HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/16/2007 MINUTESMinutes for
City of Bremerton Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
January 16, 2007
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Cockburn at 5:31 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Those present were: Chairman Cockburn, Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf, Commissioner
Kennedy, Commissioner Kosusko, Commissioner Mosiman, and Commissioner Streissguth.
Commissioner Hoell was excused. Quorum certified.
Also present: Andrea Spencer and Pam Ransier (DCD staff).
III. Election of Officers
Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf nominated John Cockburn for the position of Chairman.
Commissioner Kosusko seconded the nomination. The vote was unanimous in favor of
Commissioner Cockburn being the Chairman of the Bremerton Planning Commission for 2007.
Commissioner Kosusko nominated Judy Friedberg -Nerf for the position of Vice - Chairman.
Commissioner Kennedy seconded the nomination. The vote was unanimous in favor of
Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf being the Vice - Chairman of the Bremerton Planning Commission
for 2007.
IV. Approval of Agenda
Chairman Cockburn introduced the agenda. It was agreed by general consensus to approve the
agenda as presented.
V. Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the Regular Meeting held on August 15, 2006 were presented for approval by
Commissioner Cockburn. A motion was made by Commissioner Kosusko and seconded by
Commissioner Kennedy to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of August 15, 2006, as
presented. Called for a vote: Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf: Yes; Commissioner Kennedy:
Yes; Commissioner Kosusko: Yes; Commissioner Mosiman: Yes; Commissioner Streissguth:
Yes; Chairman Cockburn: Yes. The motion carried.
The minutes of the Special Meeting held on August 29, 2006 were presented fox approval by
Commissioner Cockburn. A motion was made by Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf and
seconded by Commissioner Kosusko to approve the Special Meeting Minutes of August 29,
2006, as presented. Called for a vote: Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf: Yes; Commissioner
Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2007 Page 1 of 8
Kennedy: Abstain; Commissioner Kosusko: Yes; Commissioner Mosiman: Yes; Commissioner
Streissguth: Yes; Chairman Cockburn: Yes. The motion carried.
The minutes of the Regular Meeting held on November 21, 2006 were presented for approval by
Commissioner Cockburn. A motion was made by Commissioner Kosusko and seconded by
Commissioner Kennedy to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of November 21, 2006, as
presented. Called for a vote: Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf Yes; Commissioner Kennedy:
Yes; Commissioner Kosusko: Yes; Commissioner Mosiman: Yes; Commissioner Strcissguth:
Yes; Chairman Cockburn: Yes. The motion carried.
VI. Public Meeting
A. Call To The Public (public comments on any item not on tonight's agenda).
Commissioner Cockburn asked if there were any comments from citizens. Seeing
none, he closed this portion of the meeting.
B. Public MeetiW ;_ Mayor Cary Bozeman opened the Public Meeting with an overview
of the lack of new residential construction and support of the East Park sub -area plan and
the sale of the 2.5 acre parcel which is currently city park land. He noted the positive
benefits of using that parcel to increase the number of residential units and reminded the
Commission of other park purchases and improvements planned.
Andrea Spencer, Director of Community Development, reviewed the East Park sub-
area plan and reminded the Commissioners that the sub -area plan, which the Commission
unanimously recommended, was developed after several community meetings where the
public had an opportunity to express their concerns. The park parcel in question had been
designated a redevelopment site and was acknowledged by the Planning Commission that
including it into the sub -area plan was an appropriate use of that area. She noted that the
developer included more than 13.5 acres of open space in the plan.
Wyn Birkenthal, Director of the Parks Department, on behalf of the Parks Board,
asked the Planning Commission for their guidance on the sale of the park land at the
southern point of the East Park development. He gave a brief history of how this parcel
had been acquired by the City of Bremerton and recent purchases of other park land to be
used in exchange for selling the parcel near East Park. He noted that, as a Parks
Department employee, he does not usually agree with the sale of park land, but
acknowledged that the benefits of selling this parcel outweighed keeping it as city park
land. He pointed out the unique quality of the East Park plan which provides open spaces
and neighborhood parks and outlined the financial benefits to the City by selling the
parcel and developing residential units.
Chairman Cockburn asked if the "Madrona Forest" was being merged into the park.
An unidentified speaker said it would remain part of the private plat. [Further comment
was inaudible as the speaker was away from the microphone.] Wyn Birkenthal remarked
that the City of Bremerton was not required to provide maintenance to the open space
provided in the sub -area plan, but if it was desired to have it open to the public then the
city would be responsible for its upkeep.
Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2007 Page 2 of 8
Commissioner Kosusko asked Wyn to speak on the quality of the park land abutting
East Park. Wyn explained that it is currently an undeveloped parcel with a trail that
connects with the 13+ acre nature area. A portion of the property has madrona trees and
other areas have scrub vegetation. There is an access easement from the park to Old
Wheaton Way.
Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf asked Wyn to give more detail on the process to surplus
park land. He explained that the process is clearly defined in the Bremerton Municipal
Code and is summarized as follows: the Parks Board writes findings on proposed surplus
and sale of park property and presents these findings to the City Council; the City
Council holds at least two public hearings on the surplus and sale and have a unanimous
vote by all members of City Council in favor of selling City owned park land. This item
has not yet gone before City Council. The purpose of this meeting was because the Parks
Board wanted to know what the Planning Commission's opinion of the sale was.
Andrea agreed that since this was the first sub -area plan it would be good to have the
Planning Commission's comments on the record.
Commissioner Cockburn asked if there were any comments from citizens.
Jack Welling, East Park Developer (no address given): "I'd like to give just a little bit
of history of how this came about. I tied up the property when I entered into a purchase
agreement with the City. I had approached them during our feasibility study whether or
not we could use this lower area of the park property which was — had already been
cleared, there were no trees on it — if we could enter into an easement agreement to
maybe put our stormwater system on that property. Gary Sexton suggested, he says,
`Well, rather than do that, why don't you buy it?' I would do that if I could, and he says,
`Well, if you'll pay for an appraisal, we will proceed and see if we can get the National
Park Service to agree to it.' So I did that; I paid for the appraisal and the appraisal carne
back at $300,000.00 for four and a half acres. That four and a half acres was kind of an
arbitrary number for that lower end. So anyway, that's the way it proceeded and it took
well over a year to get the National Park Service to agree to the sale. It was only recently
that we discovered that the State was involved and Wyn explained that. But I think that
it's important that, right now, there really is no access to the lower part of that park,
unless you park up at the hospital and walk the trail down. There's no parking down
below at all. What we are proposing in our development is that we will provide, not only
an access to the lower part, but we will provide a parking lot for use for the park system.
If we are not allowed to buy that property, there really won't be any access because we're
going to close it off with our buildings, so the only access would be from up above,
unless they want to park on Wheaton Way and go up the little narrow strip that's there.
We are also going to improve a path from our new parking lot all the way up to Harrison
[Hospital], and when I say `improve a path', there are paths in there now, but we plan to
make it wider for people to use bikes and make it improvable so that more than just foot
traffic can go on it. The other thing, right now, is in that lower part of that property, and I
think your Police Department can verify this, there has been homeless people living down
there and it's been a scene of drug use and other things down there, too. Wyn explained
that we will be adding a lot of value to the City as far as assessed value if we are allowed
to build the condominiums on that site. So I think that the benefits, in addition to the
Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2007 Page 3 of 8
$300,000.00, we'll improve the park property with the parking lot for better access for
the public and an improved path to the Harrison Hospital. We will create a tax base
that's going to generate over a million dollars a year to the City of Bremerton. And
finally, if the State objects for some technicality, I would be willing to give them an equal
amount of our property. Give that back to the City and then they've kind of got around
their requirement of the State. And I wouldn't charge them for it either. Thank you."
Walter Draper, 3725 Bahia Vista Drive: "I am talking to you tonight as a
representative of the [Bremerton] school district. I'm the director of Finance and
Operations for Bremerton schools. We would support this as the Mayor, I think,
mentioned, we've been in a gradual decline in terms of number of students for about ten
years. We used to have well over 6,000 students; we're now at about 5,100. We're
working very hard to turn that around and arrest that decline and get the numbers
increasing again, so anything that creates residential housing within the school district is
a good thing for us. We did have to close an elementary school, actually very close to
this area, within three or four blocks, several years ago, so, particularly if we can get
students in this area, we would like to recover that. As far as the increase in the assessed
value for these housing units that would be built there, I think estimated at $17 million
dollars, unlike the City, just the assessed valuation of the real property in the school
district goes up, the school district does not get any more money; we only get what the
voters approve when they vote for a school levy, but everyone will pay relatively less
across the board to generate that amount of money the more property we have on the roll
so it does, sort of, have a global benefit for the taxpayers within the school district. Now,
the condominiums that are proposed for this piece of property will not generate a loft of
students; condominiums in general don't do that, but they will generate some and that
will certainly be a benefit for us. So I would encourage you to look favorably on this
proposal. Thank you very much."
Jim Spencer (no address given): "I am very much opposed to the sale of this park
property for a number of reasons. Once the land is gone, the land is gone. So what we're
talking about is a development of 400 units that we're going to add an additional forty. I
applaud the developer for being proactive in putting parks in his development. Does he
do that for a reason? Yeah, because parks sell homes. Parks attract people. This sale is
totally inconsistent with what's happening today in the city. I mean, you go look at the
little pocket park at the end of Manette; the City went and got that property from a lease
agreement that the Boat Shed owner had for a period of years, took that property back
and developed it into a park. Has anybody complained about that property as a park? I
attended a Park Commission meeting where this issue was first brought up. There was a
group of citizens from Manette who were there lobbying to go and tax themselves to go
buy a piece of property in Manette, 6110 of an acre, an old reservoir, for a quarter million
dollars so they could develop a park in their neighborhood. From my standpoint, it's all
about the land. We could argue about Chevron, we could argue about IAC, National Park
Services. You know, none of that matters. The real issue is the land. This is a
remarkable piece of property. What you heard was that it's got trees on it and those sorts
of things. It does; it's got beautiful madronas. It also has an incredible panoramic view
of Port Washington Narrows and the Olympics. That's why the developer wants to go
and build condos on it. So it's really a simple decision. It really is. It's about the land.
Do you retain the land for the public, or do you sell it to a developer so he can go and
Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2007 Page 4 of 8
build condos. It's really that simple. From my standpoint, it's really a very simple
decision. We have so little property in this city that is ours, why would we go worry
about trades and dollars and all this other stuff and try to find a comparable piece of
property? You can't find a comparable piece of property. Chevron's going to get
developed no matter what. It's going to get developed; don't confuse the issue with
Chevron. I beg you to consider this long and hard. Mayor Glenn Jarstad went and got
this property in '68 with all of our futures in mind to retain it for public use. I hope you
deliberate on this and take it very seriously. It's an issue that I certainly have and I would
recommend that we not sell this property. East Park's going to get developed; that's a
good thing, I'm all for it. We don't need East Park nature to do it."
Dick Bruskrud, 1102 Shore Drive: "Just wanted to take a minute here to give you
something. I was the lead position on the design team for the developer at East Park.
You probably can remember — most of you will remember me. Our assessment [stepped
away from the microphone] I'm sorry; I thought he had a different drawing up there. Our
assessment, when we took a look at this particular parcel, we noticed the madrona forest;
it's a very unique forest. It should be preserved. That was our entire intention and we
worked around preserving the forest. What we also noticed was the small area at the very
bottom of the land that had been previously developed during the Navy development of
the parcel. The area in question is primarily not part of the forest itself. It has been
cleared - who knows when -- a long time ago. There are very few trees on that particular
parcel and it is isolated from the rest. What we saw in the forest itself is a wonderful
nature conservancy and that is why we added seven acres to that conservancy that is in
forest land. In return, we could transfer some of the density onto a portion of the land
that had already previously been developed. That is the primary purpose of that. I'd also
like to say that there are access problems to this forest. The developer is going to provide
access to the forest; an accessible trail through the forest connecting the hospital and the
East Park area is a great benefit. There are currently many active parks in the area. If I
thought for a minute that it would make more sense to have a playfield here then we
would have never looked at it. But there are soccer fields, gymnasiums, all the skate
park, the park land south of the YMCA, all of that land is providing that service. And in
addition, the developer's providing more active parks in the two one -acre parks within
the development. To me, I am very concerned about the City selling public land, at the
same time we need to be prudent and we need to find that there are times when to the
benefit of the public, using some land in being able to maintain over three times what he
is asking to purchase seems to make sense for this particular parcel. Thank you."
Richard Nerf, Madrona Point, Bremerton: "I'm here because of having worked on
the Comprehensive Plan. I really support the development of East Park; I think it's being
done in an exemplary fashion and that I know how hard you all have worked on that. I
know, too, that selling park land is a very emotional situation. When I was in school,
there were major riots over building the gym in a city park. I remember when there was
quite a problem in New York City because the Metropolitan Museum of Art wanted to
have the Temple of Dendur added, and that was going to take part of Central Park and,
there may not have been riots, but there were certainly a lot of discussion. In Houston, a
municipal golf course incurred — was getting into a park there and that caused a problem.
So I'm very conscious of keeping park land. This is an excellent park; I really wish I had
known it was there years ago. I would not have spent a lot of time doing figure eights in
Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2007 Page 5 of 8
Lions Park for exercise; it's a great hiking area. There are reasonably well maintained
trails through it. So it's a very important thing to consider. My main concern here is that
we have not held to the Comprehensive Plan; we have not considered this explicitly. I
have read through the sub -area plan and no where in there could I find any reference to
the sale of park land, or even to the point that some of this shown here encroaches on
park land. So I don't believe that either the public nor you have considered this
sufficiently. I can believe that all the arguments we've heard make sense to me, but I
would like us to go through our procedure for you to think about this and not just react to
an emergency kind of situation we seem to have tonight. But to consider this and say,
`Yeah, this makes sense,' and that we think the public has been heard. Thank you."
Chairman Cockburn asked for any further comments on this item. Seeing none, he
closed this portion of the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Kosusko asked what the intended result of the Planning Commission's
deliberation was. Andrea explained the Commission was being asked if the sub -area
process to determine the use is really what the Commission intended and to acknowledge
the sale of park property with a motion indicating the Planning Commission concurs with
the East Park sub -area plan and a recommendation to move forward with that plan. It is
not intended to have the Planning Commission make any decision regarding the sale of
park property.
Commissioner Kennedy confirmed that the sub -area plan in question was the same as
what had been previously approved and forwarded on to City Council. Andrea referred
to the map of East Park and noted the entire area, including the park property, had been
designated Public Sector Redevelopment.
Commissioners Kosusko and Friedberg -Nerf, and Chairman Cockburn, noted that,
while they support the East Park sub -area plan, they had no recollection of park property
being included in the plan.
Commissioner Kennedy acknowledged that the potential sale of park land creates an
emotional situation, but she still supports the East Park sub -area plan including the parcel
in question and feels it had been fully vetted through the public process.
Commissioner Kosusko suggested repeating a portion of the sub area planning process
to make an amendment to the plan to include discussion of the sale of the park property.
Commissioner Streissguth supports the East Park sub -area plan and how it will benefit
Bremerton, but did not realize it would include the sale of park property. She expressed
surprise that this item was coming up this late in the process and concern that the public
had not been given an opportunity to comment on the property sale.
Andrea explained that the Parks Board holds public meetings regarding the sale of park
property. Notices had been sent to the Parks Board outlining the East Park sub -area plan
and a Parks Board member had been included on a technical committee working on that
plan. She reminded the commissioners that they are not being asked to approve the sale
of park property but to confirm they still support the East Park sub -area plan.
Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2007 Page 6 of 8
Commissioner Mosiman acknowledged that he was new to this item and didn't have the
history that the other commissioners had. He felt he could not make an informed
decision at this time.
Commissioner Kosusko posed the question, What if the sale of park property had been
made clear during the original public process? He speculated that a land trade of some
kind would have occurred after commission discussion.
Chairman Cockburn summarized by stating ownership of property was not discussed
during the Commission's deliberation on the East Park plan and the sale of the park
property was a duty of the Parks Board and City Council and not the Planning
Commission.
As a whole, the Planning Commission agreed:
o there was a sub -area planning process with extensive public input;
o there was no discussion of the ownership of the parcels during the sub area
planning process and the commission was unaware that park property
would be sold as a result of the plan, and the plan should have had
discussion of property ownerships;
o discussion at Parks Board meetings is appropriate for this item and public
testimony should be added to the debate;
o the Planning Commission will not take a stand on whether or not to sell
the park property; and
o the Planning Commission supports the East Park sub -area plan.
Chairman Cockburn closed the Public Meeting.
VI. Business Meeting
A. Chairman's Report: None.
B. Director's Report: Andrea Spencer, Director of Community Development, reported
that the Downtown Regional Center plan had been allocated an additional $65,000.000
by City Council to go with the $35,000.00 CTED grant for a total of $100,000.00 to
complete the plan. Request for Proposals (RFP) from potential consultants are due
January 31, 2007, and interviews will be conducted the following week. Commissioner
Kosusko will be on the interview panel.
The West Hills and Navy Yard City annexations are scheduled to commence in February.
The Tracyton annexation will be finalized on February 1, 2007. The Mayor is in support
of the proposed racetrack in the South Kitsap Industrial Area (SKIA) and all departments
are working on the feasibility of annexing this property into the city. Currently, SKIA is
not assigned to any jurisdiction's Urban Growth Area (UGA).
The West Park sub -area plan goes to City Council the-week of January 22, 2007. It's
hoped to have the plan adopted by February 7, 2007.
Community Development is exploring options for a Comprehensive Plan amendment to
possibly make Anderson Cove a center or a redevelopment site to improve that
neighborhood.
Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2007 Page 7 of 8
C. Old Business: None.
D. New Business. Commissioner Kosusko reported three employees of Rice
Fergus Miller, a staff member of the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council,
Andrea Spencer, and Mayor Bozeman, have begun discussions on a sustainable
development initiative for the City of Bremerton.
The Wheaton/Riddell Sub -area Plan should be completed in the first part of 2007.
Community Development has received approval from City Council to hire two
Senior Planners, a Planner I, and upgrade other department positions.
Commissioner Kennedy suggested a training session on the process of creating a
sub -area plan and making that process a standard.
Commissioner )Friedberg -Nerf asked for additional training by staff regarding
Low Impact Development opportunities within the city and parliamentary
procedure.
Commissioner Streissguth suggested creating overlays for the city showing non-
motor vehicle traffic, etc. to be used in centers planning. Andrea reported that
the contract to create that plan had recently been awarded to Parametrix and a
Parks consultant will be chosen to prepare the Parks Department's comprehensive
plan.
Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf inquired about by -laws. Andrea reported that
staff had a draft amendment proposal to the current by -laws and will present the
updated version to the commission at the February meeting.
An ordinance was passed to create a Design Review Board. City Council will be
appointing members in February. Currently there are no projects pending which
need review.
VII. Adjournment
Meeting was adjourned at 7:19 p.m. The next Regular Meeting is scheduled for February 20,
2007.
Respectfully submitted by:
, Executive Secretary
Approved by:
ao//," A"
0 6 Cockburn, Chairman
Planning Commission Meeting January 16, 2007 Page 8 of 8
Minutes for
City of Bremerton Planning Commission
Special Meeting
Joint Session with Bremerton City Council
June 26, 2007
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Council President Maupin at 5:32 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Those present were: City Council members Maupin, McConnell, Brockus, Robinson, and Wofford; Chairman
Cockburn, Commissioner Hoell, Commissioner Kosusko, Commissioner Mosiman, and Commissioner
Streissguth. Commissioner Kennedy was excused. Commissioner Friedberg -Nerf had resigned. Quorum
certified.
Also present: Andrea Spencer and Pam Ransier (DCD staff).
III. Approval of Agenda
It was agreed by general consensus to approve the agenda as presented.
IV. Public Meeting
A. "Vision 2040" was presented by the Puget Sound Regional Council
PSRC will also be conducting open houses throughout the Puget Sound area. There will be an open
house on August 8, 2007, from 4:00 — 7:00 P.M. at the Sylvan Way branch of the Kitsap Regional
Library.
Council President Maupin closed the Public Meeting.
V. Adjournment
Meeting was adjourned at 6:29 p.m. The next Regular Meeting is scheduled for July 17, 2007.
submitted by: ,
, Executive Secretary
Approved by:
- " a <x ��
Jo ockburn, Chairman
Planning Commission Meeting June 26, 2007 Page 1 of 1