Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01/17/1989I CALL TO ORDER Mayor McPhee called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. II PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Kathy Monds' third grade Bluebird Group, members Jessie Monds, Lisa LeVeaux, Katie Boggs, Christina Clapshaw, Sarah Hines. III ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Staff Present: None. CITY COUNCIL MEETING Port Angeles, Washington January 17, 1989 Mayor McPhee, Councilmen Gabriel, Hallett, Hordyk, Lemon Sargent, Stamon. Manager Flodstrom, Attorney Knutson, Clerk Maike, 0. Miller, M. Cleland, S. Brodhun, L. Glenn, J. Pittis, D. Wolfe, S. Hardy, S. Hursh, G. Kenworthy, K. Ridout, J. Hordyk, C. Headrick. Public Present: Mr. Mrs. C. Alexander, J. Fairchild, C. McKeown, J. S. Denoyer, B. Hansen, D. Willson, P. D. George, M. J. Grooms, B. Warder, H. L. Soderquist, L. Torres, L. Beil, J. VanOss, D. Rudolph, D. Rogers, G. B. Boyd, R. French, B. N. Johnson, J. Newlin, M. Langley, H. Berglund, L. Fuller, D. Vincent, D. Hines, F. Winters, P. Vanderhoof, M. Todd, L. LeVere, L. Lee, G. Austin, A. Wang, P. McDonagh, G. Witherow, R. B. Reidel, V. French, L. Sunny. IV APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 3, 1989 Councilman Sargent moved to accept and place on file the minutes of the meeting of January 3, 1989. Councilman Stamon seconded and the motion carried unanimously. V FINANCE 1. Request for Payment to Riddell. Williams. of $7.680.28 for Legal Representation on WPPSS Issues Councilman Hallett moved to authorize payment of January 2nd and 4, 1989, Riddell Williams bills $7,680.28 for legal representation on WPPSS iss seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 2. Consideration of Bid Award for Underground Electrical Cable VI CONSENT AGENDA 1257 the June 10, 1988, and in the total amount of ues. Councilman Sargent Councilman Stamon stated this matter was discussed and approved by the Utility Advisory Committee. She then moved to concur with the recommenda- tion of the Light Department to award the bid for the purchase of approxi- mately 15,000 feet of #4/0 aluminum underground cable to Graybar Electric Co., Inc. The bid price is approximately $33,116.16 (including tax), depending upon escalation factor, which is built in to the bid summary. Councilman Lemon seconded. After some discussion, the question was called and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Stamon moved to accept the items as listed on the Consent Agenda, including (1) Request permission to call for bids on Corporation Yard Buildings; (2) Request permission to call for bids on Water /Sewer and Traffic materials; (3) Request permission for bids for Patrol Car Mainten- ance; (4) Request permission to call for bids on Petroleum Products; (5) Correspondence from Washington State Liquor Control Board; (6) Vouchers of $262,244.72 (1988) and Vouchers of $50,039.35 (1989); and (7) Payroll of 1- 1258 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 13 -89 of $249,282.12. Councilman Hallett seconded. Following some discussion, the question was called and the motion carried unanimously. VII ITEMS FROM THE AUDIENCE TO BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA Darrel Vincent, 701 East Front Street, stated it was his opinion that the findings of fact cited for refusal of the rezone request, RZ- 88(12)3, in the half block south of San Juan Avenue between Lincoln and Laurel Streets, are not substantiated according to the testimony presented during the hearings and the Council discussion, and therefore, Mr. Vincent requested the Council reconsider the issue. Councilman Stamon moved to schedule the issue for discussion before the Council at the February 7, 1989, City Council meeting. Councilman Hallett seconded. Councilman Hordyk stated the matter should be referred back to the Planning Commission prior to a public hearing. Councilman Hallett did not feel that referring the matter back to the Planning Commission would add any additional information. However, he stated he would like to see this matter reconsidered. Mr. Vincent stated there is no new information to be offered. Councilman Stamon stated procedurally if the Council did not have a public hearing there could not be any discussion, except by the Councilmembers, because it is a rezone. Attorney Knutson stated that was correct, and because the original decision was made after a public hearing, the Council should be very careful to make sure, when a public hearing is required in the land use type of decisions, that the Council treat it as a quasi judicial matter and only take testimony during a public hearing. Councilman Gabriel stated since the Council is reconsidering the matter, it would be essential to open the matter up to a public hearing. Mayor McPhee stated he is opposed to another public hearing because there has already been one on the matter and this would only open the door to groups of people who wish to have items reconsidered because the Council has gone against their wishes. Councilman Lemon requested that Acting Planning Director Miller contact a larger radius of people involved in the neighborhood of the rezone and to post public notices within two or three blocks of the proposed rezone. On call for the question, the motion carried, with Councilmen Lemon, Hordyk, and Mayor McPhee voting "No Leonard Fuller, 420 East llth Street, requested that he be placed on the agenda. Mayor McPhee and Council placed Mr. Fuller as Item 13 on the Agenda, regarding the issue of his home as a public nuisance. Jerry Cornell, 1019 East Ninth Street, requested Council allow him to make comments on Item 6, Consideration of Issues Which the City Council Wishes to Discuss With the Planning Commission at the Joint Meeting on January 25, 1989. Dennis Alwine, 519 South Peabody Street, also requested that he be allowed to speak on Item 6. Hessle B. Buck, 1716 East Fourth Street, requested that Council allow him to speak on Item 10 on the Agenda, Consideration of Telecable Rate Regulation Issues. Howard Gapinski, 702 South Cherry Street, requested that he be allowed to speak on the public hearing Item 2B, Consideration of Resolution for Abatement of Public Nuisances, specifically the northwest corner of Eighth and Cherry Streets. VIII LEGISLATION 1259 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 Councilman Sargent asked that Council discuss a letter received from the Clallam County Commissioners regarding tourism promotion and to include it in Item 4. Councilman Stamon moved to place the letter from the County Commissioners as a part of Item 4, and that Item 4 be placed as Item 6A on the Council's Agenda. Councilman Hallett seconded and the motion carried, with Councilman Hordyk, Lemon, and Mayor McPhee voting "No Mayor McPhee requested that Information Agenda Item No. 6 regarding the donation of an old meter test board to Rocky Reach Dam Museum be placed on the Council's legislative agenda as Item 14. 1. Presentation of Certificates of Appreciation to Port AnEeles Senior Center and Olympic Memorial Hospital for Assistance with the City's D.A.R.E. ProEram Mayor McPhee presented certificates of appreciation to Al Remington, representing Olympic Memorial Hospital, and Jean Hordyk, representing the Port Angeles Senior Center, and commended them and their personnel for the outstanding effort they have given to the D.A.R.E. Program. 2. Public Hearings A. Proposed ChanEes to Cronauer to Shoreline Development Permit Continued from January 3. 1989 Mayor McPhee opened the public hearing at 7:33 P.M. Louie Torres, representing Paul Cronauer, the applicant, and the Olympic Development Planning for Terminal Land Company, gave a brief outline of the issue to date. The City Council approved the Shoreline Permit for Paul Cronauer's development at the foot on Francis Street on November 15, 1988. A portion of the conditions for the shoreline approval was that Mr. Cronauer would grant an easement to the City for public access and utility mainten- ance across all of the applicant's property lying north of the southerly edge of the access ramp. However, more recently it has been discovered that Mr. Cronauer does not own the Victoria Street right -of -way in front of his property. Upon finding that Mr. Cronauer does not, in fact, own the right of -way easement, the Jet Set Soroptomists requested that the City of Port Angeles rescind the existing permit, based upon the erroneous data; that the benefit of the easement was now lost; that there was inadequate data in the application; the requirement of retaining walls around landfills; and that the applicant had no right to use Victoria Street for private use. Subse- quent to the request for the rescission of the permit, the applicant is requesting approval for revisions and amendments to the permit. In part, the revisions are as follows: (1) Modification to the rip rap repair; (2) Removal of the fill; (3) Relocation of the 8 -1/3% graded and graveled access ramps. Additionally, it was requested that amendments to the conditions of approval be granted at the same time, to include in part A, rip -rap repairs shall not disrupt, damage, or have significant negative impact; B, said easement shall be granted by quit claim in recognition of the possibility that properties underlying the proposed improvements may already be non vacated rights -of -way; C, a copy of an application permit for right -of -way construction with these conditions attached. The final request of the applicant was that the approval of the revised plan and amended condition also include a modification to the original findings of fact. It was proposed that Finding C be revised to read: "Public access and utility easement to be granted by quit claim is appropriate to assure that any potential interests to the contrary are ended and to assure that the City can maintain and protect its investment in utilities in the shoreline area in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare, and the local Shoreline Master Program." Mr. Torres stated the following benefits to the City and the City residents if the amendments are approved: (1) Removal of the fill sufficient to accomplish a return to the railroad grade waterfront trail; (2) Repair of one portion of the rip -rap which appears to be experiencing erosion and failure; (3) Access to the water through the rip -rap from the Waterfront Trail at the Francis Street right -of -way; (4) Ramp access provides for use of pedestrians, bicyclists, and handicapped persons. Finally, Mr. Torres stated this accomplishes compliance with the -3- 1260 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 provisions of the resolution of the "cease and desist" order which currently encumbers the property, so the benefits gained are for both parties. Dave Johnson, attorney for the Jet Set Soroptomists, 708 South Race Street, stated the concerns of the Soroptomists come from two basic areas: (1) Procedural; and (2) The substance of the aspects of this particular pro- posal. He questioned the procedures of the Council to set a public hearing on this matter when there was some indication there would be a potential agreement between the Soroptomists and the applicant with respect to an amendment to the permit. Further, the Council had agreed to put it on the agenda for the purpose of considering the agreed amendments. One of the main concerns of the Soroptomists has to do with the boundaries of the particular property, specifically the north boundary of the developer's property and the Victoria Street right -of -way. Mr. Johnson stated there are many aspects of the new proposal that are beneficial and are what the Soroptomists have been advocating all along. One of the primary aspects is to maintain the Waterfront Trail as a level trail at the original railroad grade. He voiced his concern over the submittal of new information on the previous Friday, and further, that the general public has not had a suffi- cient amount of time to review the new proposal. Given the fact the applicant is asking the Council to approve substantial revisions to the shoreline permit, the Council should establish a public hearing to address the new proposal, providing adequate notice to the public of the details of the proposal. Mr. Johnson stated the City has received a review of the application submitted to the Department of Ecology, citing a deficiency of the information submitted in support of the application. Referring to the letter written by the Soroptomists, dated January 17, 1989, the following recommendations were submitted for the Council's consideration. In part, those considerations are (1) That as a condition to the Council's consid- eration of the request for an amended permit, Mr. Cronauer be required to stipulate to rescission of the existing permit; (2) That the public be given at least ten days' advance notice of any amendments to the permit prior to a public hearing considering such plans; (3) That any considera- tion of approval of plans to fill and use public right -of -way comply with existing laws relating to the use of public right -of -way; (4) The amended proposal be submitted for review by the City Departments; (5) A particular concern regarding the fill to the Victoria Street right -of -way and whether this fill and the proposed ramps constitute the best use of this public property. In addition, the City's Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan, p. 7 -11, provides: "The City should develop a street end and beach access park at the foot of Francis Street." Such an alternative use of the Victoria Street right -of -way certainly warrants the City's consideration and would be foreclosed if Mr. Cronauer is permitted to fill the right -of -way; (6) If consideration is given to the proposed amendments, the following minimal conditions should be included as stated below, in part: (A) Perimeters of any fill within the shoreline area must be provided with retaining walls; (B) The Waterfront Trail to be constructed by the applicant at railroad grade, be a minimum of 16 feet wide to allow accommodation of the 1 -foot Trail and at least a 4 -foot shoulder to the water side of the Trail; (C) All fill above, below, and within the proposed Trail and Trail ramps be engineered and constructed according to standards identified; (D) The developer shall immediately rectify the current problem on site; (E) The developer shall submit a reclamation plan to inc'ude standards with which the developer will comply with respect to erosion control, vegetation and site stabilization; (F) All rip -rap improvements shall hold the existing toe of the rip -rap; (G) There shall be a setback for all buildings and struc- tures on Lots 5 through 8; (H) Developer or his successor shall be responsible for constructing to a gravel surface the entire Trail and ramp system; (I) Developer or his successor shall be responsible for removal of all fill necessary to return Victoria Street to its original elevation and condition; (J) Developer or his successor shall be responsible for con- struction of access to the beach through the rip rap; (K) The Developer or his successor shall construct and improve the Francis Street right -of -way and its connection with the Waterfront Trail; (L) The developer or his successor shall complete all construction authorized or required under permits granted. Mr. Johnson stated it seems one of the major considera- tions that the Council has is what is going to be the best public use, or the most beneficial use to the public, that can be made of this particular right -of -way. Hattie Berglund, 1834 West Seventh Street, voiced her concern over the scheduling of the public hearing on the controversial development project, -4- 1261 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 stating the Council has kept information relating to such changes secret from the public prior to the public hearing. She stated she believed this violated the rules of the State Environmental Protection Act, based on information to be furnished to the public prior to a public hearing; and because of this, she requested the Council withdraw the determination of non significance for the Cronauer project. She stated she felt this would be a most appropriate action, as this would force Mr. Cronauer to submit a new proposal, if he should wish to do so. The Environmental Protection Act provides that the City shall withdraw a determination of non significance if there are substantial changes to a proposal, if there is significant new information on the proposal, and if the determination of non significance was procured by misrepresentation or lack of material disclosure. Further stating, there certainly is new information relating to this project, specifically that the City of Port Angeles, not Mr. Cronauer, owns the right -of -way. Her final concern was if the City Council allows this project by amendment and doctoring up of his proposal, a precedent will be set for future development projects which will affect the City for years to come. She urged that the Council withdraw Mr. Cronauer's determination of non significance. She also concurred with the comments made by Mr. Johnson. Mayor McPhee replied the City Council did not receive the information from Mr. Cronauer nor the attorney for the Soroptimists until the previous Friday, and also information was submitted at the beginning of the meeting. Therefore, it was not the intention of the Council to keep any information from the public. Donald E. Rudolph, 1013 East Third Street, commented he was tired of the "no- growth" attitude of the City. Rosemary Cockrill, 1162 Marsden Road, stated she had been to the Planning Department the previous week to review information regarding the amendments to the shoreline permit; however, she found that no information was avail- able. There has been no prior release or discussion of the proposal. There has been no proposed changes available to the public. Stating, a public hearing, by its very nature, is for the informed input from the public, based on material previously published and available for public review prior to the hearing date. She stated this is a new proposal; it is not an amended proposal; and as such, it should go through the proper procedures, through the Planning Commission, then back to the City Council again. Louie Torres again spoke in response to some of the comments made, giving a history of the letter from the Department of Ecology regarding the deficiency in the plans. He stated that the letter sent from the City to the State was deficient. In regard to the authority to use a City right -of- way, he stated the right -of -way was not vacated by ordinance and the City did not treat this piece of property as right -of -way for a number of years; that there are other issues of ownership by statutes associated with prop- erties that the City may hold in its role of fiduciary agent when it is not right -of -way. Under those circumstances, there are issues of adverse possession; and although it may be true the City has clear title to this property, he suggested it probably is not true. It is not a vacated street and who owns it may be a valid question. He requested the Council amend the existing permit and allow the project to proceed. Mike Doherty, 617 South "B" Street, concurred with the comments made by Ms. Cockrill, Ms. Berglund, and Mr. Johnson. He made some comments regarding the public notices and suggested there be better notification to the public regarding these types of matters, stating the original notices are still posted on telephone poles throughout the area. He also questioned the administrative process involved, stating only part of the information was available to the general public. He stated he felt it was appropriate the public should have been able to attend the meetings between the Soroptomists and the applicant in deciding on the amendments, as he felt the public may have been able to give some appropriate input. He spoke on being able to go to the site on a rainy days and to see sediment flowing into the Harbor without any measures to mitigate the problem. He stated the City should review the Comprehensive Plan to see what is best for the public interest. Finally, he suggested a solution of speaking to the owners of ITT Rayonier to see if they would work with the developer and the City to possibly consider rescinding the purchase contract from Rayonier to the developer, refund the applicant's money and try to get the land rehabilitated, and then -5- 1262 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 get the corporate good neighbor to donate some of that land to the City for park, recreation, and greenbelt policy agreements. Mike Langley, 1036 West 17th Street, informed Council of some information he had received from the United States Housing and Urban Development Adminis- tration regarding ramping. Ramping for trails is one foot of rise for every 20 feet of run, and for every 30 feet in elevation gained, there was a requirement for a rest. Darrel Vincent, 701 East Front Street, spoke in support of the development of the area, as he stated this would be turning an unsightly area into a nicely developed area. He felt this to be a fantastic asset. Jewel VanOss, 1019 East Fourth Street, stated she is not opposed to private development; however, she was concerned that the Cronauer development be developed within the property bounds. Rosemary Cockrill read Policy No. 7 from the City's Shoreline Master Program, which states in part that the Master Program shall protect the public interest as against private interest, while recognizing the right to private shoreline ownership. However, exploitation of shoreline areas, to the detriment of public interest, shall be prohibited within the limits of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. She stated if we are to have people who can enjoy the waterfront, then the waterfront must be open to all people to use. She further stated within Clallam County there is very little shoreline that is available for public use. She suggested very strongly that the Council schedule a public hearing so people could speak to the issue. Dave Johnson, attorney for Jet Set Soroptomists, gave an overview of some information submitted to the Council in regard to this matter. Paul Cronauer, developer, speaking in regard to the siltation, stated the City has had extreme rains over the last two weeks and the rains have filled the siltation trenches, and it has overflowed; however, they have been out to the site to clean up the ditch so it is functioning once again. Mayor McPhee then closed the public hearing at 8:52 P.M. Councilman Stamon asked if the plans submitted by the applicant have been reviewed by the Departments. Manager Flodstrom stated no, not in any detail. Councilman Hallett asked Attorney Knutson if there was any legal definitions for the term "significant as used in the context of SEPA and a declara- tion of non significance. Attorney Knutson stated other than the dictionary definition, he was not aware, of any difference in the definition as used by SEPA. However, the word is used in such a way that the Department of Ecology lets the City know whether to issue a declaration of non significance or to require an environmental impact statement on the project. The phraseology used is something to the effect that if there is more than''a moderate probability of a significant negative impact caused by the development, then it would not issue a declaration of non significance, but instead to do an environmental impact statement. Councilman Hallett asked, with the changes being proposed, are they significant enough that an amendment would not be the best way to handle this issue? Attorney Knutson responded the original declaration of non significance and the staff recommendation made by the City's responsible official, which is the Planning Director, was that the shoreline permit be issued with the fill material being removed from the railroad grade further south than what this proposed revision is contemplating; concluding that the responsible official of the City, the Planning Director, felt there was leeway within the scope of the original shoreline application and how much fill should be removed. That would still result in the shoreline permit being issued, falling into the category of being non significant. -6- 1263 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 Acting Planning Director Miller stated the original application was considered incomplete. With the new information, it would be difficult to determine whether or not this would require studies to indicate whether it needed mitigation environmentally. At this point, there has not been a great impact environmentally. However, the possibility will need further study and Mr. Miller was unsure whether it would require an environmental impact statement. Councilman Hallett asked Acting Planning Director Miller, if this project was coming to him for the first time, as written, would it be reasonable that he may require an EIS? Acting Planning Director Miller stated it would be reasonable. Councilman Hallett asked whether the City ever vacated Victoria Street. Manager Flodstrom replied that this portion of Victoria Street has never been vacated. Councilman Hallett asked since the vacation has not taken place, could the City actually grant a permit without going through the street vacation process? Attorney Knutson responded with the question stated as such, they probably could not. In order to allow for the project to go forward as proposed, the City would have to be determining that the use being made of the City right of -way is a public use. Councilman Hordyk expressed some concerns and in light of some of the information that has been expressed at the public hearing, he stated he was not ready to make any kind of decision on the issue. Councilman Hordyk moved that Council table the issue until the February 7, 1989, regular City Council meeting. Councilman Lemon seconded. Councilman Stamon rose to a point of order and pointed out to Mayor McPhee that as chair, if he feels that possibly the motion is frustrating, in some way, the attempt of Council, then he could rule the motion out of order. Mayor McPhee stated he did not believe it was and ruled that the motion was acceptable. On call for the question, the motion failed, with Councilmen Gabriel, Hallett, Stamon, and Sargent voting "No Councilman Stamon moved, for discussion, that the Council rescind the shoreline permit, withdraw the declaration of non significance, based on the requirements and provisions as outlined in the State Environmental Policy Act, and to instruct staff to work with the applicant to develop a plan to restore the City right -of -way to its previous condition. Councilman Hallett seconded for purposes of discussion. Councilman Stamon, in speaking to her motion, stated that the basic fact the Council needs to consider is thatfill has beenkillegally placed on City owned property. The applicant is asking the Council to grant permission to use public right -of -way for private use and gain, and it was the Council's job to weigh the benefits of the application to the applicant and the public, as well. In closing, she stated it is important for the Council to preserve these areas for our posterity, for the benefit of the many rather than the benefit of the few. Mayor McPhee asked Attorney Knutson what were the legal alternatives available to the Council in the present situation. Attorney Knutson replied motion that was made, considered findings of public hearing; take no effect. that procedurally, the Council could act upon the and suggested that the supporting comments be fact; the Council continue the matter and set a action, and consider the original permit to be in Councilman Hallett stated in his opinion, it appears that based upon the Council's original permit, there are some substantial changes and signifi- cant new information; and also, the original permit was based on a lack of -7- 1264 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 complete information or some misinformation that neither party had complete knowledge of. Now that some of the information has come to light, he was not sure what the impacts would be, short -term and long -term, and the Council would be better served by starting the process over from the beginning. Councilman Sargent voiced her concern that the public was not fully informed and she felt there is significant new information on the proposal which was not available, and the Council should begin the process from the beginning. Councilman Stamon amended her motion to state that the Council would rescind the present shoreline permit, withdraw the declaration of non significance, based on the State Environmental Policy Act, and instruct the staff to work with the applicant in developing a new environmental assess- ment, and to start the process over. Councilman Hallett concurred. Councilman Lemon spoke in opposition to the motion. He felt there was not sufficient change from the recommendation of the staff and he felt this was a win -win situation of having an accessible trail with handicapped accessi- bility. In regard to the City losing some property to a private developer, the applicant does not have access to build on the right -of -way. Councilman Hordyk stated the Council is not trying to set back development within the community, but rather trying to help development to proceed. If the property was to be saved for posterity, then the City should be prepared to buy the property and to make it into a park. He did not feel that going back to square one would resolve the issue, as he felt the efforts made in the development so far were promising and he did not think Council wanted to create any hardships. Councilman Stamon stated if the Council continues with the application they presently have, then the Council would be in clear danger of violating the State Environmental Policy Act. Mayor McPhee asked Attorney Knutson if he had been able to form an opinion as to whether or not the City would be in violation of State law or regulations if the City continued with the present permit. Attorney Knutson stated he did not believe the City would be, as he believed the original declaration of non significance was intended to be broad enough to cover both sides of this particular revision. Councilman Lemon questioned Manager Flodstrom as to what he saw as being proposed by the two mediating bodies, Soroptomist and the applicant, that is significantly different than the staff recommendation versus what the Council gave in the shoreline permit. Manager Flodstrom responded in his opinion the proposal, as presented, is an improvement over the previous proposal. The improvements of the new propozal (1) provides better access to the Waterfront Trail; (2) provides beach access; (3) provides a continuous route for the Trail along the shoreline up to and beyond Francis Street to the east; and (4) provides easy access via Francis Street. Generally, it is an improvement from the perception of the Soroptomists and the City wheat looking at the concerns immediately following the approval of the shoreline permit. Following further discussion, the question was called and the motion failed, with Councilmen Hordyk, Gabriel, Lemon and Mayor McPhee voting "No Councilman Lemon moved to amend the previous permit to reflect the applica- tion revisions, as follows: (1) Modification to the rip -rap repair to include access through the rip -rap to the beach within the Francis Street right -of -way. Access shall include a relocation of rock and addition of small stone to create a pathway which will traverse the rip rap. Additional rip -rap or armor stone sill be placed as necessary to protect the pathway; (2) Removal of fill immediately south of the repaired rip -rap to the original ±16.5') elevation to maintain a level area of not less than 12 feet in width for the continuation of the Waterfront Trail across the entire width of the project area; (3) relocation of the 8 -1/3% graded and graveled access ramps, from the Waterfront Trail up to Francis Street, to a location south of the aforementioned Waterfront Trail but still within the original Victoria Street right -of -way; and to revise the conditions as follows: (A) Revise condition "2" in its second line to read rap repairs shall -8- not disrupt, damage, or have a significant negative impact which would acknowledge that the fill to create the easterly access ramp will increase the depth to existing utility lines by 10 to 15 feet, thereby potentially increasing replacement cost at that location in the future. (If future replacement is relocated into right -of -way and down the new ramp route, then the impact is potentially minimized.); (B) Revise condition "3" with an additional sentence stating: "Said easement shall be granted by suit claim in recognition of the possibility that properties underlying the proposed improvements may already be non vacated rights -of -way and the applicant's acquisitions of potential interests in that property was limited to quit claims from other parties believed to have interests in said properties_ (C) Revise condition "6 line three, to read: upon a copy of an application permit for right -of -way construction with these conditions attached acknowledging which revision addresses the potential right -of -way status of Victoria Street and provides for proper City indemnification and contractor (applicant) liability for improvements; and amending finding "C" to read: "The public access and utility easement to be granted by quit claim is appropriate to assure that any potential interests to the contrary are ended and to assure that the City can maintain and protect its investment in utilities in the shoreline area in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare, and the local Shoreline Master Program." and to continue with the shoreline permit. Councilman Hordyk seconded. Following further discussion, Councilman Hordyk moved to table the issue until the February 7, 1989, City Council meeting. Councilman Sargent seconded. On call for the question, the motion carried, with Councilmen Hallett and Stamon voting "No BREAK Mayor McPhee recessed the meeting for a break at 9:30 P.M. B. Consideration of Resolution for Abatement of Public Nuisance (Northwest Corner 8th /Cherry and 400 block West 9th (East)) Mayor McPhee read the Resolution by title, entitled RESOLUTION NO. 2 -89 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, declaring the existence of a public nuisance and requiring the elimination of such nuisance. Mayor McPhee opened the public hearing at 9:55 P.M. 1265 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 Ken Ridout, Deputy Director of Public Works, stated the Public Works Department has deleted the lots listed on Exhibit "A" as the northwest corner of Eighth and Cherry. Upon the advice of the City Attorney, the Department found that the lots did not meet the criteria of the Public Nuisance Ordinance. Howard Gapinski, 702 South Cherry, voiced his conc over the lots located on the northwest corner of Eighth and Cherry, stating this is a vacant lot which has become a dump site for dirt. Mr. Gapinski gave a brief history with regard to the site in question, stating that the dirt and debris which has been placed on the lot has caused degradation to the neighborhood. He felt it was a public safety hazard, as the children in the neighborhood use the dirt piles as a play area and ride their bicycles up and down the hill, which causes a safety hazard to those children. He has witnessed several near accidents in the area caused by the children on their bicycles crossing the street in front of on- coming traffic. He asked why this could not be enforced by the nuisance ordinance. Attorney Knutson suggested the Council could consider passing a grading and filling ordinance which would have given Council the ability to control the deposit of earth and fill at the time it was done, by permitting the process, and attaching conditions to the permit. He further stated the nuisance ordinance has language for specific classifications of nuisances and this issue does not fall into any of those categories. -9- 1266 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 Following further discussion between Council, Mr. Gapinski, and staff, Mayor McPhee closed the public hearing at 10:12 P.M. Councilman Stamon moved to pass the Resolution as read by title, with the amendment to Exhibit "A Councilman Hallett seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Hallett moved to continue with the items on the Agenda. Coun- cilman Sargent seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 3. Report on Retainine Wall Failure City Engineer Gary Kenworthy provided Council with a brief report on the failure of the retaining wall located at 303 Tumwater Truck Route. Engineer Kenworthy stated on January 4, 1989, just shortly before noon, while employees of the agency were backfilling the retaining wall, a failure occurred and the wall tipped over and struck a piece of equipment. Engineer Kenworthy responded to the incident and met with the owner, Paul Cronauer, at the site to discuss immediate remedial actions to be taken. He recom- mended that Mr. Cronauer retain a geologist, and remove the trees above the wall that had failed. As of this date, Mr. Cronauer has complied with the removal of trees; he has retained a geologist and provided the City with a report on the failure, and has proceeded with the recommended measures to correct the action immediately in order to protect the Cedar Street hill above. In reviewing the area as of this date, Mr. Cronauer has not com- pleted the measures; however, he is working diligently and it is expected to be completed by the following day. Public Works Director Pittis stated the Department has also established new survey points on the wall and the roadway of Cedar Street that the Depart- ment is monitoring to make sure there is no movement in the area. So far, there has been no movement. Mayor McPhee asked if City staff was satisfied with the results that have taken place thus far. Engineer Kenworthy stated yes. Councilman Stamon asked if the replacement wall has been finished, or is it just a temporary measure to hold the hill and stabilize until such time as a new wall can be constructed. Engineer Kenworthy stated it is only a temporary situation to enable the stabilization of the hill until winter is over. Councilman Stamon also requested that a time table for completion be sub- mitted to the Council. Councilman Hallett concurred. Following further discussion, no action was taken. 4. PlanninE Commission Minutes of January 11. 1989 A. Rezone Request Leonard Bell. Jr. Councilman Stamon moved to set a public hearing for the February 7, 1989, City Council meeting to consider a request to rezone 3 lots presently designated single family residential to RMF, Residential Multi Family, located at Liberty and Georgiana Streets. Councilman Sargent seconded and the motion carried unanimously. B. Conditional Use HearinE Gretchen Delaney Councilman Hallett moved to concur with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the Conditional Use Permit to allow a day care operation as a Home Occupation, located in the RS -7, Single Family Residen- tial District, at 1617 South "D" Street, subject to the following condi- tions: (1) The proposed family day care center shall conform with the development standards as set forth in the Home Occupations Chapter of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 17.86.040); (2) The hours of operation are limited to 7:30 A.M. to 5:30 P.M., Monday through Friday, and on Saturdays from 9 A.M. to 5 P.M.; (3) This Conditional Use Permit allows the applicant to operate a family day care center with a maximum of six children. All indoor -10- C. Rezone HearinE Shelter Resources D. Shoreline Management Hearine Fidler 1267 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 and outdoor play areas shall meet all State Department of Health require- ments for a family day care center; (4) State and local Fire Codes shall be complied with, including smoke alarm, fire extinguishers, and approved fire exit areas. The premises will be inspected yearly by the Fire Department and shall comply with the UFC requirements; (5) If, in the future, the City or other appropriate regulatory agency, finds that the family day care center, as approved at this site, required greater on -site parking facili- ties, the applicant shall provide such on -site parking, subject to the City Planning and Public Works Departments' approval; (6) If substantive com- plaints regarding noise are received, the authorized hours of operation may be reduced and /or other noise control measures required by the Planning Commission; and citing the following findings: (A) This location is physically suited for a family day care center; (B) The proposed use will not result in significant impacts on the environment; (C) The proposed use is consistent with the City of Port Angeles Residential Policies of the Comprehensive Plan; (D) A family day care center on this property, as conditioned by this Permit, will not adversely affect the surrounding properties. Councilman Sargent seconded and the motion carried unani- mously. Councilman Stamon moved the Council accept the applicant's request to withdraw the application to rezone approximately 4.2+ acres from Residential Single Family to RMF, Residential Multi Family, located on Ahlvers Road. Councilman Gabriel seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Sargent moved to refer the issue back to the Planning Commission to have a vote of all seven members and to get a recommendation from the Planning Commission on the issue. Councilman Stamon seconded. Following some discussion, the question was called and the motion carried, with Councilmen Lemon, Hordyk, and Gabriel voting "No E. Conditional Use HearinE Clallam County Emergency Housing Councilman Sargent moved to concur with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the Conditional Use Permit to allow a group home facility for emergency family shelter to locate in an RS -9, Single Family Residential District, located at 4108 Newell Road, subject to the following conditions: (1) This Conditional use Permit allows the applicant to operate a "hospice" with a maximum twelve person occupancy, including 24 -hour staff; (2) State and local fire codes shall be complied with, including smoke alarm, fire extinguishers, and approved fire exits. The premises shall be inspected yearly by the Fire Department and shall comply with the UFC requirements; (3) Future expansions and /or improvements, including the proposed six -foot fence, gate system, and utility improvements, shall be subject to the City's Fire, Light, Public Works, and /or Planning Depart- ments' approvals; (4) If substantive complaints regarding this emergency housing use are received, the authorized operation may be reduced, modi- fied, and /or other control measures required, as determined by the Planning Commission; and citing the following findings9 (A) This location is physically suited for an "emergency housing hospice (B) The proposed use will not result in any significant impacts to the environment; (C) The proposed use is consistent with the purpose of the RS -9, Residential Single Family Zoning District; (D) An "emergency family hospice" on this property, as conditioned by this permit, should not adversely affect the surrounding properties. Councilman Gabriel seconded and the motion carried unanimously. F. Acceptance of Minutes Councilman Gabriel moved to accept and place on file the Planning Commission minutes of the January 11, 1989, meeting. Councilman Stamon seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 5. Consideration of Issues Which the City Council Wishes to Discuss With the PlanninE Commission at the Joint MeetinE on January 25. 1989 Jerry Cornell, 1019 East Ninth Street, a member of the Planning Commission, requested the Council consider discussion of three issues during their joint meeting: (1) A general discussion on the draft adult congregate care 1268 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 ordinance; (2) A general discussion concerning multi- family zoning within the City of Port Angeles; and (3) The consensus of the Planning Commission is that priority should be given toward review of the following long -range planning issues in the upcoming year: (a) Review adult care facilities; (b) Review the multi family zoning district; (c) Review the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map; and (d) Implementation of the Harbor Plan. Dennis Alwine, 519 South Peabody Street, requested the Council and Commis- sion discuss elderly housing density standards. He read a letter to Council submitted from Roger Almskar, land use consultant, regarding the issue. The letter, in essence, states that Mr. Almskar would request consideration of a zoning ordinance amendment regarding the allowance of elderly housing in the City. The amendment states: "A RMF or Residential Multi- Family is amended as follows: Conditional Use duplexes, public parks, churches, golf courses, public and private schools, libraries, utility buildings and structures, hospitals and rest homes, retirement apartments, boarding and rooming houses, business parking, and motels." He gives the definition of "retirement apartment: a multi family dwelling consisting primarily of studio and /or one bedroom apartments, averaging 800 or fewer square feet in gross floor area. The Councilmembers offered the following items of discussion for the joint meeting: Review the procedure regarding notification of the public during the public hearing process; discussion of the Circulation Policies; review and discussion of senior housing; adult entertainment; discussion of long plat /short plat; study of a land grading and filling ordinance; review the concept of annexation; discussion of residential neighborhoods; the estab- lishing of neighborhoods where Conditional Use Permit Home Occupations are not allowed; sidewalks; discussion of the infrastructure of the City; and pre- zoning. 6A. City Council Committee Assignments Council had received a letter submitted by the Clallam County Commissioners' Office regarding the situation with the Tourism /Convention Association of Clallam County, stating that the Commissioners are very concerned about the present leadership of TCACC and local government representation on the Board of Directors. Clallam County feels TCACC is too important to let succumb to the internal problems it is now experiencing. They requested the coopera- tion of the Council in requesting the TCACC Board of Directors to amend their by -laws to allow each city and Clallam County to become voting members of the TCACC. Each city council and the Board of Commissioners would then appoint a representative, thus eliminating the current government representative position. Councilman Stamon stated, in speaking with the Commissioners regarding the issue, she was told by Commissioner Cameron that she could communicate to the Council that the intent of the County was to look at a different approach for governmental representation on the Tourism /Convention Asso- ciatipn Board of Directors. It was not an intent to ask for the removal of Councilman Stamon on the Board as the governmental representative, and their comments to her were that she was still the representative and duly appointed by them to represent their interest with this particular organi- zation. Councilman Gabriel stated he concurred with the comments stated in the letter; that he, too, has some real concerns regarding the leadership in the organization. He moved the Council send a letter to the TCACC indicating the Council's intention of also having their own local government repre- sentative. Councilman Sargent seconded. Councilman Sargent stated she, too, had spoken to the County Commissioners and also had attended the Board of Directors' meeting and she believes that each governmental entity needs a representative in order to rectify the situation that has evolved. Councilman Gabriel expressed his interest as serving as the member to be seated on the Board. Councilman Stamon spoke in support of the motion; however, she stated the Board of the TCACC may or may not decide to accept those requests and recommendations. She spoke in opposition to being removed from continued representation on the Board, as she felt she has kept the Council informed. -12- CITY OF January She has worked hard on the organization, and if there are individual Councilmembers have, they should call her and concerns. She did not feel she has failed in doing her job. 1269 PORT ANGELES 17, 1989 concerns that express those Councilman Hordyk stated it is not a point of failing, but it is a very healthy situation to move around on committee assignments. Councilman Lemon called for the question, and the motion carried, with Councilman Hallett voting "No Councilman Lemon moved to appoint Councilman Gabriel as the City's repre- sentative to the Board of Directors of the TCACC. Councilman Hordyk seconded. Councilman Stamon spoke in opposition to the motion. Following a lengthy discussion, the question was called by Councilman Lemon. Mayor McPhee called for a vote on calling for the question. Councilman Stamon rose to a point of order, asking for the opportunity to make one short comment. Mayor McPhee stated he would not accept the point of order. Councilman Stamon then appealed to the Council. The vote was made on the appeal and the appeal failed, with Councilmen Stamon and Hallett voting "Aye The vote was called for the calling for the question, and carried, with Councilman Hallett voting "No On call for the question, the motion carried, with Councilmen Hallett and Stamon voting "No Councilman Lemon moved to appoint Councilman Hordyk to the Utility Advisory Committee in replacement of Councilman Gabriel. Councilman Gabriel seconded and the motion carried, with Councilmen Hallett and Stamon voting "No Councilman Stamon stated she felt there should be more balanced representa- tion on the Audit Committee than what presently exists, as she did not feel that all points of view of the Council were represented. She then moved that the Council would consider the appointment of either herself, Council- man Sargent, or Councilman Hallett to the Audit Committee. Councilman Hallett seconded. Councilman Lemon spoke in opposition. Following discussion, the question was called and the motion failed, with Councilmen Stamon and Hallett voting "Aye 6. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing on DelGuzzi Drive LID Mayor McPhee read the Resolution by title, entitled RESOLUTION NO. 3 -89 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, declaring the intention of the City Council to order the improvement of a certain area within the City by doing street improvements, and by doing all other work necessary in connection therewith, and fixing a time, date and place for a hearing on this resolution of intent. Councilman Hordyk moved to pass the Resolution as read by title. Councilman Stamon seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The public hearing was set for February 7, 1989. 7. Consideration of Setting Public Hearing for Street Vacation Reouest- STV- 89(02')1 Priest /Ziegler /Ouinn Alder Street Mayor McPhee read the Resolution by title, entitled -13- 1270 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989 RESOLUTION NO. 4 -89 A RESOLUTION of the City of Port Angeles setting a hearing date for a petition to vacate a portion of Alder Street and alley in Block 133, Thomas W. Carter's Subdivision. Councilman Sargent moved to pass the Resolution as read by title, and to refer the matter to the Planning Commission for a recommendation. Council- man Hallett seconded and the motion carried. The public hearing was set for February 21, 1989. Councilman Stamon moved to continue Items 8, 11, and 13 to the February 7, 1989, City Council meeting. Councilman Gabriel seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 8. Consideration of Option for Providing Pharmaceutical Prescriptions/ Supplies for City Employees Continued to the February 7, 1989, City Council meeting. 9. Consideration of Telecable Rate Regulation Issues Hessle Buck, 1716 East Fourth Street, spoke regarding the increased rates of Port Angeles Telecable and the franchise the City of Port Angeles has with the Telecable company. Mr. Buck pointed out to Council that the Federal law states that in any area where there is not effective competition, rates can be regulated. He stated he had called the FCC to research this item and he felt the City should take steps toward regulating the rates and he urged the Council pursue this issue. Attorney Knutson pointed out to the Council that the franchise ordinance includes a provision that allows the City to regulate rates in the event it is determined that Telecable is not exempt from local rate regulation by pre- exemption of Federal law. In a recent court case, the Federal Communi- cations Commission found that cable TV rates can be regulated if there is not effective competition. In order to determine whether or not there is effective competition in Port Angeles, it would be necessary to do two surveys and to present the results in a contested waiver hearing before the FCC. The estimated cost of performing these surveys and having them presented to the FCC by an attorney experienced in such matters would be approximately $40,000 to $50,000. However, depending on the outcome of those court hearings, the party losing would incur the costs of both parties. Another option that the City has would be to notify the cable company of the City's intent to proceed with the rate regulation procedure and hopefully to come to some agreement prior to any litigation of the matter. Following lengthy discussion, Councilman Lemon moved Council notify Telecable of the City's intent to proceed with the rate regulation waiver process and at the same time indicate a willingness to negotiate a reasonable limit on rate increases. Councilman f argent seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 10. Consideration of Letter to Port Angeles School District Regarding Lincoln School Property Councilman Lemon moved to send a letter to John Pope, Superintendent of the Port Angeles School District #121 outlining possible uses for the Lincoln School property. Councilman Gabriel seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 11. Need to Schedule Meeting of the Permit Process Review Committee Tabled until the February 7, 1989, City Council meeting. 12. Leonard Fuller Reouesting to Speak to the Council Mr. Fuller outlined briefly his attempts to be placed on the Legislative Agenda of the Port Angeles City Council. -14- CC.51 Councilman Lemon was opposed to the placing of Mr. Fuller's concerns on the Agenda, as this item has been revisited on many occasions. Councilman Lemon moved to not put the item on the Agenda regarding Mr. Fuller's yard. Councilman Hordyk seconded. Councilman Stamon stated Mr. Fuller has had the opportunity at a number of meetings to express his feelings regarding the yard and the enforcement of the Nuisance Ordinance, and she did not feel it was appropriate at this point to continue discussion of this item. On call for the question, the motion carried with Councilman Hallett voting "No 13. Donation of Old Meter Test Board to Rocky Reach Dam Museum Continued until the February 7, 1989, City Council meeting. IX CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS /LATE ITEMS A meeting of the Audit Committee was set for Thursday, January 26, 1989, at 4:00 P.M. in the Caucus Room. X ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor McPhee adjourned the meeting to executive session at 12:05 A.M. The purpose of the executive session was to discuss two items of real estate and one item of litigation. Approximate length, 15 minutes. XI RETURN TO OPEN SESSION The meeting returned to open session at 12:20 A.M. XII ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 12:21 A.M. 441/1,- Clerk Mayor 1271 CITY OF PORT ANGELES January 17, 1989