods for completion of the Trenching, installation of ducts and vaults, the construction and removal of any Temporary Service, and the removal of overhead facilities (e) The Project Plan may include the specification of work and requirements for Government- Requested Upgrades and Company - Initiated Upgrades, provided, however, that the costs incurred by the Company with respect to the design and engineering of Company - Initiated Upgrades shall not be included in the costs reimbursable to the Company under this Agreement or the Construction Agreement For purposes of the foregoing, (Q the term "Government - Requested Upgrade" shall mean any feature of the Underground Distribution System which is Design Agreement, Attachment "A" to Schedule 74, Page 3 [Pacific Avenue Improvements 6th Street —11 Street] requested by the Government Entity and is not reasonably required to make the Underground Distribution System comparable to the overhead distribution system being replaced,'and (u) the term "Company- Indiated Upgrade" shall mean any feature of the Underground Distribution System which is required by the Company and is not reasonably required to make the Underground Distribution System comparable to the overhead distribution system being replaced For purposes of subparagraph (ii), above, a "comparable" system shall include, unless the parties otherwise agree, the number of empty ducts (not to exceed two (2), typically having a diameter of 6" or less) of such diameter and number as may be specified and agreed upon in the final Scope of Work necessary to replicate the load - carrying capacity (system amperage class) of the overhead system being replaced For purposes of subparagraph (), above, any empty ducts installed at the request of the Government Entity shall be a Govemment- Requested Upgrade (f) The Protect Plan shall set forth all specifications, design standards and other requirements for the Construction Worts and the Conversion Project, including, but not limited to, the following (i) applicable federal and state safety and electric codes and standards, (r) applicable construction and other standards of the Company, and (ii) applicable street design and other standards of the Government Entity which are in effect as of the commencement of the Conversion Project 12 Upon request of the Government Entity, and in any event at the times specified in the Design Schedule, the Company shall provide periodic reports which compare the actual costs of the Design Work incurred to that point in time to the Design Cost Estimate, as changed or amended in accordance with paragraph 13, below Further, if at any time the Company reasonably expects that the actual cost of the Design Work will exceed the Design Cost Estimate, as changed or amended in accordance with paragraph 13, below, the Company shall notify the Government Entity immediately Upon receipt of the Company's notice, the Government Entity may, at its option, (a) notify the Company in writing that this Agreement is terminated, or (b) request a reasonably detailed explanation supported by documentation (reasonably satisfactory to the Government Entity) to establish that the actual costs in excess of the Design Cost Estimate are - (i) reasonable, (h) consistent with the Scope of Worts, and (ii) consistent with sound engineering practices If the Government Entity requests an explanation, the Government Entity shall, within ten (10) business days after receipt of the explanation, (a) change the Scope of Work in accordance with paragraph 13, below, or (b) direct the Company to continue with the Design Work without a change in the Scope of Work, but reserving to the Government Entity the right to dispute the reasonableness of the costs to be paid the Company under paragraph 14, below, in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures in paragraph 16, below, or (c) direct the Company to discontinue performing the Design Work pending resolution, pursuant to paragraph 16, below, of any dispute regarding the reasonableness of the costs, in which event the Design Schedule will be adjusted to reflect the delay, or (d) notify the Company in writing that this Agreement is terminated Design Agreement, Attachment "A" to Schedule 74, Page 4 [Pacific Avenue Improvements a Street —11 Street] In the event the Government Entity terminates this Agreement or discontinues the performance of the Design Work under subparagraph (c), above, for more than ninety (90) days, the Government Entity shall pay the Company for all costs incurred by the Company in its performance of the Design Work prior to the date the Company receives the Government Entity's notice of termination, plus any costs incurred by the Company for materials and other items ordered or procured by the Company with the prior authorization of the Government Entity in order to meet the schedule for the Conversion Project The foregoing payment obligation shall survive any termination of this Agreement 13 (a) Either party may, at any time, by written notice thereof to the other party, request changes to the Scope of Work (a "Request for Change") No Request for Change shall be effective and binding upon the parties unless signed by an authorized representative of each party If any approved Request for Change would cause an increase in the cost of, or the time required for, the performance of any part of the Design Work, an equitable adjustment in the Design Cost Estimate and the Design Schedule shall be made to reflect such increase The parties shall negotiate in good faith with the objective of agreeing in writing on a mutually acceptable equitable adjustment If the parties are unable to agree upon the terms of the equitable adjustment, either party may submit the matter for resolution pursuant to the dispute resolution procedures in paragraph 16, below Notwithstanding any dispute or delay in reaching agreement or arriving at a mutually acceptable equitable adjustment, each party shall, if requested by the other party, proceed with the Design Work in accordance with the Request for Change Any such request to proceed must be accompanied by a written statement setting forth the requesting party's reasons for rejecting the proposed equitable adjustment of the other party (b) The Design Cost Estimate and/or the Design Schedule shall be equitably adjusted from time to time to reflect any change in the costs or time required to perform the Design Work to the extent such change is caused by (i) any Force Majeure Event under paragraph 17, below, (i) the discovery of any condition within the Conversion Area which affects the scope, cost, schedule or other aspect of the Design Work and was not known by or disclosed to the affected party prior to the date of this Agreement, or (ii) any change or inaccuracy in any assumptions regarding the scope, cost, schedule or other aspect of the Design Work which are expressly identified by the parties in the final Scope of Work Upon the request of either party, the parties will negotiate in good faith with the objective of agreeing in writing on a mutually acceptable equitable adjustment If, at any time thereafter, the parties are unable to agree upon the terms of the equitable adjustment, either party may submit the matter for resolution pursuant to the dispute resolution provisions in paragraph 16, below 14 Upon completion of the Design Work (i e , the date on which the Project Plan is final under paragraph 10, above, either by mutual agreement of the parties or as established through the dispute resolution procedures), the Government Entity shall pay the Company all actual, reasonable costs to the Company for the Design Work (which, if disputed in good faith by the Government Entity, may be submitted by either party for resolution pursuant to the dispute resolution provisions in paragraph 16, below), plus any costs incurred by the Company for materials and other items ordered by the Company with the prior authorization of the Government Entity in order to meet the schedule for the Conversion Project If, thereafter, the Construction Agreement is executed by the parties and the Conversion Project is completed within five (5) years from the date of this Agreement, the full amount of the costs incurred by the Company in its performance of the Design Work shall be included in the "Shared Company Costs" under the Construction Agreement and any payment of such amounts under this Agreement shall be credited to the Government Entity in calculating the "Net Amount" payable under the Construction Agreement 15 Within sixty (60) business days after completion of the Design Work, the Company shall issue to the Government Entity an itemized invoice for the amounts payable under this Agreement. Such invoice shall be in a form mutually agreed upon by the Company and the Government Entity and shall, at a Design Agreement, Attachment "A" to Schedule 74, Page 5 [Pacific Avenue Improvements 6 th Street —11 Street] minimum, itemize the design and engineering costs, including and listing separately inspection, labor, materials and equipment In the event the Government Entity does not verify such invoice within ten (10) business days of receipt, the Government Entity shall provide a written request to the Company specifying the additional information needed to verify the invoice The Company will provide, within a reasonable period after receipt of any request, such documentation and information as the Government Entity may reasonably request to verify such invoice The Government Entity shall pay the Company all amounts payable under this Agreement within thirty (30) days after receipt of the Company's invoice Payment as provided in this Agreement shall be full compensation for the Company's performance of the Design Work, including without limitation all services rendered and all materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete the Design Work Design Agreement, Attachment `AA to Schedule 74, Page 6 [Pacific Avenue Improvements 6th Street —11 Street] 16 Dispute Resolution Procedures (a) Any dispute, disagreement or claim ansing out of or concerning this Agreement must first be presented to and considered by the parties A party who wishes dispute resolution shall notify the other party in writing as to the nature of the dispute Each party shall appoint a representative who shall be responsible for representing the party's interests The representatives shall exercise good faith efforts to resolve the dispute Any dispute that is not resolved within ten (10) business days of the date the disagreement was first raised by written notice shall be referred by the parties' representatives in writing to the senior management of the parties for resolution. In the event the senior management are unable to resolve the dispute within twenty (20) business days (or such other period as the parties may agree upon), each party may pursue resolution of the dispute through other legal means consistent with the terms of this Agreement All negotiations pursuant to these procedures for the resolution of disputes shall be confidential and shall be treated as compromise and settlement negotiations for purposes of the state and federal rules of evidence (b) Any claim or dispute ansing hereunder which relates to the Scope of Work, Design Cost Estimate, and Design Schedule under paragraph 4, above, the Project Plan under paragraph 10, above, or any Request for Change (including, without limitation, any associated equitable adjustment) under paragraph 13, above, and is not resolved by senior management within the time permitted under paragraph 16(a), above, shall be resolved by arbitration in Seattle, Washington, under the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect The decision(s) of the arbdrator(s) shall be final, conclusive and binding upon the Parties All other disputes shall be resolved by litigation in any court or governmental agency, as applicable, having jurisdiction over the Parties and the dispute (c) In connection with any arbitration under this paragraph 16, costs of the arbdrator(s), hearing rooms and other common costs shall be divided equally among the parties Each party shall bear the cost and expense of preparing and presenting its own case (including, but not limited to, its own attomeys' fees), provided, that, in any arbitration, the arbdrator(s) may require, as part of his or her decision, reimbursement of all or a portion of the prevailing party's costs and expenses by the other party (d) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties in writing, the parties shall continue to perform their respective obligations under this Agreement during the pendency of any dispute 17 In the event that either party is prevented or delayed in the performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement by reason beyond its reasonable control (a "Force Majeure Event'), then that party's performance shall be excused during the Force Majeure Event Force Majeure Events shall include, without limitation, war, civil disturbance, flood, earthquake or other Act of God, storm, earthquake or other condition which necessitates the mobilization of the personnel of a party or its contractors to restore utility service to customers, laws, regulations, rules or orders of any governmental agency, sabotage, strikes or similar labor disputes involving personnel of a party, its contractors or a third party; or any failure or delay in the performance by the other party, or a third party who is not an employee, agent or contractor of the party claiming a Force Majeure Event, in connection with the Worts or this Agreement Upon removal or termination of the Force Majeure Event, the party claiming a Force Majeure Event shall promptly perform the affected obligations in an orderly and expedited manner under this Agreement or procure a substitute for such obligation The parties shall use all commercially reasonable efforts to eliminate or minimize any delay caused by a Force Maieure Event. 18 This Agreement is subject to the General Rules and Provisions set forth in Tanff Schedule 80 of the Company's electric Tariff G and to Schedule 74 of such Tariff as approved by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission and in effect as of the date of this Agreement Design Agreement, Attachment °A" to Schedule 74, Page 7 [Pacific Avenue Improvements 6 th Street —11 Street] 19 Any notice under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be faxed (with a copy followed by mail or hand delivery), delivered in person, or mailed, properly addressed and stamped with the required postage, to the intended recipient as follows If to the Government Entity City of Bremerton 3027 Olympus Drive Bremerton. WA 98310 Attn Eduardo Aban, PE Fax 360 -473 -5398 If to the Company Puget Sound Energy, Inc 6522 Kitsap Way Bremerton, WA 98312 Attn Thomas Brobst Fax - Either party may change its address specified in this paragraph by giving the other party notice of such change in accordance with this paragraph 20 This Agreement shall in all respects be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington (without reference to rules governing conflict of laws), except to the extent such laws may be preempted by the laws of the United States of America 21 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and all other agreements and understandings of the Parties, whether written or oral, with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement are hereby superseded in their entireties 22 This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the respective successors, assigns, purchasers, and transferees of the parties, including but not limited to, any entity to which the rights or obligations of a party are assigned, delegated, or transferred in any corporate reorganization, change of organization, or purchase or transfer of assets by or to another corporation, partnership, association, or other business organization or division thereof Government Entity Company PUGET SOUND ENERGY, INC BY BY ITS ITS Municipal Liaison Manager Date Signed Date Signed Approved as to form Design Agreement, Attachment `A° to Schedule 74, Page 8 [Pacific Avenue Improvements. 6"' Street —11"' Street] EXISTING CONDITIO 2 -16 2.0 M Action Items Action Item Description iI Responsible Parties Timeframe f Cost/Funding Notes 2 3.1 Expand Multi- Expand multi - family property tax incentive Council DCD Attorney Concurrent with Property tax frozen at time of family Tax incentive through -out the Downtown Sub Area Sub Area Plan development for ten years program adoption 2 3 2 Work with Work with property owners to create a LID Council DCD Economic 2008 - On LID may be tailored to downtown property owners to 'for the ongoing impr ovement of Pacific Avenue Development needs with help from the City create LID and other identified areas Property owners Finance Department to decide priority areas and set goals for street (Local Improvement upgrades District) 2 3 3 Develop Facade improvement programs help provide DCD DRB CDBG 2009-2012 Allocation of Staff Time Grant Facade Improvement grants to small business owners for facade funding Program treatment 2 3 4Transit Advocate for passenger -only ferry to increase Council Mayor 2008 - On Frequency and transit frequency and reliability to benefit both Reliability commuter s and businesses located within Bremer ton PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED MIXED USE ACTION ITEMS DISTRICT CHA RACTER 4 -63 Action Items Description Responsible Parties Timeframe Cost/Funding � - i - - - -- -- Notes 4 7.1 Allow mixed Adopt development standards to allow mixed use DCD Concurrent with Sub use development development for full length of Pacific Ave and the Area Plan adoption along a Pacific Evergreen Park frontage Avenue'park to park' corrid _ 4 7 2 Pacific Avenue Upgrade the str on Pacific Ave, making it a DCD PW &U Council Mayor Phase 1 2008 Fund 6th St north 1 Streetscape Park to Park 'main street through City TIP Phase II (6th St north) Grant sources (See Also Circulation, Pedestrianize the intersection of I 1 th and Pacific and 2010-2014 Section 5) add public art as a significant gateway TRANSIT CORRIDOR ACTION ITEMS Action Items Description — Responsible Parties Timeframe Cost/Funding _ No 4 8 1 Allow transit Adopt development regulations to allow infill com- DCD Council Concurrent with Sub No direct supportive infill mercial and residential development with a moderate Area Plan adoption density along the parking ratio in the Wari en Ave corridor Warren Avenue i frontage _ 1 4 8 2 Extend V Extend the Boundary of the Downtown Regional DCD Council Concurrent with Sub No direct ! Downtown Boundary I Center and apply Sub Area Plan designations for Transit Ai ea Plan adoption to complete 6th St. Corridor on 4 parcels fronting 6th Street to Chester block to Chester Ave 4 8 3 Collaborate Enhance the streetscape environment and livability DCD Council Ongoing with Kitsap Transit of the district through a coordinated approach to to enhance trans- increasing transportation availability portation options on Warre Avenue DISTRICT C HARACTER 4 -58 DOWNTOWN CORE ACTION ITEMS Action Item Description Responsible Parties Timeframe � Cost/Fundrng Notes 4 1 1 Taller Buildings Allow taller, slender buildings in the downtown Council DCD Concur rent with Sub Area No direct with Public Amenity core if public amenities are provided according to Plan Adoption a Bonus Amenity program 4 12 Pacific Avenue Upgrade the str eetscape on Pacific Avenue Council DCD PW &U 6th St south, 2008 6th St Fund 6th Street North making it a Park to Par k'main street Mayor north, 2009 — 2012 through TIP (See Also Circulation, Section 5) 4 13 Alley Vacations Encourage and support the vacation of long alleys DCD PW &U Concurrent with adoption & Mid -Block Incentivize creation of mid -block cr ossings to of Sub Area Plan With Crossin break up long blocks development over time 4 14 Workforce Support workforce housing projects in the DCD CDBG program 2007 Potential allocation of Housing downtown core Excellent access to lob centers BHA KCCHA Mayor City CDBG funds, site transportation choices Other s control 4 15 Continue to Continue to work with developers to bring retail Economic Development Ongoing recruit services back to downtown Seek grocery public mat ket DCD Mayor Continue to encourage redevelopment of JC Penney's site RCW 35 96 050. Notice to owners to convert service lines to underground — Objections — Hearing — Page 1 of 1 RCW 35 96 050 Notice to owners to convert service lines to underground — Objections — Hearing — Time limitation for conversion When service from the underground electric and communication facilities is available in all or part of a conversion area, the city or town shall mad a notice to the owners of all structures or improvements served from the existing overhead facilities in the area, which notice shall state that (1) Service from the underground facilities is available, (2) All electnc and communication service lines from the existing overhead facilities within the area to any structure or improvement must be disconnected and removed within ninety days after the date of the mailing of the notice, (3) Should such owner fad to convert such service lines from overhead to underground within ninety days after the date of the mailing of the notice, the city or town will order the electric and communication utilities to disconnect and remove the service lines, (4) Should the owner object to the disconnection and removal of the service lines he or she may file his or her written objections thereto with the city or town clerk within thirty days after the date of the mailing of the notice and failure to so object within such time will constitute a waiver of his or her right thereafter to object to such disconnection and removal If the owner of any structure or improvement served from the existing overhead electric and communication facilities within a conversion area shall fad to convert to underground the service lines from such overhead facilities to such structure or improvement within ninety days after the mailing to him or her of the notice, the city or town shall order the electric and communication utilities to disconnect and remove all such service lines PROVIDED, That if the owner has filed his or her written objections to such disconnection and removal with the city or town clerk within thirty days after the mailing of the notice then the city or town shall not order such disconnection and removal until after the hearing on such objections Upon the timely filing by the owner of objections to the disconnection and removal of the service lines, the legislative authonty of such city or town, or a committee thereof, shall conduct a hearing to determine whether the removal of all or any part of the service lines is in the public benefit The hearing shall be held at such time as the legislative authority of such city or town may establish for hearings on the objections and shall be held in accordance with the regularly established procedure set by the legislative authonty of the city or town If the hearing is before a committee, the committee shall following the hearing report its recommendation to the legislative authority of the city or town for final action The determination reached by the legislative authority shall be final in the absence of an abuse of discretion [2009 c 549 § 2135 1967 c 119 § 61 httn //anus lea wa eov /rcw /default asox ?cite =35 96 050 3/24/2011 RCW 35 96 010 Declaration of public interest and purpose Page 1 of 1 RCW 35 96 010 Declaration of public interest and purpose It is hereby found and declared that the conversion of overhead electric and communication facilities to underground facilities is substantially beneficial to the public safety and welfare, is in the public interest and is a public purpose, notwithstanding any resulting incidental private benefit to any electric or communication utility affected by such conversion [1967c119 §21 httn Hann-, leg wa Qnv /rcw /default aenx9c►te =35 96 010 3/24/2011 RCW 35.96.030 Conversion of electric and communication facilities to underground facilities authorize Page 1 of 1 RCW 35 96 030 Conversion of electric and communication facilities to undergrmind facilities authorized — Local improvement districts — Special assessments Every city or town shall have the power to convert existing overhead electric and communication facilities to underground facilities pursuant to RCW 35 43 190 where such facilities are owned or operated by the city or town Where such facilities are not so owned or operated, every city or town shall have the power to contract with electric and communication utilities, as hereinafter provided, for the conversion of existing overhead electric and communication facilities to underground facilities To provide funds to pay the whole or any part of the cost of any such conversion, either where the existing overhead electric and communication facilities are owned or operated by the city or town or where they are not so owned or operated, every city or town shall have the power to create local improvement districts and to levy and collect special assessments against the real property specially benefited by such conversion For the purpose of ascertaining the amount to be assessed against each lot or parcel of land within any local improvement district established pursuant to this chapter, in addition to other methods provided by law for apportioning special benefits, the legislative authority of any city or town may apportion all or part of the special benefits accruing on a square footage basis or on a per lot basis [1967c119 §41 httu //anus lea wa eov /rcw /default asDx =35 96 030 3/24/2011 LI; -I PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES -- - --- - - -- Engineering Division Td360-473 -6270 Fax 3M 11]8 3027' Olympus Dave February 10, 2011 IlMnld 4n. WA M10 Re Pacific Avenue I mpi overnents 6' Street to 1 I` Street Public Meetin- Notice Dear Property Owner The City of Bremerton IS currently in the design effort foi the ne\t phase of the Pacific Avenue lmpiovement Project from 6" Street to 11 °i Street The proposed i mpro�,ements include two lanes of traffic and parking lanes on both sides, widening the sidewalk areas to accommodate planter strips and meandering walkway on the east side, and planter strip on the "est side installation of ornamental streetlights including all electrical amenities and overhead wires undergrounding installation of curb extensions at Intersections or proposed pedestrian crossings improving all intersections radii and re\ istons to existing signal -;}stems in order to accommodate the proposed improvements As part of the design phase the City will be hosting a project open house on I ebruary 17 2011 starting. at 5 30 PM at the Council Cli ambers in the Norm Dicks Government Center You are strougly encouraged to attend! One of the important items of the project is the replacement of electric and con7nu1,111cation lines (e g telephone, cable tcle\ ision) «ith underground lines This protect Item will affect the emsting overhead lines going into �oui property Please contact Fduardo \ban at 360-47 it N ou ha\ e an? questions Sincerer - 1 I arry Matel P E Managing FnginLer CL Property Resident 0211 -10 Tax Account Property Address Prop City St Zip Name Business Address Address2 City SI Zip 132401 -3 -189 -2009 607 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Kilsap Bank Re Anthony George 619 Bay Street Port Orchard WA 98366 132401 -3.146 -2001 701 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Barbara J Lawson Trustee PO Box 2894 Belfair WA 98528 132401 3 145 2002 705 Pack Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Weslar Investments LLC 109 Oldmg Road 203 Bremerton WA 98312 707 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 709 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 711 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3 144 -2003 713 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 R A Oraker Go Barbara Lawson PO Box 2894 Belfair WA 98528 715 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 717 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 719 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 721 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 3738 001- 001 -0000 508 8th Street Bremerton WA 98337 American National Red Cross 811 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 3738 001 002 -0009 811 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 American National Red Cross 611 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 3738 -001 004 -0007 817 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Pluvian Investments LLC PO Box 2976 Bremerton WA 98310 131401 -3- 140 -2007 815 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Nathan L & Casey M Rossow 825 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3- 141 -2006 827 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Robert A Chvostal 827 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 132401 3 -142 -2005 831 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 J P Mentor 9330 Silverdale Way NW Ste 201 Silverdale WA 98383 132401 -3 -143 -2004 512 91h Street Bremerton WA 98337 Julie M Johnson 512 9th Street Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3- 085 -2004 905 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 YWCA of Kilsap County Ellen Golombek PO Box 559 Bremerton WA 98337 132401 3- 084 -2005 909 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Richard B & Sandra C Mayfield 909 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3- 083 -2006 911 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Jeff Leet 911 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3- 082 -2007 915 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Thomas A Morse 915 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3 -081 -2008 919 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Rosalina E Osquisa 919 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 3728 -000 -004 -0001 923 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Roqer and Judith Duryea PO Box 582 Bremerton WA 98337 3728 -000 003 0002 925 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Roger and Judith Duryea PO Box 582 Bremerton WA 98337 3728 -000- 002 -0003 929 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Rhoads C & Cush MJ 938 Callahan Drive Bremerton WA 98310 3728 000 - 001 -0004 931 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 City of Bremerton 346 6th Street Ste 600 Bremerton WA 98437 132401-1080-2009 932 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Robison Green LLC 3121 Chico Way NW Bremerton WA 98312 132401 -3 -079 2002 928 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Robison Green LLC 3121 Chico Way NW Bremerton WA 98312 132401 -3 078 2003 924 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Robison Green LLC 3121 Chico Way NW Bremerton WA 98312 926 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 132401 3 077 -2004 920 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 David P & Frances D Brate PO Box 313 Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3 -076 2005 916 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Nina Nancarrows 514 13th Street Bellingham WA 98225 132401 3 -075 -2006 914 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Barbara J Lawson Trustee PO Box 2894 Belfair VJA 98528 132401 3 074 2007 910 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Barbara J Lawson Trustee PO Box 2894 Belfair VOA 98528 912 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3 073 2008 900 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Bremer Trust Go Bradley Scott Inc 400 Warren Avenue Ste 450 Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3 -072 -2009 830 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 J P Mentor 9330 Silverdale Way NW Ste 201 Silverdale WA 98383 132401 -3-071 2000 820 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Pacific Avenue Partners LLC 109 Olding Road Ste 200 Bremerton WA 98312 132401 3 068 -2005 816 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 KSS Partners t LC 816 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3- 067 -2006 708 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Donald & Cynthia Large PO Box 275 Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3 -066 -2007 706 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Donald & Cynthia Large PO Box 275 Bremerton WA 98337 132401 3 065 -2008 614 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 Godofredo L & Reinelda M Navarro Jr 7305 NW Jupiter Trail Silverdale WA 98383 616 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 132401 -3 -061 -2002 602 Pacific Avenue Bremerton WA 98337 USA IN TRUST Table 1 Pacific Avenue Improvements Project Property Taxpayer Information FIG O TAX A ROP E S r TAXPAYER MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE 1 132401 3 -189 -2009 KITSAP BANK ATYN M N GEORGF COM RC AI UL E ES 619 SI Port Orch WA 99366 2 132401 3-1462D01 LAWSON BARBARA J TRUSTEE COMMERCIAL 701 PACIFIC AVE PO BOX 2890 BELFAIR WA 98526 3 132401 3 145 -2002 WESLAR INVESTMENTS LLC COMMERCIAL MULT ADDRESSES 109 OLDING RD 203 BREMERTON WA 98312 4 132401 3 1442003 ORAKER R A COMMJMULTI- FAMILY RES MOLT ADDRESSES I PO BOX 2894 BELFAIR WA 98528 5 3738. 001-001 0000 AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS COMMERCIAL 508 8TH STREET 811 PACIFIC AVE BREMERTON WA 98337 6 3738 001- 002.0009 AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS COMMERCIAL 811 PACIFIC AVE 811 PACIFIC AVE BREMERTON WA 08337 7 3738 001 -004.0007 PLUVIAN INVESTMENT LLC COMMERCIAL 817 PACIFIC AVE PO BOX 2976 BREMERTON WA 98310 8 1132401 3.140.2007 ROSSDW NATHAN L 8 CASEY M SINGLE FAMILY RES 825 PACIFIC AVE 825 PACIFIC AVE BREMERTON WA 98337 9 1132401 3.141 2008 CHVOSTAL ROBERT A SINGLE FAMILY RES 627 PACIFIC AVE 827 PACIFIC AVE BREMERTON WA 98337 10 132401 3 142 -2005 MENTOR J P VACANT — 8 TI PACIFIC AVE 9330 SILVERDALE WAY NW STE 201 SILVERDALE WA 98383 t 1 132401 3.14 &2004 JOHNSON JULIE M SINGLE FAMILY RES 512 9TH ST 517 9TH STREET BREMERTON WA 98337 12 132401 3 -085 -2004 YWCA OF KITSAP COUNTY COMMERCIAL MOLT DRESSES PO BOX 559 BREMERTON WA 98377 13 132401 -3-094 -2005 MAYFIELD RICHARD B 8 SANDRA C SINGLE FAMILY RES 909 PACIFIC AVE 909 PACIFIC AVE BREMERTON WA 98337 14 1324013-083.2006 LEET JEFF SINGLE FAMILY RES 911 PACIFIC AVE 911 PACIFIC AVE BREMERTON WA 98337 15 132401 -3.082 -2007 MORSE THOMAS A SINGLE FAMILY RES 915 PACIFIC AVE 915 PACIFIC AVE BREMERTON WA 98337 16 132401 3 081 2008 OSOUISA ROSALINA E SINGLE FAMILY RES 919 PACIFIC AVE 919 PACIFIC AVE BREMERTON WA 98337 17 3728 - 000 004 0001 DURYEA ROGER AND JUDITH SINGLE FAMILY RES 923 PACIFIC AVE PO BOX 582 BREMERTON WA 98337 18 13728-OW 0D3 -0002 DURYEA ROGER AND JUDITH VACANT 925 PACIFIC AVE PO BOX 582 BREMERTON WA 198337 19 3728 -000 002 0003 RHOADS C 8 CUSH MJ VACANT 928 PACIFIC AVE 938 CALLAHAN DR BREMERTON WA 98310 20 3778 -000 -001 0004 CITY OF BREMFRTON VACANT 931 PACIFIC AVENUE 3458TH STREET STE 600 BREMERTON WA 98337 21 132401 - 3.080.2009 ROBISON GREEN LLC SINGLE FAMILY RES 932 PACIFIC AVE 3121 CHICO WAY NW BREMERTON WA 98312 22 132401 -3 079 -2002 ROBISON GREEN LLC MULTI FAMILY RES 928 PACIFIC AVE 3121 CHICO WAY NW BREMERTON WA 98312 23 132401 3 078 2003 ROBISON GREEN LLC MULTI FAMILY RES MULT ADDRESSES 3121 CHICO WAY NW BREMERTON WA 98312 24 132401 -3 077 2004 GRATE DAVID P 8 FRANCES D SINGLE FAMILY RES 920 PACIFIC AVE PO BOX 313 BREMERTON WA 98337 25 132401-3- 076 -2005 NANCARROWS NINA SINGLE FAMILY RES 918 PACIFIC AVE 514 13TH STEET BELLINGHAM WA 98225 26 132401 3-075 2006 LAWSON BARBARA J TRUSTEE SINGLE FAMILY RES 914 PACIFIC AVE PO BOX 2894 BELFAIR WA 98528 27 132401 3 -074 2007 LAWSON BARBARA J TRUSTEE MULTI - FAMILY RCS MULT ADDRESSES PO BOX 2894 BELFAIR WA 98528 28 132401.3 -073 -2008 BREMER TRUST C/O BRADLEY SCOTT INC COMMERCIAL 900 PACIFIC AVE 400 WARREN AVE STE 450 BREMERTON WA 98337 29 132401 3 -072 -2009 MENTOR JP COMMERCIAL 830 PACIFIC AVE 9330 SILVE ALE WAY NW STE 201 SILVERDALE WA 98383 30 132401 3 -071 -2000 PACIFIC AVENUE PARTNERS LLC COMMERCIAL 820 PACIFIC AVE 109 OLDING ROAD STE 200 BREMERTON WA 98312 31 132401 3-066.2005 KSS PARTNERS LLC ICOMMERCIAL 816 PACIFIC AVE 816 PACIFIC AVE ISREMERTON WA 98337 32 132401 -3. 067 -2006 LARGE DONALD 8 CYNTHIA COMMERCIAL 708 PACIFIC AVE PO BOX 276 BREMERTON WA 98337 33 132401 3 -068 2007 LARGE DONALD 8 CYNTHIA COMMERCIAL 706 PACIFIC AVE PO BOX 275 BRCMERTON WA 98337 34 132401 3 -065 2008 NAVARRO GODOF REDO L JR 8 REINFLOA M ICOMMERCIAL. IMULT ADDRESSES 7305 NW JUPITER TRAIL ISILVERDALE WA 98383 35 132401 3-061 2002 USA IN TRUST ICOMMERCIAL 1602 PACIFIC AVE NONE LISTED January 2011 !34 1896 091 Pacific Avenue Improvements Project Property Taxpayer Benefits FIG NO TAX ACCOUNT NO TAXPAYER PROPERTY TYPE PROPERTY ADDRESS ESTIMATED INVESTMENT /BENEFITS 1 132401 -3- 189 -2009 KITSAP BANK ATTN ANTHONY GEORGE COMMERCIAL MULT ADDRESSES $183,500 2 132401 -3- 146 -2001 LAWSON BARBARA J TRUSTEE COMMERCIAL 701 PACIFIC AVE $22,020 3 132401 -3- 145 -2002 WESLAR INVESTMENTS LLC COMMERCIAL MULT ADDRESSES $55,050 4 132401 -3 -144 -2003 ORAKER R A COMM /MULTI- FAMILY RES MULT ADDRESSES $71,565 5 3738 -001- 001 -0000 AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS COMMERCIAL 508 8TH STREET $51,380 6 3738- 001 - 002 -0009 AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS COMMERCIAL 811 PACIFIC AVE $67895 7 3738 - 001 -004 -0007 PLUVIAN INVESTMENT LLC COMMERCIAL 817 PACIFIC AVE $122,945 8 132401 -3- 140 -2007 ROSSOW NATHAN L & CASEY M SINGLE FAMILY RES 825 PACIFIC AVE $31,195 9 132401 -3- 141 -2006 CHVOSTAL ROBERT A SINGLE FAMILY RES 827 PACIFIC AVE $31,195 10 132401 -3- 142 -2005 MENTOR J P VACANT 831 PACIFIC AVE $31195 11 132401 -3- 143 -2004 JOHNSON JULIE M SINGLE FAMILY RES 512 9TH ST $31,195 12 132401 -3- 085 -2004 YWCA OF KITSAP COUNTY COMMERCIAL MULT ADDRESSES $82575 13 132401 -3 -084 -2005 MAYFIELD RICHARD B & SANDRA C SINGLE FAMILY RES 909 PACIFIC AVE $31195 14 132401 -3- 083 -2006 LEET JEFF SINGLE FAMILY RES 911 PACIFIC AVE $36,700 15 132401 -3- 082 -2007 MORSE THOMAS A SINGLE FAMILY RES 915 PACIFIC AVE $36,700 16 132401 -3- 081 -2008 OSQUISA ROSALINA E SINGLE FAMILY RES 919 PACIFIC AVE $36,700 17 3728 - 000 -004 -0001 DURYEA ROGER AND JUDITH SINGLE FAMILY RES 923 PACIFIC AVE $27,525 18 3728- 000 - 003 -0002 DURYEA ROGER AND JUDITH VACANT 925 PACIFIC AVE $36700 19 3728 -000- 002 -0003 RHOADS C & CUSH MJ VACANT 929 PACIFIC AVE $31,195 20 3728- 000 - 001 -0004 CITY OF BREMERTON VACANT 931 PACIFIC AVENUE $38,535 21 132401 -3- 080 -2009 ROBISON GREEN LLC SINGLE FAMILY RES 932 PACIFIC AVE $27,525 22 132401 -3- 079 -2002 ROBISON GREEN LLC MULTI - FAMILY RES 928 PACIFIC AVE $36,700 23 132401 -3- 078 -2003 ROBISON GREEN LLC MULTI - FAMILY RES MULT ADDRESSES $64,225 24 132401 -3- 077 -2004 BRATE DAVID P & FRANCES D SINGLE FAMILY RES 920 PACIFIC AVE $31,195 25 132401 -3- 076 -2005 NANCARROWS NINA SINGLE FAMILY RES 916 PACIFIC AVE $31,195 26 132401 -3- 075 -2006 LAWSON BARBARA J TRUSTEE SINGLE FAMILY RES 914 PACIFIC AVE $38,535 27 132401 -3- 074 -2007 LAWSON BARBARA J TRUSTEE MULTI - FAMILY RES MULT ADDRESSES $78,905 28 132401 -3- 073 -2008 BREMER TRUST C/O BRADLEY SCOTT INC COMMERCIAL 900 PACIFIC AVE $78,905 29 132401 -3- 072 -2009 MENTOR JP COMMERCIAL 830 PACIFIC AVE $104,595 30 132401 -3- 071 -2000 PACIFIC AVENUE PARTNERS LLC COMMERCIAL 820 PACIFIC AVE $91,750 31 132401 -3- 068 -2005 KSS PARTNERS LLC COMMERCIAL 816 PACIFIC AVE $192,675 32 132401 -3- 067 -2006 LARGE DONALD & CYNTHIA COMMERCIAL 708 PACIFIC AVE $78,905 33 132401 -3- 066 -2007 LARGE DONALD & CYNTHIA COMMERCIAL 706 PACIFIC AVE $119,275 34 132401 -3- 065 -2008 NAVARRO GODOFREDO L JR & REINELDA M COMMERCIAL MULT ADDRESSES $40,370 35 132401 -3- 061 -2002 USA IN TRUST COMMERCIAL 602 PACIFIC AVE $157,810 March 2011 t fit» l Al l f4 U4 `44 + � V%, � 1V%, � �• •��w� ! .�� A �sDll!4 %�' JI 1 7 •1 r 31K 7, r 1 1 . r� 7 �� I �• .� a U �� •,,,. i:: _ �ri � 11.E °' �I {.s . •� � ti., •a.r :�•� rna � •11tf1� a - � .�. .. 1 Puget Sound Regional Council � March 10, 2011 Mr. Vincent Akhunie Public Works Director City of Bremerton 100 Oyster Bay Ave N Bremerton, WA 98312 RE BRE -7 SR 303 Corridor (111h Street at Warren Ave) BRE -9 Pacific Ave Improvements (from 6th to 11th Streets) Mr Akhunie• I am writing to see if the Puget Sound Regional Council can offer you any assistance toward obligating federal funds designated for the two projects referenced above It is very important that t t o C ity obligate these fu nds prior to June 30. 2011, After that date, PSRC will no longer be able to contribute funds for these projects and, instead, will redistribute them to other projects within the region that can put the funds to use sooner Here are the things you need to know - What is the status of your project? The award history and obligation information for these two projects is attached Of the $1,559,553 STP awarded to these two projects in 2009 and scheduled to obligate during the first quarter of 2010, approximately 17 ($273,866) has yet to obligate Why is PSRC placing a time limit on obligating past due funds? Given the tremendous need for transportation funding in the region, we want to ensure that any funds available are put to use in the most efficient and timely manner possible The PSRC's Executive Board adopted new project tracking policies on April 22, 2010 (attached) that place priority on projects that can put funding to use without delay Which projects are subject to the time limit? Any project currently funded, either totally or partially, with PSRC funds is subject to these new policies Past due funds are defined as funds that haven't obligated by the sponsor's estimated obligation date plus the one -year grace period rounded out to the end of the next full quarter year What is the deadline to obligate these funds? For these projects, the deadline is June 30, 2011 If you are unable to obligate the funds by this date, the funds will be returned to PSRC for redistribution to fund contingency projects or be added to the amount available during a subsequent project selection process, depending upon the timing. Who can you contact for help? The Regional Project Evaluation Committee (RPEC) and the TransTAC subcommittee of the Kitsap 1011 Westem Avenue Suite 500 - Seattle Washington 981041035 - (206) 4641090 - FAX (206) 581.4825 - psrc crg Regional Coordinating Committee are the forums that recommended funding for these projects. As such, their membership has a vested interest each project's success They will be monitoring your progress in the months ahead and will offer whatever assistance possible There is a lot of experience and wisdom represented by RPEC and TransTAC so I encourage you to take advantage of it to the extent possible I hope that you will also seek PSRC's assistance if we can help move these projects along If you have any questions regarding these new policies or how they affect your project, please call Larry Burris at (206) 4645301 He will be glad to help however he can Sincerely, /"c Charlie Howar Transportation Planning Director Enclosure cc Mayor Patty Lent Councilmember Carol Arends Councilmember Will Maupin Councilmember Jim McDonald Larry Matel, Transportation Managing Engineer Proiect Obligation History As of 4" Quarter 2010 BRE -7: SR -303 Corridor (11"' Street at Warren Ave ) Award Hi sto Obligation Information Recommending. Award Award Federal Sponsor's 1- Year PSRC's Actual Forum Fund Phase Estimated Amount Year Type Obligation Grace Obligation Obligation Date Period Deadline Date KRCC $150,000 2006 STP /U PE 3/1/07 3/1/08 N/A 12/15/08 KRCC $222,048 2008 STP /U ROW 7/30/08 7/30/08 N/A 3/8/10 KRCC $894,361 2009 STP /U ROW 1/15/10 1/15/11 N/A � 3/13/10 KRCC $228,367 2009 STP /U ROW 1115110 1/15/11 6/30/11• KRCC N/A $742,000 2009 STP /U CN 1/15111 1/15/12 8/30/12" N/A Totals: $2,236,776 BRE -9: Pacific Ave Ir"orovements (from 6"' to 11 w Streets) Award Histo Obligation Information Recommending Award Award Federal Sponsor's . 1_ Year PSRC's Actual Forum Amount Year Ty Phase Obligation Grace O Obligation Type pe Date Period Deadline Date RPEC $391,326 2009 STP /U PE 1/1/10 1/1/11 N/A RPEC 71 $45,499 2009 STP /U PE 111/10 1/1/11 6/30/11' N/A RPEC $2,563,175 2009 STP /U CN 1 1/1/12 8/30/12" N/A Totals: $3,000,000 Explanation of PSRC Obligation Deadlines The deadline has been extended to June 30, 2011 for all unobligated PSRC funds whose "grace period" expires during the 1" Quarter of 2011 Failure to obligate funds by then will cause the funds to be returned to PSRC for redistribution Projects returning funds in this manner are eligible to compete for future PSRC funds during subsequent project selection exercises "' The deadline has been extended to June 30.2012 for all unobligated PSRC funds whose "grace period" expires during the first quarter of 2012 You will be notified in advance of that time in a similar manner to ensure that adequate notice is given before any unobligated funds must be returned. Project Tracking Policies for PSRC's Federal Funds (As Revised and Adopted Apn122, 2010 by the Executive Board) Purpose A significant amount of PSRC funding is programmed to delayed projects — a condition that current project tracking policies have been unable to correct This results in lower than expected obligation levels, increases project costs, and delays needed improvements to the region's transportation network Given recent experiences regarding economic stimulus funding, more stringent project delivery requirements have proven very effective For these reasons, it is recommended that project tracking policies be modified to improve the region's record of delivering transportation investments Introduction The project tracking policies contained within this document apply to the following federal funds for which the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) has primary responsibility for project selection through the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act- A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA -LU)- • Surface Transportation Program (STP) — urban (STP/U) and rural (STP/R) • Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) • Federal Transit Adrmnistration (FTA) — Section 5307 & section 5309 Fixed Guideway The purpose of the project tracking system is to ensure the timely use of all regionally managed federal funds (hereafter referred to as "PSRC funds "). Ensuring that projects are delivered in a timely manner will- • Reduce project delays that lead to increased costs • Ensure the traveling public benefits from investments at the earliest point possible • Create or sustain jobs needed to stimulate the regional economy PSRC funds are distributed through a competitive process This competitive process is based on the requirements of SAFETEA -LU, with additional guidance provided by the following documents. • VISION 2040, the region's long -range growth, transportation, and economic strategy • Destination 2030 (soon to be Transportation 2040 ), the region's long -range metropolitan transportation plan • Regional Economic Strategy for the Central Puget Sound Region • Local comprehensive plans, as required by the state Growth Management Act • A policy framework revised and adopted prior to PSRC's project selection process The Transportation Policy Board (TPB) recommends to the Executive Board approval of the distribution of funds to projects via this competitive process Every approved project will identify the specific year during which awarded funds will obligate and will have approved financial plans and project delivery plans with identifiable milestones and delivery dates 1 The designated obligation year programmed in the TIP will be used to monitor the use of PSRC funds Delayed projects that do not obligate PSRC funds within their established schedule must return them to PSRC for redistribution Projects that return funds may compete for funding at the next or subsequent project selection exercises These projects may also be added to a current contingency list of projects at the request of the sponsor and approval of the recommending project evaluation committee Policies A. Obligation Monitoring of STP and CMAQ Funds 1. Obligation Dates Sponsors of projects with STP and/or CMAQ funds are required to designate the year that each phase with STP and/or CMAQ funds will obligate In addition, those projects with STP and/or CMAQ funds programmed to Right -of -Way or Construction phases are allowed a one -year grace period beyond the designated year of obligation Planning and design phases are NOT eligible for any type of grace period In all cases, the designated program year for obligation must occur in one of the years for which federal funds are being distnbuted (for example, in 2011 funds are expected to be distributed for 2013 and 2014) 2. Quarterly Report All project sponsors must submit quarterly reports that identify all progress made toward obligation during the preceding 90 days PSRC staff will compare all stated accomplishments with the milestone schedule outlined in each project's approved Protect Delivery Plan to determine each project's status at that time. All projects determined to be behind schedule and in jeopardy of failing to obligate as scheduled will be reported to the appropriate project evaluation committee. In addition to determining the cause of delays, project evaluation committees are expected to monitor future performance, and provide possible assistance in an effort to help sponsors get back on schedule 3. Obligation Date Extensions No time extensions will be allowed unless the cause of delay, as determined by the appropriate project evaluation committee, is deemed to be clearly beyond the control of the sponsor (e g lawsuits). When so determined, causes of delay must be mitigated within a short time period and by a date certain No project will be granted more than one extension and that extension will be limited to a maximum of one year regardless of the circumstances All extension requests will be evaluated on a case by case basis by the appropriate project evaluation committee 4. Reporting Performance reports for each project will be provided to PSRC policy boards, elected officials, sponsors, and the public. These performance reports will include general 2 information about each project, the phases programmed with PSRC funds, and a summary of reported progress The intent of this quarterly reporting is to keep all interested parties fully informed on an ongoing basis so that ample time and attention can be given to delayed projects before funds will be returned for redistribution. At the end of each calendar year, PSRC's Transportation Policy Board and Executive Board will be given a final list of projects whose funds have "sunset" and will be returned for redistribution due to non - performance within established schedules Projects that return funds may compete for funding at the next or subsequent project selection exercises These projects may also be added to a current contingency list of projects at the request of the sponsor and approval of the recommending project evaluation committee 5. Currently Funded Projects as of April 2010 Those projects currently identified by PSRC as past due or that become past due will have until the conclusion of the first quarter in 2011 to obligate current funding Failure to do so will result in the return of those funds for redistribution during the 2011 project selection process. All such projects will be able to recompete for lost funds in 2011 The existing obligation dates and grace periods will be honored for those projects previously awarded PSRC funds that are NOT indentified by PSRC as past due B. Expenditure Monitoring of STP and CMAQ Funds A previous version of project tracking polices (as adopted in July2003) established a 10- month period after obligation during which project sponsors were expected to start processing expenditures. Due to complexities with the reporting of project expenditures and the inability to report by funding source, this policy was unable to be implemented However, both PSRC and WSDOT recognize the importance of projects meeting expenditure requirements for PSRC's federal funds. As such, we recommend a on period during which time PSRC will monitor and collect data on the overall expenditures r r projects, regardless of funding source This data will be used to determine if projects are expending federal dollars within a reasonable timeframe, and to report on how many projects are landing on FHWA's report of inactive piejects After this one year period, in consultation with WSDOT, PSRC will report back to the Boards and the project evaluation committees with a proposal for a new project tracking policy related to expenditures C. Obligation and Expenditure Monitoring of FTA Funds Note project tracking policies for FTA funds were reviewed and recommended by the Seattle - Tacoma - Everett FTA Caucus and the Transportation Open ators Committee, these policies were adopted in January 2009 and are not subject to the current proposed revisions Each phase of a project with PSRC FTA funds is allowed a one -year grace period beyond the estimated obligation date If un- obligated by the end of this grace period, funds are at risk of being removed from the project Regional Council staff will provide regular reports to the Transportation Operators Committee (TOC) of those projects with PSRC FTA funds that are 3 approaching this milestone These reports will include information on the age of the funds, the phases progranuned, and the length of time passed beyond the estimated obligation date (i e , months "past due ") When any PSRC FTA funds are nine months past the estimated obligation date (before the one -year grace period expires), Regional Council staff will contact the project sponsor and initiate an evaluation process Staff will meet with the sponsor, gather information on the reasons for the delay, and prepare a recommendation to the TOC on whether or not an obligation date extension is warranted When the PSRC FTA funds aie from the Seattle- Tacoma - Everett (STE) urbanized area, the Regional Council evaluation will be submitted to the STE FTA Caucus for its review and recommendation prior to the TOC The length of any obligation date extension will be determined on a case -by -case basis and may be allowed for any date within the four -year tune span of the current TIP The procedures for conducting these evaluations will be identified in the next update to the "Administrative Guidelines for implementing PSRC's Project Tracking Policies " D. Scope Changes to Projects Awarded STP, CINIAQ and/or FTA Competitive Funds PSRC funds are awarded to projects with the expectation they will be completed as originally described and scheduled. Funded projects were evaluated, underwent a public review and comment period, and were included in a regional air quality analysis based upon their original scope of work Requests to change a project's description must be reviewed and approved in advance by PSRC staff and the recommending project evaluation committee to ensure that the modified description is consistent with the project's original scope, purpose, intent, and/or utility If such a request is deemed to deviate from the original scope of work, the request will be denied Should PSRC and the recommending project evaluation committee disagree, the matter will be forwarded to the Transportation Policy Board for resolution E. Distribution of New and Returned STP, CMAQ, and FTA Competitive Funds The Transportation Policy Board in 2004 approved contingency lists of prioritized projects in case additional funds become available through higher than estimated allocations, the project tracking system, or any other sources These contingency lists became effective with the adoption of the 2005 -2007 Regional TIP, and subsequent lists were developed and approved with the adoption of the 2007 -2010 and 2010 -2013 Regional TiPs These contingency lists have encompassed the RPEC and countywide STP and CMAQ processes as well as FTA competitive processes The policies for the redistribution of new and returned funds are summarized below 4 I New funds are defined as additional funds to the region from higher than estimated allocations or other sources New STP and CMAQ funds will be split for distribution between RPEC and the four countywide forums based upon the formula adopted during the most recent Policy Framework. New FTA funds will be distributed according to adopted policies regarding earned share vs competitive funds. 2 Returned funds may originate from several sources- unused funds remaining from completed projects, unused funds remaining from cancelled projects, or funds returned from projects due to a variety of reasons (project tracking funding sources, etc ) Returned STP and CMAQ funds il l l be red he receipt of other forum from which the funds originated - RPEC or one of the four countywide project evaluation committees Procedures for the redistribution of FTA funds will be determined at a future date by PSRC, the STE FTA Caucus and the TOC Depending upon timing, the allocation of new or returned funds will be applied to either the contingency list in effect at the time or added to other available funds dedicated to the next project selection process. This decision will be made at the discretion of the appropriate project evaluation committee (RPEC or one of the four countywide committees) Projects that return funds may compete for funding during the next or subsequent project selection exercises These projects may also be added to a current contingency list of projects at the request of the sponsor and approval of the recommending project evaluation committee Refer to Exhibit A attached. 3. Contingency Lists a. The current contingency list in place as of April 2010 will be in effect until the issuance of the 2011 call for projects Projects funded from this list will be subject to the policies outlined in Paragraph A (Sections 1 and 3) regarding the selection of an estimated obligation date, grace periods, and time extensions b Contingency lists adopted during the 2011 project selection exercise will also be subject to the new policies as described in Paragraph A (Sections I and 3) This includes a review of each project's updated financial plan and project delivery schedule 5 Christine Grenier 7 From Paul Drnjevic [pauldrn @comcast net] Sent Wednesday, April 20, 2011 5 00 PM To City Council Subject Underground Utilities on 6th St to 11 th St on Pacific Avenue Underground Utilities on 6th St to 11th St on Pacific Avenue City Council, I do not own any business This letter is because I care about the City Regardless if the project is supposedly to be paid for by "FREE GRANT MONEY" I do not see a need for it now All on City Council should realize by now there is no such thing as "FREE MONEY" I think a good example of this is the supposedly "FREE MONEY" for the Tunnel to nowhere Wiped out several businesses — which wiped out taxes from those businesses Probably was, and is, more costly to the City than I know And what of the tunnel operating costs ?) Is "FREE MONEY" paying for those costs? The above ground utilities on Pacific Av 6th St to 11th St are serving their function very well now IF THERE IS ANY COST TO THE OWNERS OR THE TENNANTS IT MAY VERY WELL MEAN LOSS OF MORE BUSINESSES THAT, CITY COUNCIL, WILL MEAN LOSS OF MORE TAXESf FREE GRANT MONEY ?'� I THINK NOT'' The same is true of the talked about changes on 4th St For sure if there are any costs to ANY OF THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS OR TENNANTS I am quite certain there will be at least a couple businesses which will close That would not make sense to me And loss of more taxes Again — "NO FREE MONEY" If in the future, and there are more businesses are in the City, and economic times are better for all, that would be a time to consider projects on Pacific Av and 4th St If City Councilors are pressured to approve something that has been put into action by someone who does not have the authority to approve — City Councilors should be smart and work for the people and not authorize it Let the one who did not have the authority to approve it PAY FOR IT 11 I guarantee that will stop ALL UNAUTHORIZED APPROVALS 11 In case you are wondering who I am referring to — it is GARY SEXTON If Paul DRNJEVIC (a simple name like Smith or Jones 1 Page 1 of 1 Lori Smith �A From. Lori Smith on behalf of City Council Sent* Wednesday, April 20, 2011 2 24 PM To. City Council Cc 'Paul Drnlevic' Subject: Citizen Concern - Item 7A Pacific Avenue 6th to 11 th Underground Conversion (Paul Drnjevic) Attn Council Members Paul Drnjevic called the Council Office to express his concern and objection to the action before the Council tonight under Item 7A on the agenda Mr Drnjevic pointed out that the City can not afford to lose any businesses, and believe that it would be better to wait until there are better economic conditions before taking this type of action on Pacific Avenue or any other street in the City Thanks, Lori 4/20/2011 AOL From Lori Smith on behalf of City Council Sent Monday, March 28, 2011 1 47 PM 7A To City Council Subject Council Comments - Item 6(A) "Pacific Avenue, 6th to 11 th Streets, Electric Power Undergrounding Agreement" (Jim McDonald) From: Jim McDonald [mailto•jimmcdonalddistl @hotmail com] Sent: Sunday, March 27, 20117:25 PM To: City Council Cc: Larry Matel, Vincent Akhimie Subject: RE: Pacific Avenue, 6th to 11th Streets, Electric Power Undergounding Agreement I will be out of town the 1st week of April when the decision regarding the agreement with PSE is made so I wanted to share my thoughts with the council about this issue If the agreement is approved, PSE pays a significant percentage of the costs to move the power lines from 6th to 11th underground. Our PSRCC funding provides the additional funding match Property owners would have to pay approximately $5000 per hookup for commercial and multi -family sites and residential site would pay about $3200 per site (if I recalled the data correctly) I support this project for a couple of reasons Since we are investing a lot of money into street and sidewalk improvements (over a million dollars), we will be increasing the value of all the properties along this corridor Property owners will directly benefit from these improvements Also, as Council member Wheeler pointed out, since the city will have the roads torn up, this is the most economical time to move these power lines. In fact, if we don't move these power lines now, I doubt that these improvements will occur in my lifetime. Finally, while there are always trade -offs between pedestrian and vehicle access, the pedestrian improvements made in the downtown core have made a significant improvement in the 'livability" of the downtown core AND improved the business climate Yes, these improvements have temporally stressed some of our downtown businesses However, they have also brought new customers and new investment into the downtown area via the condos, the Credit Union, the hotels, the new Bremerton Bar & Grill, and the future development of the old Penny's site and the real chance to have a movie theater complex and other apartments built at our new parking garage location As we go forward, these improvements will continue to draw more people to live and visit our downtown core and therefore improving the business climate for everyone These improvements would not have occurred if the city had not enacted the improvements to this area which included moving the overhead power underground, redoing the streets, and creating some temporary headaches for our local businesses While its obvious we don't have enough information regarding the proposed changes on 4th Street, we do have good cost data on the 6th to 11th project and we should consider each project on its own merit and own cost data. We should not let the fear of the unknown aspects of the proposed 4th street project stop us from supporting the vision of our city when we applied for the PSRCC funding I understand that the electrical hookup costs could provide a hardship to some property owners and it would be great if we could help those individuals that claim this hardship (and I would support this). However, this project will position the city for future growth and development which will be far above the minor costs required for the property owners who will benefit the most from these improvements The "do nothing" alternative will maintain the status of quo of zero development and zero growth. R, I i Jim McDonald I 3/28/2011 r 1ECEIVED (M (OUNOL URGE" To City Council, DATE Thank you for your continued interest in the Pacific Avenue, 6th to 11` Street, project and your questions at the study session Wednesday night Please be assured that Public Works staff have been working on the issue of defraying the cost of the private property electrical connections and information is still being developed To that end Eduardo and I have attached various pieces of information that relate to this issue and have been working with the City Attorney and the Finance Department in trying to solve this challenge Attached please find information from the Downtown Sub Area Plan that lays out a strategy for implementation of the Plan with key players identified, excerpts from Washington legislation that pertains to this project, and an estimate of benefits to the various properties within the project limits In addition, the concepts of environmental and social justice are important considerations in this project as evidenced by your questions last night As was stated, the economic benefits of this project go well beyond the property owners fronting on the street improvements When the protect is complete a much expanded community will benefit from this project, including the City at large, Kitsap County and the Puget Sound Region A balance must be achieved and policy established with respect to the appropriate share that private property owners must bear with respect to this type of project This policy should also address a similar situation that Public Works is currently dealing with in the undergrounding of electric power associated with the WsDOT Manette Bridge Replacement project As you will see this project is an activity that requires the input from a number of parties and Public Works staff looks forward to the interaction with all to make this important improvement a reality i i Page 1 of 2 Lori Smith From City Council Sent Monday, April 04, 2011 11 03 AM To Vincent Akhimie Cc Gary Sexton, Patty Lent, Roger Lubovich, Becky Hasart Subject FW Response to Council Questions - Pacific Avenue Improvements - Underground Conversion (Greg Wheeler) From: greg wheeler [mailto electgregwheeler @gmail com] Sent: Sunday, April 03, 20119 31 PM To: City Council Subject: Re Pacific Avenue Improvements - Underground Conversion Hi Lon, Please forward my thanks to the Public Works department for providing us with plenty of information regarding the Pacific Avenue undergroundmg project I really appreciate their extra effort in helping the City Council ask the right questions and make the right decisions Well done Sincerely, Greg Wheeler On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 7 22 PM, greg wheeler < electgre wheeler kgmail com wrote Lon, Please forward this letter on to the rest of the City Council, Mayor, City Attorney, Finance Director & Public Works Director I am in agreement that moving existing overhead wiring underground creates a streetscape that is pleasing to the eye I question the finding from RCW 35 96 010 that states "that the conversion of overhead electric and communication facilities underground is substantially beneficial to public safety and welfare" I see a small safety & welfare benefit but measured against other public safety and welfare projects that involve crosswalks, sidewalks etc this is relatively small in comparison I support the beautification of downtown Bremerton I hear people comment on the improvements from all over the county They are complementary of the new clean look that Bremerton has acquired Some of that is a result of the undergroundmg already accomplished RCW 35 96 030 states that "every city or town shall have the power to convert existing overhead electric and communication facilities to underground facilities pursuant to RCW 35 43 190 where such facilities are owned and operated by the city or town " This code also states that 4/4/2011 Page 2 of 2 "every city or town shall have the power to create local improvement districts " MY QUESTION: At this point in time, what options are we proposing to help the private property owners fund the electrical hookups from public to private? Just because we are under a time crunch to have this funding dedicated by June 30, does not mean we should bypass the very important step of how the citizens are going to pay for it I absolutely do not support the idea that the city will work with property owners after the council has approved the project I do not want the threat of electrical disconnects, as mentioned in RCW 35 96 050, to be the backdrop for discussions with our private property owners That seems heavy handed to me Until we have all of the funding alternatives identified with regards to the affected private property owners and we know and understand the ramifications to each with these decisions, I propose we postpone this decision I look forward to further discussion on this matter Respectfully, Greg Wheeler Bicmejton City Council District 5 4/4/2011 DATE SUBMITTED April 6, 2011 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 7 ■■ rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrarrrrrr SUBJECT: Resolution No. 3 3 q Committee Meeting Date April 13, 2011 submitting proposed charter amendments to COUNCIL MEETING Date April 20, 2011 the voters of the City Department. City Attorney's Office Presenter. Roger Lubovich Phone 473 -2345 SUMMARY: The City Council is proposing charter amendments for the submission to registered voters at the general election on November 8, 2011 to reduce the size of the City Council from nine Council Members to seven Council Members and to make other related changes ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Resolution N 0 - 3 i 3 FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount) APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR. CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR MAYOR COMMITTEE CHAIR COUNCIL PRESIDENT CONSENT AGENDA ❑ GENERAL BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING ❑ RECOMMENDED MOTION: 4Aouc to approve Resolution 4o-tho -for- submission fig the w m0 ✓t- to f or'f�' fl! H y T, go t(... COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny ❑ Table Continue ❑ No Action RESOLUTION NO. 3 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, setting forth amendments to the City Charter for submission to the qualified voters of the City of Bremerton for approval or refection at the general election to be held on November 8, 2011 WHEREAS, the City Council is proposing a charter amendment to reduce the size of the City Council from nine Council Members to seven Council Members and to make other related changes, and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35 22 130, the City Council may propose amendments to the City Charter, and WHEREAS, amendments to the City Charter must be submitted to the qualified electors of the City of Bremerton for approval or refection, NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS SECTION 1. The proposed amendments to the City Charter, as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herem by reference, shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the City, for their ratification or refection, at the general election to be held November 8, 2011 in accordance with RCW 35 22 160, which amendments shall become effective upon certification of the election results following passage of this ballot measure SECTION 2. The Kitsap County Auditor, as ex officio supervisor of Elections, is hereby requested to submit the proposition to the electors of the City of Bremerton of whether or not the proposed amendments to the City Charter shall be adopted as set forth in Exhibit A SECTION 3. In accordance with RCW 35 22 170, the proposed amendments to the City Charter shall be published in the Kitsap Sun at least once each week for four weeks next preceeding the day of submitting the same to the electors for their approval or refection SECTION 4. SeverabihU If any one 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. SECTION S. Effective Date This Resolution shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its passage 1 2011 Charter Amendment PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington this day of , 2011 WILL MAUPIN, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM- ATTEST. ROGER A LUBOVICH, City Attorney CAROL ETGEN, City Clerk R \LEGALTiilesl \Charter Amendments\2011 Charter Amendment - Resolution doc I i 1 2 2011 Charter Amendment EXHIBIT A CHARTER OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE I Name, Boundaries, Powers, Definitions Section 1 Name Section 2 Boundaries Section 3 Definitions Section 4 Rights and Powers Section 5 Powers — How Exercised ARTICLE H Elective Officers Section 6 Officers — Election — Term — Qualifications Section 7 Change in Districts Section 8 Compensation — Reimbursement Section 9 Vacancies — Events Creating Section 10 Vacancies — Filling Section 11 Pro Tempore Appointment ARTICLE III Legislation Section 12 Powers Vested in Council Section 13 Council Meetings - Public Notice of Meeting Agendas Section 14 Open Meetings — Requisites Section 15 Ordinances — Styles — Requisites — Veto Section 16 Ordinances — Authentication and Recording Section 17 Publication of Ordinances or Summary of Ordinances Section 18 City Auditor ARTICLE IV Administration Section 19 Duties and Authority of the Mayor Section 20 Appointive Officers — Duties — Compensation Section 21 Appointment and Removal of Appointive Officers and Employees — Terms Section 22 Oath of Appointive Officers and Employees Section 23 City Attorney ARTICLE V Finance Section 24 Organization Section 25 Receipt, Custody, and Disbursement of Funds Section 26 Fiscal Year Section 27 Public Utilities ARTICLE VI Civil Service Section 28 Commission, Creation of Section 29 Commission, Rules and Powers Section 30 Civil Service Officer Section 31 Employees Included in Civil Service ARTICLE VII Boards, Commissions and Committees Section 32 Member Residency Requirement ARTICLE VIII Recall, Initiative and Referendum Section 33 Recall Section 34 Initiative and Referendum ARTICLE IX Franchises Section 35 Franclises — Term — Renewal Section 36 Franchise — Compensation — Publication Section 37 Franchise — Council Rights Section 38 Franchise — Transfers ARTICLE X Miscellaneous Section 39 Legal Continuity Section 40 Employment Continuity Section 41 Report — Requisites of Clain — Time Limitations ARTICLE XI Amendments t Section 42 Conform to State Law ,Seetten 43 rhai4e,. A Effeetive Date ll J CHARTER OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON ARTICLE I. Name, Boundaries, Powers, Definitions Section 1- Name: The corporate name of this City is BREMERTON Section 2 - Boundaries: The existing boundaries may be changed in the manner provided by law Section 3 - Definitions: As used in this Charter, unless the context indicates otherwise (1) RCW - Means the Revised Code of Washington, and refers to any subsequent amendments to statutes referenced in this Charter (2) Residence - Residence within any territory included in, annexed to, or consolidated with the City is construed to have been residence within the City (3) Shall - Means mandatory (4) May - Means optional (5) Appointive Officer — Means those employees appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the Council as established by Charter and by ordinance Section 4 - Rights and Powers: By and in the corporate name, the City shall have perpetual succession and all powers of a First Class city, may sue and be sued in all courts and proceedings, use a corporate seal approved by its legislative body, and, by and through its legislative body, may contract and be contracted with; may purchase, lease, receive, or otherwise acquire real and personal property of every kind, and use, enjoy, hold, lease, control, convey or otherwise dispose of it for the common benefit Section 5 - Powers - How Exercised: All powers of this City, unless otherwise provided in this Charter, shall be exercised by, through and under the direction of a mayor, who shall be the chief executive and administrative officer, and mne seven council members who shall constitute the City Council (hereafter referred to as Council) The Council shall serve as the legislative body of the City The Mayor and Council shall be subject to the control and direction of the people at all times by means of the initiative, referendum and recall provided for in this Charter 1 ARTICLE II. Elective Officers Section 6 - Officers - Election - Term - Qualifications: (1) Effective until the first day of January 2014, The -the elective officers of this City shall be eleven in number The Mayor and Municipal Judge, who shall be elected by majority vote from the City at large, and nine part-tune members of Council, who shall be elected by majority vote from each of their respective districts Effective the first day of January 2014 as set forth in Section 6(2) below, the elective officers of this City shall be reduced from eleven to nine in number The Mayor and Municipal Judge, who shall be elected by ma�onty vote from the City at large, and seven part-tune members of Council, who shall be elected by ma�onty vote from each of their respective districts No person shall be eligible for election to any City office, unless he or she is a citizen of the United States and has resided in Bremerton for at least one year preceding election, except the Municipal Judge, who need only be a citizen and reside in Kitsap County and licensed to practice law in the State of Washington No person shall be eligible for the position of council member while holding any other elective public office or otherwise employed by the city Candidates for Council must also be residents of their respective districts at the time of filing The Mayor shall continuously reside within the City and Council members shall reside continuously within their district during their elective terms, except as provided in Section 7 of this Charter Except as set forth in Section 6(2) below, The the terms of all elective officers shall commence on the first day in January following their election and shall be for a period of four years until their successors are elected and have qualified r m e c 7 an n sh .,t f e,e ,.o,,,,,, pesitiens will stand fer- eleehen in 1999 � th �t�ens -�3 � � " „a (2) Effective the first day of January 2014, the Council members and the Council districts of this CrtY shall be reduced from nine to seven in number Elections for all Council districts as redistricted shall be held in 2013 Council members elected in 2013 to represent districts 1 3 5 and 7 as redistricted each shall serve a four year term Council members elected in 2013 to represent districts 2, 4, and 6 as redistricted each shall serve a two year term Thereafter municipal elections shall be held biennially and the requisite Council members shall be elected for four year terms Section 7 - Change in Districts: Council may change the boundaries of existing districts by ordinance to make each as equal in population as practicable, so long as redistricting is approved forty -five days before the fourth Monday in July. Except as set forth in Section 6(2) above, ono change in the boundaries of districts shall affect the terms of any council members, they shall serve out their terns representing the district for which they were elected even though such change of district boundaries may result in more than one council member residing in the same district Section 8 - Compensation - Reimbursement: (1) The Mayor's and Judge's compensation may be increased during a tern of office by ordinance (2) There is hereby created the Bremerton Citizen's Commission on Council Salaries pursuant to RCW 35 21 015 appointed as provided herein to set the salary of the Council members I 2 l (a) The Commission shall consist of three (3) members who shall be registered voters and residents of the City of Bremerton No City officer, official, or employee or immediate family member of any City officer, official or employee shall be eligible for membership on the Commission. As used in this section, "immediate family member" means parents, spouse, siblings, children or dependent relative of the officer, official or employee whether or not living in the household of the officer, official or employee (b) Commission members shall be appointed by the Mayor, subject to approval of Council (c) Commission members shall be appointed for three year staggered terms of office Commission members may not be appointed to more than two terms (d) No member shall be removed during Ins or her term of office unless for cause of mcapacity, incompetence, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office or for a disqualifying change of residence (e) Upon a vacancy in any position on the Commission a successor shall be appointed to serve the unexpired term The appointment shall be made in the same manner as for original appointments (f) The members of the Commission shall receive no compensation for their services but shall receive reasonable reimbursement for their expenses in accordance with state law and city ordinance Staff shall be assigned to the Commission to provide support for its work (3) The Commission authority and responsibility shall be as follows (a) The Commission shall study the relationship of salaries to the duties of the City Council members and shall fix a salary for each such position by an affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the commission (b) Except as approved in this section, the Commission shall be solely responsible for its own organization, operation and action and shall enjoy the fullest cooperation of all City officers, officials, departments and employees The Commission shall have access to all City books, papers, documents and accounts applying or in any way concerning the subject matter of thus section (c) The members of the Commission shall elect a chairperson from among their number every two years (d) The Commission shall file any change in its schedule of salaries for the positrons of City Council members with the City Clerk by July 1 st of the applicable year so as to coincide with the City budget cycle (e) Each schedule shall become effective thirty days after filing with the City Clerk Salary decreases established by the Commission shall become effective as to incumbent City Council members at the commencement of their next subsequent terms of office Such schedule shall be subject to referendum in the same manner as provided by Section 34 of tlus Charter (f) Prior to the filing of any salary schedule the Commission shall hold no fewer than two public hearings thereon within the four months immediately preceding the filing i (g) Signature of the chairperson of the Commission shall be affixed on each schedule submitted to the City Clerk (4) The Mayor, Municipal Judge and Council members shall receive reimbursement for their necessary expenses incurred in the performance of the duties of their office as provided to City management and professional employees i 3 Section 9 - Vacancies - Events Creating: The position of an elected officer shall become vacant upon the occurrence of any of the following events (1) Death (2) Resignation (3) Judicially declared incompetency (4) Failure to maintain residency as required by Charter (5) Failure to qualify within two days after the beginning of term. (6) Continuous absence from the City for more than thirty days during a term of office without consent of Council, unless on business of the City (7) Conviction of or plea of guilty to a felony or to a crime involving moral turpitude, or an offense involving the oath of office Section 10 - Vacancies - Filling: (1) A vacancy in the office of the Mayor or Council shall be filled for the remainder of the unexpired term, if any, at the next municipal general election. Council or the remaining members thereof by majority vote shall appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy until the person elected to serve the remainder of the unexpired term takes office (2) If, after thirty days have passed since the occurrence of a vacancy, Council is unable to agree upon a person to be appointed to fill a vacancy on Council, the Mayor, shall make the appointment from among the persons nominated by members of Council (3) If at any time the membership of Council is reduced below a quorum, the remaining members, if any, shall appoint the requisite number of qualified persons to create a quorum who will appoint qualified persons to fill the remaining vacancies The appointees shall serve until persons are elected to serve the remainder of the unexpired terms at the next available special election for partisan offices unless there is an earlier available general election (4) If no council members remain, the Mayor shall appoint qualified persons to temporarily fill the vacancies The appointees shall serve until persons are elected to fill the remainder of the unexpired terms at the next available special election for partisan offices unless there is an earlier available general election (5) In the event all Council positions and the Mayor's position become vacant, the Municipal Judge, or the Governor of the State of Washington if the position of Judge is vacant, shall appoint a qualified person as Acting Mayor The Acting Mayor shall perform, and appointees shall serve, pursuant to subsection four above (6) A vacancy in the office of Municipal Judge shall be filled by the Mayor for the remainder of the unexpired term, subject to Council confirmation Section 11- Pro Tempore Appointment: (1) Annually at the first meeting of Council, or when needed to fill a vacancy, the members thereof, by majority vote, shall designate one of their number as Council President to serve as Mayor Pro Tempore, to serve at the request of the Mayor, or to fill an unanticipated need in the absence or temporary disability of the Mayor. (2) The Mayor Pro Tempore shall perform all duties of the Mayor in the absence or temporary disability of the Mayor, except he or she may only remove appointive officers subject to Council confirmation after the Mayor has been absent for thirty consecutive days, at which i 4 i I time the Mayor Pro Tempore may remove such persons subject to any applicable law, rule, or regulation relating to civil service, with the approval of Council majority plus one (3) The Mayor may appoint qualified persons to serve as Municipal Judge pro tempore pursuant to RCW 3 50 090 ARTICLE III. Legislation Section 12 - Powers Vested in Council: Council shall have power to organize and regulate its internal affairs, to define the functions, _power, and duties of the City's officers and employees, to fix the compensation and working conditions of such officers and employees and establish and maintain civil service or ment systems, retirement and pension systems not in conflict with state law or this Charter Council may adopt and enforce ordinances relating to and regulating its local or municipal affairs and appropriate to the good of the government of the City, and, pursuant to state law, may impose penalties of fine, or imprisonment, or both, for the violation of such ordinances constituting a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor as provided therein Council may provide that violation of such shall constitute a civil violation subject to a monetary penalty Council shall have all legislative powers possible for a city or town to have under the Constitution of this State By way of illustration and not in limitation, such powers may be exercised in regard to acquisition, sale, ownership, improvement, maintenance, protection, restoration, regulation, use, leasing, disposition, vacation, abandonment or beautification of public ways, real property of all kinds, waterways, structures, or any other improvement or use of real or personal property Such powers may be exercised in regard to all aspects of collective bargaining, in the rendering of social, cultural, recreational, educational, governmental, or corporate services, including operating and supplying of utilities and municipal services commonly or conveniently rendered by cities or towns In addition and not in limitation, Council shall have any authority given to any class of municipality or all municipalities of this state, such authority to be executed in the manner provided, if any, by the granting statute. Within constitutional limitations, Council shall have within the City corporate limits all powers of taxation for local purposes allowed by state law Section 13 - Council Meetings - Public Notice of Meeting Agendas: (1) Council shall meet regularly, at least once a month, at such times and locations as designated by the Council (2) Council shall meet at a place within the corporate limits of the City, at such tunes as may be fixed by ordinance or resolution (3) A majority of Council constitutes a quorum (4) Meetings of Council shall be presided over by the member selected as Council President Appointment of a Council President shall not in any way abridge the President's right to vote on matters coming before Council at such meetings (5) In the absence of the City Clerk or Deputy Clerk or other qualified person appointed by the Clerk, a council member may perform the duties of Clerk at such meeting while retaining rights to participate and vote during the meeting 5 Section 14 - Open Meetings - Requisites: (1) All meetings of Council and City boards, commissions and committees shall be open to the public except as excluded by 42 30 RCW or this Charter (2) Conditions for attendance, time and place, procedures for interruption, adjournments, continuances, executive sessions; adoption of ordinances, rules and regulations, and prohibition of secret ballots shall be as prescribed within Chapter 42 30 RCW (3) Council, by ordinance, shall establish a procedure for notifying the public of upcoming open meetings and agendas Section 15 - Ordinances - Styles - Requisites - Veto: (1) The enacting clause of all ordinances shall be as follows "The City of Bremerton does ordam" No ordinance shall contain more than one subject and that must be clearly expressed in its title (2) No ordinance, or any section or subsection thereof, or any municipal code section or subsection, shall be revised or amended, unless the new ordinance sets forth the revised ordinance or the amended section or subsection at full length (3) All legislation and appropriation of money shall be by ordinance, save where there is a special fund created for a particular purpose, payments from such funds shall be made on order of the Council (4) Hearings of ordinances shall be as provided by state law or as designated by Council Every ordinance shall have one reading except that, upon a request of a Council Member, an ordinance shall have two or more readings unless otherwise directed by the Council No ordinance shall take effect until at least ten (10) days after publication stated in the ordinance, except as provided below (a) Upon the happening of any non - debatable emergency as enumerated in RCW 35 33 081, Council may adopt an ordinance addressing the emergency or appropriating funds not available in the annual budget to meet it by a vote of one more than the majority of all members of Council, stating the facts constituting the emergency Such ordinance shall become effective at passage without notice or hearing, but requires subsequent publication in the official newspaper (b) Ordinances addressing public emergencies not specifically enumerated in RCW 35.33 081 or appropriating funds to meet such emergencies which could not have been anticipated in the annual budget, may be appropriated by ordinance declaring an emergency and stating the facts constituting the emergency. Such ordinance shall not be voted on until five days have elapsed after its introduction, and shall require the vote of one more than the majority of all members of Council for passage Any taxpayer of the City may appear at the meeting at which the emergency ordinance is to be voted on and be heard for or against the adoption of it The ordinance shall become effective upon passage and publication (c) Initiative ordinances adopted by the voters of the City shall take effect at the tune fixed therein or, if no such time is designated within ten (10) days after the official canvass of the ballots pursuant to state law (5) Every ordinance that passes Council in order to become valid must be presented to the Mayor If approved, it shall be signed, but if not, it shall be returned with written objections to Council who shall cause the objections to be entered on the record and proceed to reconsideration thereof within thirty (30) days of return of the vetoed ordinance. If upon reconsideration, a majority plus one of the whole membership favor its passage, the ordinance 6 shall become valid notwithstanding the Mayor's veto The Mayor's veto with respect to budget measures shall extend to specific items only, and not to the whole budget. If the Mayor fails for ten days to either approve or veto an ordinance, it shall become valid without approval Ordinances shall be signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk Section 16 - Ordinances - Authentication and Recording: The City Clerk shall authenticate and record in full in a properly indexed book or file kept for the purpose of retaimng all ordmances and resolutions adopted by Council Copies of such shall be available for inspection by the public Section 17 - Publication of Ordinances or Summary of Ordinances: Promptly after adoption, the text of each ordinance or a summary of the content of each ordinance shall be published at least once in the City's official newspaper except bond ordmances which may be published by title alone For the purpose of this section, a summary shall mean a brief description which succinctly describes the main points of the ordinance Publication of a summary shall include notice that the full text is available from the City Clerk An inadvertent mistake or omission in publishing the text or a summary of the content of an ordinance shall not render the ordinance invalid Section 18 - City Auditor: There shall be an Auditing Committee consisting of two Council members and an independent Certified Public Accountant to be designated by Council, and two Bremerton residents selected by the designated members of the Auditing Committee The Auditing Committee shall appoint a City Auditor who shall serve at the pleasure of the Committee The City Auditor shall only be removed by the majority vote of the entire membership of the Committee sitting as a whole ARTICLE IV. Administration Section 19 - Duties and Authority of the Mayor: The Mayor (1) Shall be the chief executive and administrative officer of the City in charge of all departments and employees (2) Shall see that all laws and ordmances are faithfully enforced and that law and order are maintained in the City (3) Shall have general supervision of the administration of city government and all city interests (4) Shall see that all contracts and agreements made with the City or for its use and benefit are faithfully kept and performed, and to this end, may cause any legal procedures to be instituted and prosecuted in the name of the City, subject to approval by majority vote of all members of Council (5) Shall report to Council, in a public meeting, concerning the affairs of the City and its financial and other needs, and shall make recommendations for Council consideration and action (6) Shall prepare and submit to Council a proposed budget (7) Shall be the official and ceremonial head of the City and shall represent the City, except that when illness or other duties prevent the Mayor's attendance at an official function and the Mayor Pro Tempore is unavailable, a member of Council or some other suitable person may be designated by the Mayor to represent the City on such occasion (8) Shall devote full -time, during business hours, to the service of the City and shall not hold any other public office except notary public Section 20 — Appointive Officers - Duties - Compensation: Appointive officers shall be those provided for by City Charter or ordinance and shall include a City Attorney and City Clerk The office of City Clerk may be merged with any other compatible appointive office The authority, duties and qualifications of all appointive officers shall be as prescribed by charter, ordinances, or applicable fob description Section 21- Appointment and Removal of Appointive Officers and Employees - Terms: The Mayor shall have the power of appointment and removal of all appointive officers and employees, except the City Auditor, City Attorney, Court employees and Council employees, subject to any applicable law, rule or regulation relating to civil service Council employees who serve at the pleasure of the Council may only be removed by a majority vote of Council sitting as a whole The head of a department may be authorized by the Mayor to appoint and remove subordinates in such departments or office, subject to applicable union agreements and any applicable civil service provisions All appointments of appointive officers and employees shall be made on the basis of ability and training or experience in the duties of the position, and in compliance with provisions of any ment system applicable to the City Confirmation by Council of appointments of appointive officers shall be required. Appointive officers shall be without a definite tern unless a tern is established for such office by law or ordinance The Mayor shall have the sole authority to accept the resignation of any appointive officer Section 22 - Oath of Appointive Officers and Employees: Any appointive officer or employee, before entering upon the performance of his or her duties, may be required to take an oath or affirmation as may be prescribed by ordinance for the faithful performance of his or her duties as a condition of employment Section 23 - City Attorney: (1) Appointment The Legal Department of the City shall consist of a City Attorney, and such assistant city attorneys as authorized in the budget All must be duly licensed attorneys of the State of Washington in accordance with state statute or court rule The City Attorney shall be a full -time in-house City Attorney appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the Council The City Attorney may be removed by the Mayor, with the concurrence of a majority of Council sitting as a whole, or by Council alone, provided that removal by Council alone shall require a 2/3 vote of the entire Council The City Attorney may remove assistant city attorneys at his or j her pleasure j (2) Duties The City Attorney shall be legal advisor of all officers, commissions, boards and committees of the City and shall bring and prosecute all actions which may be directed by the Mayor or Council, and defend the City in all actions against it and any action in which the City, any past or present employee, officer, board, committee, or commission is a party as a result of acts or omissions in the good faith performance of the city's business i i s I � 1 (3) Special Counsel Council may at any time retain or appoint special counsel for specific assignments ARTICLE V. Finance Section 24 - Organization: The Mayor shall have charge of finance and shall be responsible for the custody and management of the City assets Section 25 - Receipt, Custody, and Disbursement of Funds: All payments authorized by Council shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk The City Treasurer shall receive and keep all monies due and belonging to the City, and all trust funds held by the City, and shall keep an accurate detailed account of the same in such manner as to show the exact financial condition of the City The City Treasurer shall, at the close of each month, report to Council all the monies received and disbursed during the month Section 26 - Fiscal Year: The City's fiscal year shall be the calendar year The Council may, by ordinance, establish a biennial budget Section 27 - Public Utilities: (1) The City shall have power to own and operate any public utility and may purchase, construct, condemn or acquire any public utility provided by law, and may make any additions or betterments or extensions of any existing utility, and the provision therefor shall be by ordinance which shall specify and adopt the plan or system proposed and declare the estimated cost thereof Any ordinance providing for a newly owned and operated utility shall be submitted for ratification or refection to the qualified voters of the City at a general or special election called for that purpose Provided, however, that an ordinance providing for the extension, enlargement or improvement of an existing utility shall conform to RCW 35 92 070 and need only be submitted to the voters as required thereby (2) Nothing in this Charter shall be construed to permit the city of Bremerton to sell all or any portion of any of the real property now owned or hereafter acquired for water supply purposes generally known as watersheds, whether or not currently used for water supply purposes, unless a question of such proposed sale shall be approved by a majority plus one of the council membership or shall have been first submitted to the qualified electors of the city by a majority plus one of the council membership at a municipal general or special election and assented to by sixty percent of said electors voting on such question (3) The City shall not sell, lease or dispose of any utility lands, systems or parts thereof essential to continued effective utility service, unless and until such disposal is approved by a majority plus one vote of Council i 9 ARTICLE VI. Civil Service Section 28 - Commission, Creation oh There is hereby established a Civil Service Commission of three members, who shall be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by Council, and who shall be citizens of the United States, residents of the City for at least one year preceding such appointment The currently seated members may serve their current terms The term of office of such commissioners shall be for three years on staggered terms Any vacancies in the commission shall be filled by the Mayor and approved by Council for the unexpired term Any member of said commission may be removed from office for incompetency, incompatibility or dereliction of duty, malfeasance in office, or other good cause after charges in writing have been preferred, due notice given and a full hearing had in Superior Court unless such hearing is waived in writing Section 29 - Commission, Rules and Powers: (1) The Commission shall make such rules and regulations for the conduct of its business and to enforce the purposes of this article as shall be necessary and proper (2) The Commission shall provide for the classification of all employees subject to this Article (3) All full tune paid employees of the Fire and Police departments of the City shall be included under the provisions of this Article, and all existing provisions of state law pertaining to such employees shall be substantially complied with by the Commission All other full time employees shall be included under the provisions of this Article unless excluded in Section 31 (4) The Commission, among other things, shall provide for open competitive examination as to fitness for an eligibility list from which vacancies shall be filled, for a period of probation before employment is made permanent, and for promotion on the basis of meet, experience, and record Promotional processing/testing fees shall not be charged (5) Employees within the scope of this Article who are in office at the tune of the adoption of this Charter shall retain their positions, unless removed for cause (6) The Commssion, among other things, shall provide for rules and procedures to ensure employees due process in' regard to any proposed disciplinary action Section 30 - Civil Service Officer: The Commission shall provide for the selection of a civil service officer by the Mayor, with Council confirmation who shall also serve as secretary Section 31- Employees included in Civil Service: (1) The following employees shall be included in Civil Service (a) All full time paid employees of the Fire and Police departments of the City unless specifically excluded or exempt by the City as may be provided by law (b) All other full tune employees not exempt in Section 31(2) below (2) There shall be exempt from the operation of this article the following elected officials, appointive officers not covered in Section 31(1) above, management and professional employees, all non - salaned members of appointive boards and commissions, and any other employee exempt from the operation of this Article by the Council 10 ARTICLE VII. Boards, Commissions and Committees Section 32 - Member Residency Requirement: The Mayor shall appoint all boards, commissions and committees established by ordinance or charter, except the Audit Committee, with Council confirmation as required by ordinance All members of boards, commissions and committees established by ordinance or charter shall be residents of the City for at least one year prior to appointment and eighteen years of age, unless otherwise provided by ordinance Any member of a board, commission and comrmttee established by ordinance or charter who is not a resident of the City at the time this provision takes effect shall serve out the balance of the term for which appointed ARTICLE VIII. Recall, Initiative and Referendum Section 33- Recall: The holder of any elective office may be recalled and removed from said office as provided in 29.82 RCW. Section 34 - Initiative and Referendum: (1) The powers of initiative and referendum shall be exercised in the manner set forth in RCW 35 17 240 through 35 17.360 (2) No ordinance heretofore or hereafter enacted by vote of the people shall be amended or repealed by the Council unless such amendatory or repealing ordinance shall be submitted to the qualified electors for their approval or refection in the same manner as is required by this section in respect to the submission of an ordinance initiated or referred ARTICLE IX. Franchises Section 35 - Franchises - Term - Renewal: No franchise shall ever be granted for a term longer than ten years, excepting upon a majority vote of the electors, and in no event will a franchise be granted for a period longer than fifty years, nor any franchise be renewed or extended until within two years of the expiration thereof Section 36 - Franchise - Compensation - Publication: All franchises shall be granted by ordinance and shall specify plainly the streets or other public i places or parts thereof to which they apply, and no franchise shall be provided without provision for proper compensation to the City therefor. Council shall adopt such mode of determining the compensation to be paid by such grantee as it shall determine to be reasonable and dust Every applicant for a franchise shall bear all expenses of advertising and submitting the proposed ordinance, including the expense of election, if any i 11 Section 37 - Franchise - Council Rights: The grant of every franchise shall be made expressly subject to the condition that Council shall have the right with respect to any franchise so granted to hear and determine what are dust, fair and reasonable rates, fares and charges for public service unless regulated by the State or Federal government, and to order that only reasonable charges shall be imposed, to require reasonable extensions of any public service system, to make such rules and regulations as may be required to secure adequate and proper service, and to provide sufficient accommodation for the public, to repeal, amend or modify the same, to cancel, forfeit and abrogate the same if the franchise is not operated or exercised in full accordance with its provisions, or any part thereof, or at all, to acquire by purchase or condemnation upon a majority vote of the electors for the use of the City itself or its inhabitants, the property of the grantee at a fair and dust value, which shall not include any valuation of the franchise, which shall thereupon terminate Section 38 - Franchise - Transfers: No franchise shall be transferred, sold or leased without the consent of Council, under such terms and conditions as the Council may impose ARTICLE X. Miscellaneous Section 39 - Legal Continuity: All ordinances and resolutions consistent with this Charter shall remain in effect until amended or repealed or until they expire by limitation All rights and obligations in favor of or against the City existing at the tune this Charter shall go into effect shall continue without modification All street and other improvements, all vacations of public streets, alleys or places, all assessments for improvements, all suits and actions in court, all fines and forfeitures and all other matters relating to the City that may have been begun and not completed, shall be completed according to the charter, ordinances and law existing prior to the tune this Charter shall go into effect, and all taxes and assessments levied and remaining unpaid when this Charter will go into effect, shall be collected as provided by ordinances and laws existing and in effect at the tune same were levied i Section 40 - Employment Continuity: Whenever by the provisions of this Charter duties and functions are transferred to a different department, board or office, the employees engaged in the performance of such duties and functions at the time this Charter goes into effect, shall be transferred accordingly and be deemed to have been regularly appointed to the respective positions involved in the performance of such duties and functions, until removed therefrom in accordance with the provisions of this Charter Section 41- Report - Requisites of Claim - Time Limitations: All claims for damages for personal injuries or for mjunes to property sustained by any act of the City or any officer, agent, servant, or employee, must be filed with the City Clerk All such claims for damages must be in writing and verified and must accurately locate and describe the act causing the mjury, describe the injury, giving the residence for six months last past of the claimant and contain the items of damage claimed No action shall be maintained against the City for a claim for tort damages until the claim has been filed with the City Clerk and the time specified by State Law has elapsed after such presentation. I I i 12 1 ARTICLE XI. Amendments Section 42 - Conform to State Law: Amendments of this Charter shall follow and conform to the procedures set forth in the State Constitution and Laws of the State of Washington Seetle -43 —az e.ve D Me: Amended by a vote ef the peeple dunag the genefal eleetien held Nevember- 2, 2004 with an I I i a z 13