Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/06/1990 1557 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Port Angeles, Washington March 6, 1990 I CALL TO ORDER Mayor Sargent called the regular meeting of the Port Angeles City Council to order at 7:03 P.M. II PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by the Moclar Campfire Girls. Leaders: Kerry Baker and Amber Pittis. Members Present: Meghan Peacock and Jen Hicks. 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, S. Brodhun, M. Cleland, B. Collins, L. Glenn, J. Pittis, B. Titus, D. Wolfe, G. Kenworthy, G. Beck, R. Ellsworth, B. Jones. Public Present: J. Fairchild, P. Crane, C. Alexander, L. Bell, P. Cronauer, L. Blake, J. Newlin, S. Hopper, J. VanOss, G. Larson. IV APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 20, 1990, AND MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 28, 1990 Councilman Ostrowski moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of February 20, 1990, and the special meeting of February 28, 1990. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion. Mayor Sargent offered a correction to page 2 under VII, the second sentence, to insert the word "not", so that the sentence would read: "Mayor Sargent stated that she did not feel it was appropriate to accept public testimony on this issue." On page 18, under Legislative Item 8, second paragraph, to change the number of the applications from 214 to 224. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. V FINANCE 1. Request for Payment to Riddell, Williams of $4,069.91 for Legal Representation on WPPSS Issues Councilman Hallett moved to authorize payment of the current Riddell, Williams bill in the amount of $4,069.91 for legal representation on WPPSS issues. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. VI CONSENT AGENDA Councilman Hallett moved to accept the items as presented on the Consent Agenda, including: (1) Request to call for bids for Landfill construction; (2) Request to call for bids for replacement of compactor; (3) Correspondence from Washing- ton State Liquor Control Board; (4) Vouchers of $1,892,315.86; and (5) Payroll of 2-18-90 of $254,931.54. Councilman Ostrowski seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. VII ITEMS FROM THE COUNCIL/AUDIENCE TO BE CONSIDERED/PLACED ON THE AGENDA Paul Cronauer, 303 Tumwater, wished to submit a petition signed by 295 residents regarding the Waterfront Trail development of the parking spaces on Francis Street. -1- 1558 CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 Mayor Sargent asked Attorney Knutson whether it was appropriate for the Council to hear the information brought forth by Mr. Cronauer. Attorney Knutson responded that the Council must decide whether or not it is to accept any additional information on the Francis Street issue before such a petition would be allowed. Presently, the Council is considering an issue which has been continued from the meeting of February 20th, which is the consideration of a Shoreline Permit for Francis Street. If the petition is intended to address that issue, then prior to Council consideration, the Council must decide whether to hold an additional public hearing to enable additional public testimony on the matter. Otherwise, the decision on the Shoreline Permit is restricted to the record that was created at the Planning Commission level, where there was a public hearing held. To allow one person to speak on the issue at this point would be unfair to those who have taken action during the public hearing process at the Planning Commission. Councilman Nicholson stated it was his understanding that the issue was continued in order for the Council to gather further information, and he wondered how, if the Council is restricted to the record, is it possible for them to get further information. Mayor Sargent stated she believed it was the intent of the motion to review the information that has been provided to the Council on the subject to date. Mayor Sargent stated to Mr. Cronauer that the Council would not be able to accept the petition. Sumicko Kimoto, representing LOGOS from Japan, requested that the Council allow her to speak on Legislative Item No. 3. Paul Crane, 1404 South Cherry Street, addressed the Council, regarding a complaint that he has lodged with the Mayor in a written record regarding the noises made by the street sweeper. Additionally, he stated he has filed complaints with the Police Department regarding the noise level. He asked why the City would run the sweeper at night when he felt the daytime was appro- priate; and why should the City disturb the people during the night. Manager Flodstrom stated the City had responded to Mr. Crane in the form of a letter; however, Mr. Crane stated he had not received the letter. Manager Flodstrom outlined the contents of the letter, stating that the City has traditionally swept the streets during the night and he apologized to Mr. Crane for any interruption; however, as far as he could recollect, Mr. Crane's was the only complaint received by the City, noting that it is the best time for the streets to be swept. He stated that he has suggested to the Public Works Department that they adjust their sweeping schedules to accommodate Mr. Crane. Mr. Crane also made comments regarding the air quality within the City of Port Angeles, stating that people in the City are suffering from lung and breathing problems. Glen Larson, 731 West Fourth Street, requested to speak on Item 4. Sharon Hopper, 1324-D O'Brien Road, also requested to speak on Item 4. Carl Alexander, 1712 West Fifth Street, stated with regard to the petition - requested to be submitted by Mr. Cronauer, he believed that the Council handled the situation incorrectly; that regardless of whether the Council chooses to hear the issue in a public hearing process, in his opinion, the Council should accept the petition, because the people have a right to petition their elected officials at any time. Jack Glaubert requested the Council allow him to speak to them at the end of the agenda. He also concurred with Mr. Alexander's remarks concerning the petition. Mayor Sargent placed Mr. Glaubert as Item 17 on the Council agenda. Councilman Hallett requested that the Council add Item 18 to the agenda regarding the rescheduling of an ad hoc committee meeting concerning centralized dispatch. -2- 1559 CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 Mayor Sargent added Legislative Item 19 regarding a sister city relationship. Councilman Wight requested Item 20 be placed on the agenda regarding a joint meeting with the Planning Commission. VIII LEGISLATION 1. Continuation of Planning Commission Minutes of February 14, 1990 Shoreline Management Permit - SMA-90(01)107 - City of Port Angeles: North Francis Street: Request for a permit to allow the development of six (6) all-weather parking spaces and access provided with soil erosion and surface runoff control facilities, in association with the Waterfront Trail uses (continued from February 20, 1990) Mayor Sargent disclosed to the Council that she had received a letter from Olympic Memorial Hospital requesting that the Council postpone any decision on this issue. However, she pointed out that the improvement to the Francis Street right-of-way for parking access is not necessarily permanent or an exclusive use of the area, and she did not believe this development would affect the request of Olympic Memorial Hospital. Mayor Sargent noted the issue before the Council was to approve the permit, as recommended by the Planning Commission, or deny the action. Councilman Nicholson moved that the Council set a public hearing regarding the issue of the Shoreline Permit. Councilman Lemon seconded the motion. Councilman Nicholson stated he has not had enough time to review the informa- tion, nor did he believe the Council had full information; therefore, he was not ready to make a decision on the issue but felt it would be better to have a public hearing. Councilman Lemon expressed his concerns regarding the issue. He believed that the Planning Commission has received a lot of information, and in reviewing the information himself, has found that the issue is, at best, confusing; he did not believe the multi-effects or the impacts on the Harbor Plan were addressed; also the Parks and Recreation Plan has not been addressed adequately; nor emergency access for ITT Rayonier. He did not believe the information has been fully reviewed and stated that due process should be followed. He stated he was in disagreement with the appeal process and the Determination of Non- Significance, and he believed that issue should have been brought before the City Council for a final decision. Councilman Wight stated he has no objection to the motion; however, he did believe it prolonged the issue, stating that this is a temporary improvement on a public right-of-way, until such time that decisions can be made regarding long-range plans for private property adjacent to the public right-of-way, and also until a perspective can be determined regarding the continuation of the Waterfront Trail to the east. He did not see any harm with the development of the parking area, and that this was an interim solution for parking and access to the Waterfront Trail. Councilman Hallett stated the concerns which have been expressed during the planning process have been addressed. Those concerns addressed long-term impacts and the Shoreline Permit does not preclude any long-term substantive look at what the City should decide to do regarding the Waterfront Trail. Councilman Nicholson asked how the Council could address the issue of handi- capped and stroller access without going through a public hearing process. Councilman Wight pointed out that it depended on how the Trail would continue to the east; that at this point, it may be costly to put in handicapped accessibility at the Francis Street right-of-way. The Council should perhaps look to the future and explore possible places for handicapped accessibility on the Trail as it progresses to the east. Councilman Gabriel stated he felt there had been enough issues presented to the Council that a public hearing would be appropriate and he did not believe there was any urgency in voting on the issue. -3- 1560 CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 Councilman Hallett noted that there is access to the Trail by the Red Lion that is handicap accessible. He questioned staff as to whether there could be improvements to the parking area and what the scope of the public hearing would be regarding the shoreline. Would it be the parking requirements or discussion of the Trail itself? Attorney Knutson stated that the scope of the permit decision is restricted to access between the existing Waterfront Trail and the six parking spaces, which were both approved as part of the original shoreline permit. The question of access between the two areas had not been addressed during the original shore- line permit process. At the Council's direction, staff then began the process of creating an access. When an appeal was filed, saying there should have been a shoreline permit for the connecting point, the City decided that the easiest thing to do was to file for a shoreline permit. If the Council should choose to hold a hearing, options could be addressed for use of the right-of-way and the scope of the discussion could be broadened. However, the focus of this permit process is the access between the Trail at the water level and the parking area at the top of Francis Street. Planning Director Collins concurred with Attorney Knutson, and also pointed out that the environmental review does not include a major grading of the Francis Street right-of-way. He noted it was the intention to connect those six parking spaces to the Trail. Most of the work has actually taken place; however, the permit has not been acted on. It was noted that the ramp access would require a significant placement of material to create the ramp in the shoreline area, which is well beyond the scope of the permit. Councilman Ostrowski asked the cost of the project and the projected completion date. Planning Director Collins reviewed to date the processes that staff has gone through regarding the project. At this point, Paul Cronauer objected, stating the information that was being given to the Council was incorrect. He then started to speak about the project from his point of view. At this time, Craig Miller objected to the comments being received, stating either there is a public hearing or there is not, and he submitted that the Council has received twenty minutes of information from the applicant, which is the City. Manager Flodstrom explained to the Council that there was an initial Shoreline Permit under which the City operated for the improvement of some parking and access to the Waterfront Trail. However, the current permit on which the City is acting, intended to clarify and provide further detail for the type of access which would be created. Director of Public Works Pittis responded to Councilman Ostrowski's question regarding the cost of the project, stating that the City has approximately $10,000 into the project to date. Currently, the stairs are the only work which is remaining, and the project is approximately 80% to 85% complete. Council discussed with staff the original Shoreline Permit versus the revised permit, and the Shoreline Permit which is before them regarding the parking spaces and the access to the Waterfront Trail. Councilman Lemon questioned the urgency of the issue and was concerned regarding the $10,000 cost for a temporary measure. He believed the proper time to put the issue on hold was now and to do some long-range planning; to get further public input and also perform an environmental impact assessment. Mayor Sargent stated that she agreed with Councilman Wight's statement that the approval of the issue does not jeopardize any future planning. The question was voted on and failed, with Councilmen Lemon, Nicholson, and Gabriel voting "Aye", and Mayor Sargent, Councilman Hallett, Ostrowski, and Wight voting "No" -4- 1561 CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 Councilman Hallett moved to approve Shoreline Permit SMA-90(01)107, City of Port Angeles, North Francis Street, as recommended bythe Planning Commission, citing the following conditions, findings, and conclusions: Conditions: (1) That lighting be provided in the parking lot area to be directed away from the residential uses at the site and patrolled to control objectionable evening activity; (2) Issuance of this Shoreline Management Permit for the construction of parking and access improvements from the north end of Francis Street to the Waterfront Trail shall not preclude other uses of Francis Street, including private access; provided that any such uses accommodate the Waterfront Trail, and that all applicable permitting and regulatory requirements for such uses are met; Findings: (1) The proposed access and trail will provide access to the Waterfront Trail, which is a separate, non-motorized vehicular and pedestrian path linked to other parts of the circulation system in the City, but separated from streets used by motorized vehicles; (2) The Francis Street access to the Waterfront Trail provides numerous opportunities to view the Harbor, Strait of Juan de Fuca, Canada, and Mt. Baker. The access provides an unusual recrea- tional environment compared to typical city park and sports fields and can be used by young and old residents from the entire City; (3) The proposal will provide a public access loop to the Waterfront Trail; (4) The proposal does not convert the shoreline resources into irreversible uses or detrimentally alter the natural conditions of the shoreline and has minimal impact on the shoreline area itself; (5) The proposal is an implementation of the City's adopted Urban Waterfront Trail Plan, which is a bicycle and hiking path that provides public access to the water and links to the rest of the City's circulation system; (6) The proposal provides development and expansion of recreational areas on Port Angeles Harbor; (7) The proposal is an extension of a public beach area in an Urban Environment which occurs in an existing City right-of-way; (8) The access, recreation area, interpretive signage, and parking are improvements that facilitate public access to the shoreline, which reflects a design attention to the importance of environmental quality and natural resources of the existing shoreline area by developing within areas that have already been altered by man; (9) The parking area and access to the Waterfront Trail provides significant recreational opportunities for joggers, walkers, bicyclers, and passive recreational activities, such as sight-seeing, picnick- ing, beach-combing, nature walks, fishing, birding, and observation of marine commerce in the Harbor. The construction of the parking and access areas will significantly increase the recreational facilities within the City of Port Angeles; (10) The City of Port Angeles SEPA Responsible Official has issued the proposal a Determination of Non-Significance; (11) The Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, Chapter 15.08 PAMC, requires the Planning Commission provide notice and hold a public hearing on shoreline permit applications; Conclusions: (A) The proposal is consistent with the Port Angeles Shoreline Master Program, specifically General Regulations C.2 and C.5; Land Use Elements D.2, D.4, and D.6; Natural Systems Element E.l.a; and Recreational Use Regulations F.19.a-d; (B) The proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Parks and Recrea- tion Plan; (C) The proposal implements the City's adopted Port Angeles Urban Waterfront Trail Plan; (D) The proposal is consistent with the City's Compre- hensive Plan, specifically Circulation Policies Nos. 7 and 10; Parks & Recrea- tion Policy No. 3; and Urban DesignPolicy No. 2; (E) Public notice and hearing, as required by the Shoreline Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RGW, has been completed by the City of Port Angeles; (F) The City's issuance of a Determina- tion of Non-Significance for the proposal is final and fulfills the City's responsibilities under the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW; (G) This permit for parking in association with the Waterfront Trail activity is recognized to be temporary in nature. Councilman Wight seconded the motion. Councilman Wight stated the reason he seconded the motion and will be voting in support of it is because he believed that with the exception of the parking spaces, which are not yet provided, the rest of the items contained in the permit application are essentially completed and temporary in nature; they do not involve a large expenditure of public funds, but do provide, on an interim basis, some public access from Francis Street. Councilman Hallett, in speaking in favor of the motion, stated that the Council is sensitive to the needs of the developer and others who have spoken previously on the issue and have testified during the hearing process. He believed that the Council would be well advised to make a request to the Planning Department to provide a summary of chronological actions to date on the issue; what future phases of the project would entail; and a long-term view of the project. The question was called and the motion carried, with Councilman Lemon voting "No". -5- 1562 CITY COI3NCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 2. Planning Commission Minutes 0f ~ebrUary 28, 1990 Councilman Ostrowski moved to accept and place on file the Planning Commission minutes of February 28, 1990. Councilman Wight seconded the motion. Mayor Sargent noted that the Planning Commission has made a recommendation to the Council regarding the Harbor Resource Management Plan, determining that the document should be used as a reference tool without the force of law and should be used when updating other long-range planning tools, such as the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Code, and the Shoreline Master Program. She also noted that the Planning Commission has made an amendment to the by-laws, extending the terms of appointment for their elected officials. The question was called and the motion carried unanimously. 3. Request for LOGOS Funding Assistance with Japan Tour Sumicko Kimoto, Japan, representing LOGOS of Japan, stated that LOGOS of Japan is working to support a sister city with the City of Port Angeles and the Japan LOGOS members are promising to raise $69,000 for the tour - printing, housing, food, and theater rental costs for the LOGOS musical from Port Angeles. She requested that the Council support funding of the LOGOS Japan trip in the amount of $1,500. Mayor Sargent noted that in exchange for the money, LOGOS is willing to perform at various places - City Pier, City Hall, open house, community picnic for the Centennial on the Fourth of July. Additionally, they would be promoting the City of Port Angeles in Japan by possibly taking some of the Centennial sweat- shirts, tee-shirts and pins with them for distribution. Councilman Ostrowski stated he believed the City could gain considerably by this action, and he moved that the City approve from the Hotel/Motel Tax Fund, a contribution of $1,500 toward the LOGOS Japan Tour and authorized the Mayor to sign a contract. Councilman Nicholson seconded the motion. Attorney Knutson stated that a contract for services would be drafted and the contract would specify certain services to be performed. Since the services would be paid for from the Hotel/Motel Tax Fund, the services would be to advertise the tourist-related amenities of the area or to disseminate tourist- related information. Councilman Wight suggested that the contract also make note of the City Pier performance some time during the summer. The motion, restated, that the City from the Hotel/Motel Tax Fund, contribute $1,500 toward the cause for the LOGOS Japan tour, authorize the Mayor to sign a contract, which includes dissemination of tourist information and performance on the City Pier. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. Attorney Knutson stated that another condition that the contract could include, which is related to the dissemination of tourist information, would be discus- sions regarding a sister city relationship. He requested that the Council allow him to put a clause in the contract to that effect. The Council con- curred. 4. Letter Requesting Reconsideration of Council's Decision on Retail Stand Permit RTS-89(03)2 for Hopper Councilman Lemon moved to reconsider the decision of extending Retail Stand Permit RTS-89(03)2, Hopper. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion. Attorney Knutson advised the Council that if they should decide to reconsider the issue and take further testimony, that the Council should also set a public hearing, at which time it would be appropriate to accept further testimony. Councilman Gabriel again expressed concern regarding the acceptance of comments by Planning Commission member Cornell. He believed that some of the members of the Council were swayed by the personal comments made by Mr. Cornell, and felt it would be an injustice not to open this item to a public hearing forum. -6- 1563 CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 Staff and Council discussed the appropriateness of allowing Chairman Cornell to speak to the issue at a previous meeting. Following this discussion, Councilman Wight stated he concurred with the comments made by Councilman Gabriel regarding the acceptance of Commissioner Cornellfs comments. Attorney Knutson responded that the Council has always allowed specific questions to be asked of people who are present at the meeting. However, the Council should restrict its questions to issues that do not open up a new subject matter. He also stated that it was appropriate to have the Planning Commission present to inform the Council as to the type of discussion which occurred at the Planning Commission level. However, there may be situations where this could cause a problem, and both the Council and the Commission's representative should be cautious when addressing the issues. Mayor Sargent suggested that the Planning Commission minutes should show why a person voted in opposition to a motion. The question was called and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Lemon moved to set a public hearing for the March 20, 1990, City Council meeting to consider the request for a Retail Stand Permit, RTS-89(03)2 for Hopper. Councilman Wight seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 5. Consideration of Amendment to Parking Ordinance, Eliminating Parking Lot Activity Permit Provisions (Continued from February 6 and February 20 City Council Meetings) Mayor Sargent read the Ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. 2568 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles Washington, amending the Off-Street Parking Ordinance (Ordinance No. 1588, as amended) and Chapter 14.40 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code, and repealing Sections 2 through 12 of Ordinance No. 2097 and Chapter 11.20 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code. Councilman Wight moved to adopt the Ordinance as read by title, and authorized publication by summary. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 6. Request to Modify Easement for Property Owner by Elwha Road on City-Owned Property (Elwha Watermain) (Continued from February 20, 1990) Councilman Ostrowski moved to amend the existing easement to include the placement of utilities within the existing easement area, subject to the existing terms and conditions. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. The amendment is between CIP Incorporated and the City of Port Angeles. The original easement allowed for ingress and egress only, and did not include provisions for utilities. In order to serve the homes with electricity and water, the facilities will need to be brought in from the Lower Elwha Road on City-owned property. Utilities can be physically placed within the existing roadway easement with the amendment. The original easement was entered into on June 21, 1988, and has been recorded with the County Auditor's Office in Volume 813, Page 487, 488, and 489, under Auditor's File No. 605034. 7. Consideration of Applications Received for Vacancies on City's Boards and Commissions/Setting Interview Date (Continued from February 20, 1990) The Council discussed the process to follow in the re-appointment of persons who are eligible and interested in being re-appointed, as opposed to interviewing all applicants. -7- 1564 CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 Councilman Lemon moved to delay consideration of Planning Commission appointments and to interview new candidates at a special meeting on March 20, 1990. The motion died for lack of a second. Councilman Wight moved to re-appoint Mr. Jones to the Board of Parks and Recreation; to re-appoint Mr. Lindberg and Mr. Gonzales to the Building Code Board of Appeals; to re-appoint Mr. Prentiss to the Civil Service Commission; and to re-appoint Mr. Pete Anderson to the Board of Adjustment. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion. Councilman Ostrowski stated that he felt the interviews should be given to the new applicants, as opposed to making re-appointments. Councilman Lemon was opposed to the motion, as he believed the Council should act upon each appointment separately. Councilman Wight withdrew his motion. Councilman Hallett withdrew his second. Councilman Lemon moved to interview all new candidates at the special meeting of March 20, 1990, and to make appointments during the Council's legislative meeting. Councilman Ostrowski seconded the motion. Councilman Hallett stated that since part of the Council is new, it would be appropriate to interview all candidates for the positions. Mayor Sargent agreed with Councilman Hallett's statement. Following a discussion, Councilman Nicholson offered an amendment to interview all applicants at the March 20, 1990, City Council meeting. Councilman 0strowski seconded the amendment. The amendment was voted on and failed, with Councilmen Nicholson and Ostrowski voting "Aye", and Mayor Sargent, Councilmen Lemon, Gabriel, Hallett and Wight voting "No". CouncilmanLemon withdrew his motion. Councilman Ostrowski withdrew his second. Councilman Wight moved to re-appoint PeterAnderson to the Board of Adjustment. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion. Councilman Lemon offered a friendly amendment to re-appoint Jim Jones, Jr., to the Parks, Recreation and Beautification Commission; re-appoint Bill Lindberg and Mike Gonzales to the Building Code Board of Appeals; re-appoint Bill Prentiss to the Civil Service Commission. Councilmen Wight and Hallett con- curred. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. Councilman Lemon moved to schedule interviews for a special meeting on March 20, 1990, for the terms which are still open and interview new candidates and to postpone consideration of the Planning Commission vacancies. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. BREA~ Mayor Sargent recessed the meeting for a break at 9:00 P.M. The meeting re- convened at 9:16 P.M. 8. Consideration of Contract with BPA for "DesiKnWise" Program (Continued from February 20, 1990) Councilman Gabriel moved to authorize the City Light Director to execute the agreement and future modifications for the operation of the "DesignWise" program. Councilman Nicholson seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 9. Reassignment of Energy Conservation Contract Due to Relocation of Individual Consultant (Continued from February 20, 1990) Councilman Nicholson moved to authorize the City Light Director to execute the agreement for design assistant consulting services and future modification with Iverson Elder, Inc. Councilman Lemon seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. -8- 1565 CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 10. Consideration of Contracts with Special Agencies Receiving Funding for 1990 from the City A. Clallam County Historical Society, Derby Days, Inc. Peninsula College, Port Angeles Chamber of Commerce, Tourism Convention Association of Clallam County, Port Angeles Symphony Orchestra, Clallam County Economic Development Council Councilman Lemon moved that the Council authorize the Mayor to sign the 1990 service contracts with the ClallamCountyHistorical Society, Derby Days, Arthur D. Feiro Marine Lab, Port Angeles Chamber of Commerce, Tourism Convention Association of Clallam County, Port Angeles Symphony Orchestra. Additionally, authorization for the Mayor to sign the contracts for the Economic Development Council, upon approval by the agency. These contracts will be effective from January 1, 1990, through December 31, 1990. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion. Attorney Knutson noted that the contract for Marine Lab services has been changed to reflect Peninsula College as the contractor, as the Arthur D. Feiro Marine Lab is a sub-agency of the College. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. B. Consideration of Contract with Clallam County for Human Services Councilman Lemon moved that the Council authorize the Mayor to sign the contract for human services for the period January 1, 1990, through December 31, 1990. Councilman Gabriel seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 11. Consideration of Ordinance Prohibiting Out-of-County Refuse Acceptance at Landfill Mayor Sargent read the Ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. 2569 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, prohibiting the disposal at the Landfill of waste originating outside Clallam County, and amending Sections 13.54.070 and 13.56.060 of Ordinance 2317 and the Port Angeles Municipal Code. Councilman Lemon moved to adopt the Ordinance as read by title. Councilman Nicholson seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 12. Report on Utility Service Extension Outside of City for Glaubert/Austin Councilman Wight asked whose responsibility it would be to pay for the new development of extending water and sewer lines. Public Works Director Pittis stated it was the applicant's. Councilman Wight stated that the Public Works Department has recommended against allowing the request for extension of the services because the existing capacity is not up to standards for fire protection purposes, and that an upgrade of the pump station would be needed. Additionally, some of the proposed water and sewer lines may need to be duplicated if there is a larger area to be served. Public Works Director Pittis responded as proposed, the Department envisions those as part of the lines constructed by the proponents to serve their property and in the future, they may or may not be available to serve properties, depend- ing on future development. The fire flow situation and the water supply does need additional work from the standpoint that it is served by a pump station located at Spruce and "C" Streets, and currently, there is additional construc- tion in the area within the City limits, for which the Department has responsi- bilities prior to extending services outside the City limits. Councilman Hallett stated the scenario on Bean Road is County residents on City water and City residents on County water. There are also other areas around the property which are being served. He stated there is a perimeter which is defined by those areas and it would be a proper infill to allow the extension of services to the Glaubert/Austin property; but he questioned how the City -9- 1566 CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 would allow for orderly extension of services. He asked if there were condi- tions which can be attached to the approval of the request so that the City would not have to go through the expense of duplication, and to continue the lines which have already been placed. Director Pittis stated there are provisions which need to be discussed with the proponents, regarding easements, if their desires are to have these as public systems, which is the best way to extend those types of services. Following further discussion of the issue, Councilman Hallett moved that the Council direct staff to work with Glaubert/Austin on the extension of the water and sewer connection as a public utility to the area, and bring the results of this discussion back to the Council for approval. Councilman Nicholson seconded the motion. Councilman Ostrowski noted that in the future, the City should encourage further development of the area for potential annexation. Councilman Lemon offered a friendly amendment that the applicant include in the agreement a non-protest annexation and that the service through meters or other methods, is only for that particular piece of property. Councilmen Hallett and Nicholson concurred. The amended motion was voted on and carried unanimously. 13. Consideration of an Amendment to Water Cross-Connection Ordinance Attorney Knutson provided the Council with a revised Ordinance which corrected a definition in the Ordinance which the Council had been presented in their packet. Mayor Sargent read the Ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. 2570 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, providing for regulation of water system cross-connections, amending Ordinance No. 2181 and Chapter 13.24 and 13.28 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code, and repealing PAMC 13.24.050 and Chapter 1, Section 5, of Ordinance No. 2181. Councilman Hallett moved to adopt the Ordinance as read by title. Councilman Lemon seconded the motion. Councilman Hallett stated it was the direction of the Utility Advisory Committee to submit the proposed Ordinance to the Council and that the City should continue the direction of education process for City residents regarding cross- connections. He thanked Ralph Ellsworth, Assistant Superintendent of Water/ Sewer for his continued effort in education on this issue. Councilman Lemon also spoke in support of the Ordinance, stating that this was an opportunity for the City to educate the public regarding this issue. The Council discussed backflow prevention devices and the education process the City will pursue regarding this issue. The question was called and the motion carried unanimously. 14. Setting of Public Hearing for Sewer Rate Adjustments Discussion Councilman Lemon moved to set a public hearing at the March 20, 1990, meeting to discuss sewer rate revisions and the establishment of a late-comer fee. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 15. Setting of UAC (Utility Advisory Committee) Meeting to Discuss Landfill A meeting date was set for March 16, 1990, at 4:00 P.M. in the Public Works Conference Room. -10- 1567 CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 16. Consideration of Setting Worksession to Review Administration Group Compensation Study Council discussed with staff the need for such a work session. Following the discussion, Councilmen Wight, Ostrowski, and Lemon volunteered to serve on the committee to be held March 12, 1990, at 4:30 P.M. in the Caucus Room. 17. Discussion with Jack Glaubert Concerning Access to Private Property Jack Glaubert presented to the Council a letter dated March 6, 1990, stating: Mayor of Port Angeles, Council Members: Re: Access to Pri~ate Waterfront Property Within the last several weeks, City employees have locked me out and prevented me from accessing my property. I am requesting the Council give City employees clear direction to quit harassing me in regard to accessing my property. The situation is becoming intolerable. Thank you. Sincerely, Jack Glaubert, PLS Mr. Glaubert explained that he has in the past been able to access his property, located on the Waterfront, by unlocking a gate located at the end of the Water- front Trail at the base of Lincoln Street and Railroad Avenue. However, in the past week, he has found that he has been "locked out" by the City because the City has removed the lock and he is unable to access his property. Mayor Sargent requested an explanation from the staff. Director of Public Works Pittis responded that some time ago Mr. Glaubert had requested and received a right-of-way use permit to access his property and because of the Trail and the prohibition of vehicles on the Trail for its safety, the Public Works Department felt compelled to provide some conditions to the use by Mr. Glaubert. In the permit itself, there are specified conditions and times set forth. When the permit expired, the Department, in effect, locked out Mr. Glaubert from the access. Mr. Glaubert had contacted Director Pittis after he had discovered he had been locked out, and Director Pittis had responded to him that he did not feel it was within his authority to provide him with access at any time for any reason with any vehicle on the Waterfront Trail, and that Mr. Glaubert needed to request further clarification of access from the Council. Mr. Glaubert requested that the Council make a decision on the matter. Attorney Knutson added that several months ago, there had been correspondence between Mr. Glaubert's attorney and himself regarding access to the property. After discussion of the issue during the Council's executive session, the Council authorized Attorney Knutson to respond to Mr. Glaubert's attorney that the Council would not authorize access to the property from the west, but would be willing to consider access from the east. There was no formal action on this issue. 18. Setting of an Ad Hoc Committee for Centralized Dispatch The meeting date was set for March 19, 1990, at 4:30 P.M. 19. Japanese Sister City Relationship Council discussed this briefly. Councilman Hallett requested information at the March 20th City Council meeting. 20. Consideration of Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission Councilman Wight felt this meeting should address possible ways to help the Planning Commission be more effective producers of long-range work. He stated he had introduced an idea to Planning Commission Chairman Cornell regarding the concept of two separate bodies. However, the Planning Commission had disagreed with this concept. He had also suggested the concept of a larger body, enlarging the membership to ten members, to be divided into long-range and short-range decision-making bodies. -il- 1568 CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 6, 1990 The Council discussed this issue and decided that Councilman Wight and Mayor Sargent would attend the Planning Commission long-range meeting of March 28, 1990, to discuss this issue further. IX CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/LATE ITEMS Councilmen Gabriel and Nicholson stated they had met with the Recycle Committee and would be bringing information to the Council, possibly at the April 3rd meeting. X ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Sargent adjourned the meeting to Executive Session at 10:34 P.M. to discuss one item of litigation. Approximate time, 30 minutes. XI RETURN TO OPEN SESSION The meeting returned to open session at approximately 11:04 P.M. XII ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 11:05 P.M. Clerk v --~ Ma~6?J CC.139 -12-