Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01/16/1990 1513 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Port Angeles, Washington January 16, 1990 I CALL TO ORDER Mayor Sargent called the regular meeting of the Port Angeles City Council to order at 7:05 P.M. II PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by the young people from the cast of Port Angeles Light Opera Association's 1989 production of "Oklahoma". Members present: Alison Agness, Emily Agness, Jenna Fisher, Lindsey Fisher, Hilary Fluke, Erica Ralston, and Sean Root. III ROLL CALL Members Present: Mayor Sargent, Councilmen Gabriel, Hallett, Lemon, Nicholson, Ostrowski, Wight. Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Manager Flodstrom, Attorney Knutson, Clerk Maike, B. Titus, D. Wolfe, J. Pittis, B. Collins, M. Cleland, L. Glenn, S. Brodhun, K. Ridout, B. Becker, J. Abram, M. Campbell. Public Present: D. Morse, L. Ross, J. Hoare, D. Rudolph, J. & R. Mantooth, H. Berglund, K. Erickson, T. Phillips, L. Lindberg, L. Beil, G. Watson, K. Huffman, J. Rosbach, R. French, L. Williams, J. Spiess, J. Schwagler, A. Dunker, J. Michalzik, C. & B. Brown, J. Owen. IV APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 2, 1990 Councilman Ostrowski moved to approve the minutes of the January 2, 1990, regular meeting of the Port A~geles City Council. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. V FINANCE 1o Request for Payment of $7,000.69 to Riddell, Williams for Legal Representation on WPPSS Issues Councilman Hallett moved to authorize payment of $7,000.69 to Riddell, Williams, for legal representation on WPPSS issues. Councilman Lemon seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 2. Request for Progress Payment to JB Excavating for McDonald Street Watermain Project of $44,337.55 Councilman Gabriel moved to authorize progress payment to JB Excavating for McDonald Street watermain project of $44,337.55. Councilman Ostrowski seconded the motion. Following a short discussion, the question was called and the motion carried unanimously. 3. Request for Progress Payment to Olympic Electric for DelGuzzi Drive Signal Project of $12,972.33 Councilman Ostrowski moved to authorize progress payment to Olympic Electric for the DelGuzzi Drive signal project of $12,972.33. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion. Following a short discussion, the question was called and the motion carried unanimously. -1- 1514 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 VI CONSENT AGENDA Councilman Lemon moved to act on Item 1 of the Consent Agenda separately. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Councilman Hallett moved that the Council authorize a call for bids as presented by the Administrative Services Department for Items as follows: (1) #1, 1981 Fire Engine; (2) #1815, Bobcat Mower; (3) #1571, 1984 Street Sweeper; (4) #1559, 1980 5-yard dump truck; (5) #1747, 1976 Backhoe; (7) #1930, 1981 1/2 ton van; (8) #147, 1978 brush chipper; (9) #58, 1986 Cushman Scooter; (10) Five (5) 1983 Patrol Sedans (#34, #35, #41, #42, #45). Councilman Nicholson seconded the motion. Councilman Lemon spoke in opposition to the motion, particularly regarding the replacement of the Fire Engine, as he was not in agreement with the type of - vehicle which would be replacing the current Fire Engine, stating the City has just replaced the Medic I vehicle. The proposed replacement of the Fire Engine has the capability of a Medic unit. He saw this as frivolous spending of City money. Councilman Hallett, speaking in support of the motion, noted that the Council has, through several years, examined the need to keep current the rolling stock and among those items addressed is the addition and replacement of the Medic I vehicles. Another item discussed during the budget process was the replacement of Fire Engines and he believed it was time the City began to look toward the future and take advantage of technology which would allow the City to get more mileage out of the money to be spent. He felt the approval of the motion was in the public's best interest. Fire Chief Glenn explained to the Council the latest Federal regulations regarding the safety requirements in fire trucks; that firefighters responding to fires must be in seated, belted, positions. They can no longer ride in the back on tailboards of trucks. The proposed cab is a standard cab, not just for medical purposes, but with the new unit and its capabilities, should the Fire Department have to respond to three Medic calls simultaneously, they will have the ability to do so. Councilman Lemon questioned whether revenues and funds were available, in some other form, rather than an increase in the Medic I rates. Manager Flodstrom stated that the method of purchase and ultimately the funds to pay for the purchase, whether through lease or an outright purchase, is the decision of the City Council, and that information, when available, will be provided to enable the Council to make a decision on how to proceed with the purchase of the vehicle. Following further discussion, the question was called and the motion carried, with Councilman Lemon voting "No". Councilman Hallett moved to accept the items as listed on the Consent Agenda, as follows: (2) Correspondence from Washington State Liquor Control Board; (3) 1989 Vouchers of $326,897.86; 1990 Vouchers of $180,026.56; (4) Payroll of January 17, 1990, of $240,315.17. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. VII ITEMS FROM THE COUNCIL/AUDIENCE TO BE CONSIDERED/PLACED ON THE AGENDA Jerry Cornell, 1019 East Ninth Street, requested to speak to Legislative Item 2.A, Circulation of the Annexation Petition. Larry Leonard, 1030 Olympus, brought to the Council's attention some proposed legislation before the State Legislature regarding specific planning issues, such as short plats. He urged the Council to seek further information. Mayor Sargent directed staff to provide additional information on the proposed legislation to the City Council. Pete Alexander, 1114 East Third Street, requested to speak on Legislation Item 10, regarding the Residential Sprinkler Ordinance. Jan Hare, 2136 Lindberg Road, requested to speak on Legislation Item 1.D, DelHur Rezone. -2- 1515 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 Councilman Hallett placed on the Council Agenda Item 17, regarding the Expiration of Terms of Board and Commission members. VIII LEGISLATION 1. Public Hearings A. Consideration of Final Assessment Roll for East 6th Street LID Mayor Sargent opened the public hearing at 7:35 P.M. There being no public comment, she then closed the public hearing and read the Ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. 2558 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, approving and confirming the assessment and the assessment roll in Local Improvement District No. 212 for the construction of certain improvements within the City, and levying and assessing the amounts thereof against certain property as shown on said assessment roll. Councilman Ostrowski moved to adopt the Ordinance as read by title and to authorize publication by s-mmary. Councilman Wight seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. B. Consideration of Final Assessment Roll for Regent Street LID Mayor Sargent opened the public hearing at 7:38 P.M. There being no public comment, she then closed the public hearing and read the Ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. 2559 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, approving and confirming the assessments and assessment roll for Local Improvement District No. 209, for the construction of certain improvements within the City, and levying and assessing the amounts thereof against certain property as shown on said assessment roll. Councilman Hallett moved to adopt the Ordinance as read by title and to authorize publication by summary. Councilman Lemon seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. C. Consideration of Final Assessment Roll for Alder Street LID Mayor Sargent opened the public hearing at 7:39 P.M. There being no public comment, she then closed the public hearing and read the Ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. 2560 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, approving and confirming the assessments and the assessment roll in Local Improvement District No. 210 for the construction of certain improvements within the City, and levying and assessing the amounts thereof against certain property, as shown on said assessment roll. Councilman Ostrowski moved to adopt the Ordinance as read by title and to authorize publication by summary. Councilman Lemon seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Bert Herzog, 603 South Alder Street, questioned the Council regarding the percentage of payment to be charged and the way in which owners would be billed for the assessment. -3- 1516 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 Director of Administrative Services Wolfe explained to Mr. Herzog the billing procedure regarding the LID assessment. D. Rezone Request - REZ-89(07)5 - DelHur, Inc., DelGuzzi Drive. Request to Rezone Approximately 36 Acres fromRS-9, Single-Family Residential, to RMF~ Residential Multi-Family Mayor Sargent read the Ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles reclassifying property located south of Highway 101, east of the Port Angeles Plaza, and immediately north of the Peninsula Golf Course and Lindberg Road from RS-9, Residential Single-Family, to RMF, Residential Multi-Family, and ACD, Arterial Commercial District, and amending the Official Zoning Map, Ordinance No. 2158. Mayor Sargent opened the public hearing at 7:50 P.M. William Wilbert, applicant, 13850 Bel-Red Road, Bellevue, addressed the Council regarding the issue and pointed out the dilemma to the Council that they have faced before when addressing other developers, which is that it is very difficult for developers to find property in the City of Port Angeles that has the capability to handle major development with the least amount of impact on adjoining neighborhoods. It will also be difficult to find property to handle a multi-family development with adequate utilities and electrical services in order to economically and physically follow through on the project. It was his opinion that this property met all those conditions and more, considering the location of the property, as well as the amenities it offered to attract the type of people wanted by the developer. Utilization of the topography in the development will allow a variety of placement of buildings on the site to take advantage of the privacy and the views and the amenities of the Ennis Creek Gorge. He stated as a developer, he does have concerns for the neighbors and he hoped that those concerns had been addressed by the modifications made to the rezone request through the Planning Commission hearing. He hoped some type of compromise could be met in order for the development to be put on the property. Councilman Hallett asked Mr. Wilbert if the request was for a rezone and not for a particular project. Mr. Wilbert stated the issue is the land use, but he hoped the Council would keep in mind that the best defense against undesirable development aside from the zoning laws are the economic laws and the price of the project. The price of the improvements alone has run close to $1 million and the cost alone would be prohibitive to put low-income housing on the site. Jan Hare, 2136 East Lindberg Road, spoke in opposition to the proposed rezone. She noted that DelHur, Inc., was not the company from Port Angeles, but located in Bellevue. She stated the original plat presented at the time of annexation was for single-family housing, RS-9, determined to be environmentally insignificant. The neighbors were not concerned and no protests were made. The scope has since changed dramatically and the density has increased to be an expected total of 1,534 people, over three times as many people as in the original proposal. She noted this is not high density, but rather high, high density without any playgrounds for the children and causing significant adverse impacts upon the Ennis Creek Ravine area and surrounding rural and single-family areas. She stated the people were not opposed to the land being used for needed housing, but objected to the amount of housing. She expressed concern regarding the financial commitment to finish the project and the procedure that the corporation has taken in requesting the rezone. She stated, in closing, she felt at a real disadvantage regarding the issue, as she was still under the misconception that the original plans for the property were proceeding. She believed that enough concern had been raised to prompt caution on the part of the Council in approving the rezone request. Councilman Nicholson requested clarification as to the original request requiring a rezone, and is a rezone application a result of the broadened scope of the project. -4- 1517 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 Mayor Sargent explained that any time property is annexed into the City it is automatically zoned RS-9, which is the most restrictive regarding density requirements. ,~ Councilman Nicholson asked what is relevant to the discussion and should the Council be discussing the relevancy of the rezone request or the scope of the project. Planning Director Collins stated that the original annexation proposal had a master plan and that an Environmental Impact Statement was done for the annexation of 55 acres. In the ElS and the scope of the original plan, 28 acres was planned for RS-9 development, which would permit approximately 114 units of single-family residences. The LID was formed and scaled on that development. After a significant amount of time elapsed, a reapplication was made for a zoning change to Residential Multi-Family, and the Planning Department reviewed the environmental assessment and determined whether the capacity of the road and the utility system would support the increase in density and what the impacts of that density would be on surrounding neighborhoods. Technical studies have been done, and a list of mitigation measures have been identified and developed which would sufficiently mitigate those impacts, in the estimation of the Planning staff, to allow the project to proceed with the mitigated DNS, which does not require a subsequent environmental impact statement. However, the impacts and the mitigation statements which were identified in the original proposal and ElS are still appropriate, as are the mitigation measures which have been identified primarily for increasing the capacity of the LID components, particularly the utilities, storm water, and sewer systems. Attorney Knutson added that it can be helpful if the Council is aware of what projects have been proposed for the property under previous zoning and proposed zoning as an indication of what types of uses could have been made of the property previously and what types of uses could be made of the property in the future. Also, the Council should not be limited to just what the specific proposals have been or are now, but it should be aware of all the different types of uses that could be made of the property. Dr. James Mantooth, 2238 East Lindberg Road, spoke in opposition to the rezone request. He stated any development will have an impact on the environment around the salmon stream and the peacefulness of the neighborhood. Since Port Angeles is growing and development is inevitable, the neighbors have not protested any proposals related to the existing RS-9 designation. He spoke in support of the designated RS-9 zoning on the majority of the land between the Golf Course and Ennis Creek and he suggested condominiums along the Golf Course edge, if only the overall population density is kept comparable to the present RS-9 zoning. He agreed with the Planning Commission's recommendation to leave an RS-9 buffer against the existing RS-9 neighborhoods. He suggested if apartments are necessary, they be located to the north, near Highway 101, and away from Ennis Creek. This would conform to the City's Comprehensive Plan in keeping multi-family developments near arterials and avoiding incompatible land use conflicts. Robbie Mantooth, 2238 East Lindberg Road, spoke in opposition to the proposed rezone as she did not think it was in the best interests of the City to permit the developers' requested change in zoning, an increase of five times the density that can be expected with the present zoning. She stated she had become aware of the proposal last summer and had made constant contact with the Planning Department through this process, requesting information from them, if available, on a monthly basis. She stated disappointment in not getting the information from the Planning Department until a week prior to the Planning Commission meeting of January 10th. She stated she was stunned by the way the report to the Planning Commission had interpreted the City's Comprehensive Plan to make it seem that the zoning change actually would complement the City's Goals, Policies, and Objectives. She felt it was full of blatant contradictions, asking how could permitting the densest population in the City fit with the City's goal of development. At the Planning Commission hearing, she stated that every speaker, with the exception of the applicant, spoke against the rezone and a petition with the names of every resident contacted in the Uplands development was presented. She requested that the Council deny the rezone; that the changes are incompatible with the existing neighborhood and the sensitive environment, as well as the traffic on Lindberg Road and Highway 101. She suggested as reasonable options that the Council make contract zoning legal; permit a rezone and impose the limitations necessary to keep the population density the same as it would have been with the RS-9 designation; refuse to accept the Planning Director's Determination of Non-Significance and -5- 1518 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 require an Environmental Impact Statement which specifically addresses multi- family development. She pleaded with the Council to not rush into making a decision on the issue. She spoke at length regarding the Ennis Creek area and the habitat, the environmental impacts to the Ennis Creek area, and in closing, urged the Council to require a new environmental impact statement to make sure that the development will not damage Ennis Creek. Councilman Hallett asked Mrs. Mantooth if she was familiar with the portion of the Comprehensive Plan dealing with planned residential development. Mrs. Mantooth stated she had studied this document but was concerned regarding what is considered a minor change and the adoption of such without a public hearing. She was not opposed to planned residential development, but believed the allowance for a 10% change should be lowered. Lloyd Lindberg, 1729 East Third Street, secretary of Olympic Outdoor Sportsmen Association, stated the Club has already started a rehabilitation program on Ennis Creek to get the coho and steelhead runs to return. The organization felt the more people who lived in the area, the harder it would be for them to proceed with their plan. The organization requested that the Council not allow the rezone and continue with the original request. Ted Phillips, 323 East Second Street, representing James Morris, asked that the Council include in the rezone application an agreement that the applicant provide right-of-way ingress and egress to Mr. Morris' property. Donald Rudolph, 1013 East Third Street, spoke in support of the application, as he believed that people should face the reality that the City is going to grow and that there is a need for multi-family development. Barbara Brown, 1835 East Fifth Street, stated she has no objections to multi- family housing. The City of Port Angeles is in dire need of multi-family housing and she felt this was a large enough piece of land to have such a development. She urged the Council to consider the rezone. Planning Director Collins noted for the Council the receipt of a letter from the Peninsula Golf Club which speaks in support of the rezone. Manager Flodstrom stated the Council had also received a petition signed by 15 residents in the area who object to the proposal; a letter from Gregory A. Talbot in opposition to the proposed zoning change; a letter sent by Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth Sooley, and one from Mrs. Roberta Mantooth, of which the Council had copies. Additionally, Clerk Maike had received a letter from Norman E. Brooks. The letter was read into the record: "The Honorable Mayor and Port Angeles City Council. Re: DelGuzzi Drive Rezone Application, REZ-89(07)5 Applicant William Wilbert, DelHur, Inc., and my property, lots 7 through 10, Block 3, and vacated streets abutting Lawrence's Second Addition, City of Port Angeles: Please note that in view of the City Planning Commission's 5-1 decision to approve the applicant's rezone application from RS- 9 to RMF zone, I hereby wish to withdraw my objection to the application and request that the City Council include my above- described property in the RMF rezone. Respectfully, Norman E. Brooks". Manager Flodstrom noted that the letter from Mr. Brooks was read because the Council did not receive copies. However, the other letters do become part of the record. Councilman Wight asked Attorney Knutson if the City Council could take the requested action of Mr. Brooks. Planning Director Collins stated the Council is not allowed to expand annexations, but he was not sure of the limitations in terms of adding additional properties to a rezone. The staff has not had the opportunity to incorporate the request into the plan. Attorney Knutson responded that the scope of a rezone can be reduced because the consideration covers the area that is described in the public hearing notice. However, this particular parcel was not included in the description and cannot be considered. -6- 1519 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 Mr. Wilbert spoke to address some of the concerns of the neighbors, stating that 500 units would be impossible to put on that land and the actual number will be 298 units, with the comPromfse the Planning Commission has suggested. Further, this project will take five years before completion and Port Angeles does need RMF-zoned properties for these types of developments. The environmental sensitivity of Ennis Creek has been discussed and he noted that the rezone request is for 11 of 36 acres, one-third of the total area, which will not be 100 percent covered. In closing, he stated the development will use less impervious materials because there will be fewer roofs, driveways, and less parking. The development will be built up and not out. Mrs. Hare expressed her surprise at the statement made by Mr. Wilbert regarding the fewer parking area. Mr. Wilbert explained he will be making underground parking available. Chris Brown, 3207 Maple Street, said as an original member of the committee working on the Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan in 1976, the concerns are still the same and she did not understand why business and private property owners could not work together for the benefit of everyone. She questioned the Council as to when they would start planning first and thinking into the future. Mr. Rudolph spoke again, saying that the animals in the area have plenty of area to live and he did not feel that was a good enough point to stop the development. Mayor Sargent closed the public hearing at 8:45 P.M. Councilman Hallett questioned Planning Director Collins regarding the Planning Commission's finding 7, which refers to certain mitigation measures to be completed by the applicant and what those mitigation measures were. He expressed concern in accommodating growth in the community, believing there are certain environmentally sensitive areas, and he did concur that this is one of those areas. He read for the Council the purpose of the Planned Residential Development district, stating that contract rezoning may not be the most appropriate action for the Council to take. However, if the Council should approve rezoning to RMF, then they give up the most flexibility in terms of what happens in the development. He was looking for a method which could accommodate the desire of the developer, a recognized need for additional housing, and at the same time protect the environmental characteristics of the area. Planning Director Collins noted in the Department Report on page 5, under "Environmental Review", specifically the City has identified potential impacts to the Port Angeles municipal sewer system, traffic on DelGuzzi drive, storm drainage in the rezone area, domestic water provision, fire protection, and the sensitive riparian area along Ennis Creek. Although the rezone could have significant impacts to these areas of concern, the City has determined that an environmental impact statement is not required for the proposed rezone, provided that certain mitigation measures are completed by the applicant. He stated the mitigation measures are two-fold: One are mitigation measures which are found in the original EIS for the annexation, which are incorporated by reference and which can be applied; secondly, in the Determination of Non- Significance there are listed 12 additional mitigation measures dealing with the sewer system, traffic, storm drainage, domestic water, and fire protection, and the sensitive areas of Ennis Creek. Councilman Nicholson asked if the rezone is granted will the mitigation measures automatically take effect. Planning Director Collins stated no, this is a non-project action; therefore, there is no implementation of the mitigation measures until a project is proposed. At this time, the action of rezoning the property does not have a direct impact because it does not cause any change to the environment. It is when an application for the building is submitted, the mitigation measures will be imposed. Councilman Nicholson stated it was clear to him that the Council would need to rezone areas within the City for multi-family housing. Also, there will be people in the areas who will be opposed to this action. The Council does have the ability to restrict and mitigate circumstances. It is the Council's responsibility and in the best interests of the City to rezone areas. However, on this particular issue, he was concerned about the environmental sensitivity 1520 CITY COUNCIL ~ETI~ January 16, 1990 of the area, which he hoped would be addressed by the fact that two-thirds of the area will not be developed, and other mitigating means which will be devised during the project application. Councilman Ostrowski moved to table the decision to the February 6, 1990, City Council meeting. He stated he is concerned about the issue, the statements made by the developer and the citizens, and he did not feel he could make an adequate decision. He was also concerned about maintaining the quality of life. The motion failed for lack of a second. Attorney Knutson informed the Council that if the issue is tabled the Council can speak to staff if they should have questions regarding information that has been received or mitigation measures being referred to, but they cannot conduct their own investigation outside the hearing in terms of talking to anyone who may be affected, or the applicant. Councilman Lemon expressed his concern regarding the decision to not require an environmental impact statement on this project. He did not feel the Council had enough information to make a prudent decision. Councilman Hallett concurred with Councilman Lemon's comment. He believed there is a way to address the needs of the developer and allow a person, as a property owner, to improve his or her property. Also, he thought there was a way the Council could, through existing zoning regulations, meet the needs of the community as a whole, but he also believed the Council needed more information in order to do so. Councilman Wight reviewed several issues outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, stating the area in question is in one of the five defined residential neighborhoods. There is a body of evidence included in the Comprehensive Plan that an enclave of more intense development can exist in single-family neighborhoods, but the overall neighborhood impacts must be reviewed to ensure the Council is not getting too far outside the basic planning factors in terms of density per neighborhood. He stated the Council needed to find ways to do something proactive, rather than reactive. Councilman Lemon suggested that there should be meetings with the residents, the developers, and staff to see if a compromise can be reached. Councilman Wight asked Attorney Knutson if it is possible to attach terms and conditions to a rezone with regard to such items as buffering and environmental set-asides. Attorney Knutson responded yes, it is legally possible. Although professional planners may disagree with contract rezones on a philosophical basis, the Washington courts have condoned them. Councilman Nicholson stated that although he didn't like putting off issues that needed decisions, he would go along with tabling to ask staff to explore the possibility of a contract rezone. Councilman Wight stated the issue he has heard predominantly from the people opposed to the rezone are environmental issues surrounding Ennis Creek, and setbacks and buffering around the perimeter of the proposed rezone area. He asked whether it was reasonably possible to negotiate terms which mitigate these two citizens' concerns and attach them to the rezone, if it were approved. Attorney Knutson responded that he was not sure of the exact scope of the concerns, but from this evening's testimony, he thought that conditions could be drafted which would address the concerns; however, he did not know that they would satisfy the concerns. He also stated that the mitigation measures which have been referred to in the Determination of Non-Significance could be made a finding as part of this particular approval, in such a way that it would be clear that any subsequent application for development would have to comply with those mitigation measures. Mayor Sargent asked whether it would be better to address the issue at the time of the rezone, rather than at the time of the project. Attorney Knutson stated the best time is to address it at the time of the project unless a contract rezone is used. It will be addressed at the time of -8- 1521 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 the project, because the specific approval for whatever is constructed will have conditions attached and they will definitely be enforceable. Councilman Hallett moved that the Council take no action; that Council direct staff to respond to the concerns expressed, and further to direct staff to work with the developer and interested parties, specifically those who have spoken at public hearings, and bring the information to the Council to make a decision at the February 6, 1990, City Council meeting. Councilman Lemon seconded the motion. Councilman Wight stated when considering a rezone, the Council's duty is to look at the worst-case scenario: maximum density, types of development, and anything that is permitted in the Zoning Code. It was apparent the Council must find ways to cope with large-scope projects; to find ways to force-fit them into neighborhoods in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan so they fit and the compromises are such that the qualities of life of all concerned are not too adversely impacted. He expressed his frustration that the City has failed to provide any additional land for multi-family housing over the past 18 months to two years. Mayor Sargent asked for clarification regarding the motion. Was it the intent to ask staff to come back with wording that the Council can attach to the rezone as conditions. Councilman Hallett replied he is asking staff to respond to the questions which the Council has and allow them to be the fact-finders, since the Council cannot because the hearing is closed, and it would be incumbent upon each Councilmember to direct concerns to the staff and then explore other options, whether it be contract rezones, or better understanding of how the process works, once a rezone occurs. Councilman Nicholson offered a friendly amendment to ask staff and the groups to look carefully at the possibilities of a contract rezone and bring back possible conditions under which the Council could consider one. Councilmen Hallett and Lemon concurred. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. BREAK Mayor Sargent recessed the meeting at 9:15 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 9:35 P.M. 2. Planning Commission Minutes of January 10, 1990 A. Request to Circulate an Annexation Petition - ANX-89(10)3 Glaubert/Austin, Fairmont Area, West of City Limits Jerry Cornell, 1019 East Ninth Street, stated an idea had come up after the Planning Commission hearing which he wanted to convey to the Council for its consideration. He stated the recommendation from the Planning Commission was to make one of two choices: to either annex the area or consider providing City services outside the City limits. He stated he was aware of the Council policy prohibiting this action; however, he felt it should be noted that in this case the property is surrounded by houses which receive City water, even though they are outside the City limits. The main argument in not providing services outside the City limits is that by doing so, the incentive is taken away to annex into the City. However, a possible way to alleviate this is to consider a signed statement to the effect the individual may receive City water in exchange for an agreement that he will not oppose annexation in the future. The Council discussed this consideration and the annexation request. Councilman Lemon asked Attorney Knutson if there were any legal problems with the proposal as outlined. Attorney Knutson responded that he was not aware of any legal problems, as a similar process has been used in the case of LIDs. He added that such an agreement could be enhanced by cutting off the utility service, provided that the contract contained specific wording to that effect. Councilman Hallett stated this would be an issue on which the Council should consider setting a clear policy and discuss during the Goals and Objectives -9- 1522 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 workshop. In the absence of that, he stated he would not be in support of the annexation petition and concurred with the staff recommendation. Councilman Wight moved the Council provide water and sewer services to the applicant in lieu of annexation, in exchange for a legal commitment on the part of the applicant to not object to annexation when there is a viable parcel of land which wants to be annexed, including his. Councilman Nicholson seconded the motion. Following a short discussion, the question was called and the motion failed, with Councilmen Nicholson and Wight voting "Aye". Councilman Hallett moved to direct staff to look at the particular piece of property and the alternatives for extension of utility services and bring the information to the Council at the February 6, 1990, meeting. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. B. Acceptance of Minutes Councilman Hallett moved to accept and place on file the minutes of the January 10, 1990, Planning Commission meeting. Councilman Wight seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 3. Report to Council on Harborcrest/ITT Rayonier Noise Problems. Consideration of Use of Noise Consultant to Consider Other Mitigating Measures Mayor Sargent noted that the issue before the Council is what the City should do in response to the noise impacts of ITT's chip-handling facility on Harborcrest residents. Councilman Lemon moved that the Council wait and see what effect the new loader has. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion. It was noted to the Council in a memo from Attorney Knutson that ITT has apparently ordered a new chip loader which is quieter than the one being used. The new loader is expected within a month. Councilman Nicholson asked if, while the City is waiting to see the effect that loader will have, the bottom line question is not whether or not there is a violation of an ordinance. Attorney Knutson responded that may be the bottom line question. However, it depends on what the ultimate objective is. If the object is to solve the problem of noise, it may be that the best solution is to see what a new loader is able to accomplish in terms of reducing the amount of noise. Councilman Nicholson asked why the City does not pursue the abatement of the noise during the waiting period for the new loader, if it is in violation of an ordinance. Attorney Knutson responded that at this time, the noise does not appear to be in violation. Manager Flodstrom stated that there have to be violations of the noise standards before the City can issue a citation, but that the City should continue to work with ITT Rayonier and the neighbors in the interim period while waiting for the new loader, to see if there are other opportunities to quiet the noise, work with the operating hours, etc., because there is a real problem for the people in Harborcrest. Attorney Knutson added that with the night-time noise exemption applying, the most recent noise measurements by the Police Department show that the chip loader noise is close to being in violation but that there is not at this time a case that can be justified in court. The City continues to do what is necessary to enforce the ordinance, which includes investigating the hiring of a consultant to recommend additional abatement measures that could be required under the ordinance beyond the $100 fine for violating the standards. Following further discussion of the issue, the question was called and the motion carried, with Councilman Hallett voting "No", as he was in favor of contracting a firm to investigate the implementation of additional noise mitigation measures. -10- 1523 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 4. Consideration of Resolution Amending the Councilts Rules of Procedure, Section 6, Chair of the Council, Regarding Election and Term of Deputy Mayor Mayor Sargent read the Resolution by title, entitled RESOLUTION NO. 2-90 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Port Angeles establishing the term of service and procedures for selection of a Mayor Pro Tem or Deputy Mayor, and amending Paragraph 1, Section 6, Council Rules of Procedures, as adopted in Resolution 13-86. Councilman Lemon moved to pass the Resolution as read by title. Councilman Gabriel seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 5. Report From Councilts Committee Assignment Review Committee Mayor Sargent stated that Councilmen Ostrowski, Lemon, and she had met and reviewed and made recommendations to the Council regarding the assignment to committees. Councilman Hallett stated he believed the recommendations made by the Committee were adequate. He then moved to accept the recommendations of the Committee, as proposed. Councilman Nicholson seconded the motion. Councilman Nicholson noted that he would be the Council representative on the Tourism Convention Association of Clallam County, with Councilman Wight being the alternate; and further, that he would serve as the alternate for the Economic Development Council Committee. The question was called and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Sargent noted that the LIFT Home Review Committee will meet to consider other funding alternatives to the program and that Councilman Gabriel has volunteered to serve on the Committee. ~ ~ ~L ~ ~ The Committee assignments are hereby incorporated into the minutes by reference and are attached. It now being past 10:00 P.M., Councilman Hallett moved to continue the items on the agenda. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 6. Consideration of Adoption of Model Conservation Standards (MCS) - Report from Utility Advisory Committee Mayor Sargent read the Ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. 2561 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, relating to the adoption of the 1987 Edition of the Northwest Energy Code Standards and other standards regulating the use of energy in buildings and structures, and amending PAMC 14.03.010 and Section 2, Ordinance No. 2552. Gouncilman Hallett moved to adopt the Ordinance as read by title and to authorize publication by s-mmary. Councilman Nicholson seconded the motion. Councilman Hallett, in speaking to the issue, briefly stated that as a member of the UAC there was a unanimous recommendation by the Committee, noting the reasons for the decision were first, the State of Washington is close to adoption of such a law and early adopters of the standards will have financial incentives. Secondly, the MCS program is similar to the City's Super Good Cents program. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. 1524 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 John Spiess approached the Council, stating that he and Art Dunker were here to speak on the issue and requested that the Council rescind its previous motion and adoption. Councilman Nicholson moved to reconsider the item. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion. John Spiess, President of the North Olympic Peninsula Homebuilders Association and owner of North Olympic Building Design, stated the Homebuilders Association is concerned that the City is passing the law and will be out of step with the County, Sequim, and other cities in the area. He requested the Council wait until the Legislature takes action on the issue prior to any action by the City, and requested that the Council table the item until after the Legislature has made a decision. This will allow for uniformity and affordability. Art Dunker, contractor and Board Member involved in the State Energy Code, apprised the Council of the situation, whereby the State is working toward a unified energy code. He felt the Council might be ahead of itself and if enacted, this particular ordinance may be ahead of itself and the Council may have to change code adoption, depending on the outcome of the Legislature. He requested the Council wait before acting on this issue. Councilman Wight noted that the Council is acting on this issue because they believe the State will be adopting the MCS Code and if the Council should wait before acting on the issue, the City would be losing incentive moneys to pass on to the builders. City Light Director Titus reiterated the information brought to the Council in the memo, that City staff does not know what the State Legislature will be passing in the form of a bill. There have been discussions of three or four different bills being circulated. He stated there is a valid point in having uniformity in the Code and if the State should adopt a Code which is different from the MCS but is deemed equivalent by Bonneville Power Association, then there would be no problem if the Council was to revise the City's Code to match the State adoption. Councilman Lemon asked if the Legislature was to pass an energy efficient code which is less restrictive than the City's MCS standards, which one would apply. Director Titus stated the City's law would apply within the City of Port Angeles. Councilman Lemon moved to table the issue until adoption by the State Legislature. The motion failed for lack of a second. Attorney Knutson stated that the Council has already adopted the Ordinance, that a motion to table would not change the effect of the motion to adopt, and that the Council needed to act upon the motion before it. Sheila Hardy, Conservation Manager, City Light, spoke to the Council regarding the issues, stating she has just returned from a meeting in which she has obtained information which pertains to the issue. She stated a bill has been brought to the Houses of Congress and should be moving through those houses quickly and that there is language in the bill that if legislation does not meet MCS, Bonneville will not be able to make the support payments. If the Council should wait until State adoption, the City will be pre-empted by the language from passing any legislation which is different from the State Code. Following further discussion of the issue, the question was called and the motion to reconsider failed. 7. Consideration of Grant for Secondary Sewage Treatment Design - Report from Utility Advisory Committee Councilman Hallett moved that the Council authorize the Mayor to execute the grant offer, as provided by the Department of Ecology. Councilman Lemon seconded the motion. Councilman Hallett stated the recommendation from the Utility Advisory Committee is to accept the grant. There is funding available for the City. The City still has an alternative which it may pursue, and the grant will cover approximately 40% of the design cost. -12- 1525 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. $. Consideration of Amendment to ~ro~a and Caldwell Agreement for Secondary Treatment Design - Report from Utility Advisory Committee Councilman Nicholson moved that Amendment #1 to Brown and Caldwell's contract be approved and that the Council authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. Councilman Ostrowski seconded the motion. Councilman Hallett stated this is the recommendation of the Utility Advisory Committee. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. 9. Consideration of Amendment to R. W. Beck Agreement for Landfill Design - Report from Utility Advisory Committee Councilman Ostrowski moved that Amendment #3 to R. W. Beck's contract be approved and that the Council authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment. Councilman Nicholson seconded the motion. Councilman Hallett stated this is the recommendation from the Utility Advisory Committee. Mayor Sargent thanked the Utility Advisory Committee for a job well done on the issues brought before the Council. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. 10. Consideration of Amending Residential Sprinkler Ordinance by Extending Implementation by Two Years Pete Alexander, 1114 East Third Street, spoke to the Council regarding the issue, and requested the Council consider striking reference to single-family residence; that the cost factor for the installation of such sprinkler systems adds significant costs to single-family houses. Mayor Sargent read the Ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, revising the implementation date of the requirement of automatic sprinklers in single-family residences and duplexes, and amending Section 1 of Ordinance No. 2464 and amending Section 3 of Ordinance 2426, and Chapter 14.26 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code. Councilman Lemon questioned Fire Chief Glenn on how he felt regarding the striking of references to single-family residences in the ordinance. Fire Chief Glenn responded that he believed single-family sprinkling has to be introduced through an education process, and residential sprinklers will be the fire protection of the future. He supported removal of reference to single- family residences in the Ordinance. Councilman Lemon moved to adopt the Ordinance as read, with the deletion of single-family residences referenced in the Ordinance. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion. Attorney Knutson suggested that the title would then need to be changed to revise the implementation date, and since the Council is deleting the requirement for sprinklers for single-family residences, the ordinance would further need to be revised by deleting all references to new single-family residential construction. Councilman Lemon questioned the necessity of requiring fire sprinklers in duplexes and asked Chief Glenn for his opinion on this issue. Chief Glenn responded that single-family and duplexes fall into the same classification. Therefore, a duplex is the same as single-family housing, and 1526 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 if it was was the Council's decision to have the ordinance requiring sprinklering of multi-family units, then the Council should also strike duplexes, as well as single-family residences. Attorney Knutson stated that in order to accomplish Chief Glenn's suggestion the Council would have to change the title to replace "revising the implementation date" with "deleting the requirement . .", and to delete the portion of Section 14.26.020 dealing with single-family residences and duplexes, as it is no longer necessary. Councilmen Lemon and Hallett concurred and incorporated that into the motion. The question was called and the motion carried unanimously. The revised title of the Ordinance reads as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 2562 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, deleting the requirement of automatic fire sprinklers in duplexes and single-family residences and amending Section 1 of Ordinance 2464 and amending Section 3 of Ordinance 2426 and Chatper 14.26 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code. 11. Consideration of Ordinance Requiring the Licensing of Fire Extinguisher Service Companies Mayor Sargent read the Ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. 2563 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles related to the licensing and regulating the business of servicing, inspecting, charging, and maintenance of portable fire extinguishers within the City of Port Angeles, and adding a new Chapter 5.90 to the Port Angeles Municipal Code. Councilman Hallett moved to adopt the Ordinance as read by title. Councilman Nicholson seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 12. Consideration of Contract with the State for Fire Protection for State Facilities in Port Angeles Councilman Ostrowski moved to authorize the Mayor to sign the contract approving the State's allocation of $1,990 for fire protection of State-owned buildings in the City of Port Angeles for the period July 1, 1990, through June 30, 1991. Councilman Lemon seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 13. Consideration of Contract for Fine Art Center Director Councilman Nicholson moved to approve the contract between the City of Port Angeles and Jake Seniuk to serve as Director of the Port Angeles Fine Art Center for the period covering January 1, 1990, through December 31, 1990, and authorized the Mayor to sign said contract. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 14. Information Regarding Executive Search Firms for City Manager Position The Council and staff discussed at length the use of executive search firms regarding the filling of the position of City Manager and the types of services they would expect such firms to perform. Following discussion, it was the recommendation of the Council to contact firms and direct the firm to conduct two steps: One, the development of a profile with the City Council; and secondly, some form of screening applicants down to a pre-determined number, which the Council will set, and solicit from the firms their recommendations on the number of applicants to be screened and the appropriate number to interview. -14- 1527 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 1990 15. Proposal for Use of the City Light Building for the Drug Task Force Mayor Sargent suggested that the Council discuss this issue during the Goals and Objectives discussion regarding the future use of the City Light Building. Following a short discussion, Councilman Nicholson moved to allow use of the City Light Building by the Drug Task Force. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion. Following a short discussion of the motion, the question was called and the motion carried unanimously. 16. Fire Truck Video Council viewed a video presentation on the new fire truck models. 17. Expiration of Terms Boards and Committees Council directed staff to contact the members of such Boards and Committees whose terms are expiring to see if they wish to fill another term, if they are eligible, and after that information is provided, the Council will determine if or when to post for vacancies. IX CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/LATE ITEMS Councilman Hallett noted a letter received from the Port Angeles Downtown Association requesting Council's support of a five-year action plan for the revitalization of Downtown Port Angeles, and suggested the Council respond to the letter and address the issue at the Council's Goals and Objectives meeting. Planning Director Collins noted that the Board of Adjustment will be holding a work session on February 5, 1990, for the discussion of land use philosophies and requested the Council attend such meeting. The Council set a special meeting for February 5, 1990, at 7:00 P.M. X ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Sargent adjourned the meeting to executive session at 11:38 P.M. for discussion of four items of pending litigation. Approximate length, 15 to 30 minutes. XI RETURN TO OPEN SESSION The meeting returned to open session at approximately 11:59 P.M. XII ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 12:00 midnight. Clerk NOTICE OF CALL FOR NOTICE IS HEREBY G VEN that sealed bids will be rec- eived by the City Clerk of the City of Port Angeles at 321I East Fifth Street of said City until 2:30 P.M., Tuesday, I March 6, 1990, for furnishing the following equipment and/ or materials: Bid #B.90.10 One (1) new and latest 35,000 GVW cab & CC. 129 , chassis. Bid #B.90.15 One (1) 5-6 yd. dump truck body. Bid #B.90.20 One (1) tractor loader backhoe. Bid sheets, specifications .and [ in~:t-r~iction~ ~- available trOrn I the City Clerk's Office, P.O. Box 1150, Port Angeles, WA 98362. Phone (206) 457-0411, ext. 118. Sealed bids shall be opened at 2:30 P.M., Tuesday, March 5, 1990, at 321 East 5th Street, Port Angeles City Hall. A certified check or bid bond for 5% of the amount bid shall accompany each bid. All bids to include F.O.B. Port Angeles, Washington. Th· City Council reserves the right to consider delivery time and. to accept or reject any or - 15 - all bids or any Dart thereof. David T. Flodstrom City Manager Pub.: Feb. 18. 23, 1990. LEGISLATIVE ITEM #5 ATTACHMENT X990 CITY COUNCIL~GOMHITTEE ASSIGNMENTS CITY RELATED COMMITTEES AUDIT COMMITTEE (STANDING COMMITEE MEMBERS DESIGN, ~TED AS NEED]:D) X CITIZENS RECYCLING COMMITTEE 2 X X DISABILITY BOARD !MAYOR X FIREMEN ' S PENSION BOARD ' MAYOR X PUBLIC INFORMATION COMMITTEE 2 X X REAL ESTATE COMMITTEE 3 X X X REVOLVING LOAN FUND REVIEW BOARD 1 X UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE 3 X X X VOLUNTEER FIREMEN'S BOARD MAYOR X OUTSIDE AGENCIES - CLALLAM COUNTY ALCOHOL/DRUG ABUSE 1 X DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES BOARD 1 X DWI TASK FORCE 1 X MENTAL HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD 1 X MUSEUM BOARD 1 X PUBLIC HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD 1 X SENIOR CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARD 1 X OUTSIDE AGENCIES - OTHERS CENTENNIAL COMMITTEE -CITY'S lOOth BIRTHDAY 1 X CHAMBER OF COMMERCE LIAISON 1 X CLALLAM/JEFFERSON COMMUNITY ACTION COUNCIL 1 X CLALLAM TRANSITY BOARD 2* ALT. X X ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 1' X ALT. G.M. LAURIDSEN TRUST MAYOR X PENINSULA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION 1 X HARBOR MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 X TOURISM & CONVENTION ASSOCIATION 2* X ALT. " ] L. I. F. T. HOME REVIEW COMMITTEE 1 X