Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04/06/2004 5222 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Port Angeles, Washington April 6, 2004 CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Headrick called the regular meeting of the Port Angeles City Council to order REGULAR MEETING: at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Mayor Headrick, Councilmembers Braun, Erickson, Munro, Pittis, Rogers, and Williams. Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Manager Quinn, Attorney Dickson, Clerk Upton, B. Collins, D. McKeen, T. Riepe, Y. Ziomkowski, C. Kochanek, R. Dyker, C. Wheeler, G. Kenworthy, T. McCabe, K. Loghry, R. Hoffman, K. Ridout, T. Smith, J. Lierly, and B. Kaj fasz. Public Present: R. Peterson, F. Ducceschi, V. and L. Sproat, T. Bockman, L. Williamson, M. Douglas, O. Campbell, P. Gagnon, L. DelGuzzi, J. and S. Evans, D. Frizzell, J. and L. Hendrickson, V. DelGuzzi Frizzell, D. Becker, G. and M. Page, R. Becker, C. Palazzo, K. Jons, K. Rodocker, S. McCallin, P. Lamoureux, C. Haarstad, T. Ahlgren, A. and T. Allen, V. Adams, B. and L. Zynda, M. and L. Ostrowski, and M. Oakes. All others present in the audience failed to sign the roster. PLEDGE OF The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Police Chief Riepe. ALLEGIANCE: pLrBLIC CEREMONIES, 1. Proclamation and Recognition of Retirement of Dale Miller: PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS: Mayor Headrick read and presented Dale Miller with a proclamation honoring Mr. Miller' s retirement from the City after thirty years of service. Mr. Miller acknowledged Proclamation/Recognition the support and leadership of Jack Pittis and Ken Ridout, and he acknowledged the of Retirement of Dale support of his wife and daughter throughout his career. Manager Quinn presented Mr. Miller Miller with the James Abemathy Outstanding Public Service Award, and Public Works & Utilities Deputy Director Ridout presented Mr. Miller with a retirement plaque. Scott Brodhun, Port Angeles School District, presented Mr. Miller with a "Riders" hat, thanking him for his recycling efforts throughout the School District, and George Kheriaty, Hamilton Elementary School teacher, presented Mr. Miller with a card of appreciation from the students, the contents of which were recycled materials. Plaque of Appreciation to 2. Presentation of Plaque to Jim Jones, Law Enforcement Advisory Board Jim Jones, Law Enforce- Member from 1994 - 2004: ment Advisory Board Member Mayor Headrick and Police Chief Riepe presented Jim Jones, Jr., with a plaque of appreciation for his ten years of service on the City's Law Enforcement Advisory Board. Mr. Jones responded it had been a wonderful opportunity to serve on the Law -1- 5223 CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 2004 Plaque of Appreciation to Enforcement Advisory Board in service to the community. Jim Jones, Law Enforce- ment Advisory Board Member (Cont'd) Proclamation Recognizing 3. Proclamation Recognizing April as National Occupational Therapy Month: April as National Occupational Therapy Mayor Headrick read a proclamation recognizing April as National Occupational Month Therapy Month. The proclamation was accepted by five Occupational Therapists, one of whom announced an upcoming demonstration of all aspects of occupational therapy, scheduled for Saturday, April 17, 2004, 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 Noon, at the YMCA Community Center. The public was invited to attend. Earth Day Proclamation 4. Earth Day Proclamation: Mayor Headrick read a proclamation declaring April 22, 2004, as Earth Day. Presentation Regarding 5. Presentation Regarding Carnegie Library by Historical Society: Carnegie Library by Historical Society Kathy Monds, Executive Director of the Clallam County Historical Society, distributed information to the Council depicting the conceptual design of the various exhibits proposed for the Museum to be housed in the renovated Carnegie Library. She showed additional drawings to the Council, explaining the projected details and themes of the historical exhibits and artifacts and how they will be configured in the Museum. Ms. Monds indicated the preliminary planning stages have been completed, and the Historical Society is quite excited with the progress made and is looking forward to completion. Ms. Monds expressed the hope that the exhibits can be placed on the upper floor of the Carnegie Building in July, and she indicated the lower level will feature a gift shop and an exhibit scheduled to change every nine to twelve months. Ms. Monds thanked the City for its support throughout this endeavor. Mayor Headrick asked for a projected opening date for the Carnegie, and Ms. Monds responded the building will be opened April 25'h to celebrate the County's Sesquicentennial. There will be no exhibits at that time; however, the public will be invited to see the building. Councilmember Williams urged the Historical Society to extend an invitation to Congressman Dicks for that opening date since he was significant in obtaining funds for the Carnegie renovation. Break Mayor Headrick recessed the meeting for a break at 6:30 p.m. to have refreshments in honor of Dale Miller's retirement. The meeting reconvened at 6:55 p.m. WORK SESSION: None. LATE ITEMS TO BE Paul Lamoureux, 602 Whidby, expressed his best wishes to Manager Quinn and Public PLACED ON THIS OR Works & Utilities Director Cutler for their scheduled trip to Indonesia. FUTURE AGENDAS: Leroy Sproat, 615 Thistle Street, advised the Council that he originally planned to come before the Council to appeal the denial of Right-of-Way Use Permit RWU 04-02, 615 Thistle Street, by the Director of Public Works. He since discovered that the City is not the legal owner of the right-of-way. Mayor Headrick inquired as to whether this matter was on the meeting agenda, and Manager Quinn indicated that staffhad placed the matter on the agenda but, after talking with Mr. Sproat this past week and learning of his plans to withdraw the application, there was no need for an appeal. The matter was, therefore, removed from the agenda. Mr. Sproat provided the legal description of the property in question, and he indicated the plat was developed and recorded in 1892. In February of 1897, all unopened right-of-ways were vacated by statute under Session Laws 1889-90, Chapter 19, Section 32, Page 603. The property was not annexed into the City until May of 1966; therefore, according to Mr. Sproat, falling under the 1897 law. He indicated the right-of-way was still unopened when he moved CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5224 April 6, 2004 LATE ITEMS TO BE there in January of 1975. Further, he indicated no maintenance to this section of right- PLACED ON THIS OR of-way has ever been performed by the City in the thirty years he lived there; he has FUTURE AGENDAS: maintained the right-of-way at his expense. Mr. Sproat indicated he had discussed this (Cont'd) law with three professional land surveyors from three different firms and received the same answer from each of them in that vacation by statute is legal and binding. Mr. Sproat felt that a precedent had been set by the City accepting these findings on other properties in the City. He, therefore, contended he was the legal owner of the right-of- way in question, and a right-of-way permit becomes moot. Steve Rodrigues addressed the Council, seeking support for the placement of the Kalakala in the City of Port Angeles once the Kalakala has been completely renovated. Noting the Kalakala is temporarily stored in Neah Bay, Mr. Rodrigues spoke of the heritage of the Kalakala, the importance to economic development and tourism, the need for planting a seed for growth in community spirit, and the fact that the Kalakala satisfies much of the historical criteria to be placed on national historical records. He assured the Council he would work hard to make this effort a progressive, aggressive, positive step for the community. Gerald Hauxwell, President of the Port Angeles Business Association, read and presented a letter to the Council from the PABA, urging the Council's consideration of an expression of support and encouragement for the Kalakala Alliance Foundation and its plans to develop the Kalakala as a tourist destination in the City. The letter indicated there would be no expectation of financial support from the Port Angeles public sector. Dot Fitzgerald, owner of Peninsula Travel and Olympic Peninsula Tours, spoke in support of placing the Kalakala in Port Angeles, as it would enhance tourism and economic impact to the community. Becky Rice, Log Cabin Resort, also spoke in support of placing the Kalakala in Port Angeles, feeling it would help develop tourism and establish more jobs. Cherie Kidd, 101 E. 10t~ Street, spoke of the increased publicity for the area just by virtue of the possibility of the Kalakala coming to Port Angeles. She felt it has served as a magnet for Port Angeles to be seen and heard, drawing a great deal of positive attention. She expressed the hope that the City Council would see the value of having this special art deco ferry in Port Angeles. Jack Glaubert, East Sequim Bay, echoed comments from previous speakers, urging the Council's unanimous support to bring the Kalakala to Port Angeles as its permanent home. Bill Zynda advised the Council that Mr. Rodrigues was seeking the Council's endorsement of bringing the Kalakala to Port Angeles in order to access grants and loans for the renovation. Mr. Zynda was certain the Kalakala's presence would significantly enhance tourism - there would be much to gain. Robert Sommers, 104 Hancock, has been volunteering on the Kalakala effort, and he encouraged the Council to support bringing the Kalakala home. Mayor Headrick indicated the Council would take the matter of the Kalakala under advisement and would be considered by the Community and Economic Development Committee. Carl Haarstad, 316 N. Race Street, owner of the Thor Town International Hostel, indicated he is a contract employee of environmental toxicology at Battelle Marine Science Laboratories, and he is a member of the Citizens Advisory Committee for Clallam Transit. Referencing a hospital parking lot recently constructed at Caroline -3- 5225 CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 2004 LATE ITEMS TO BE and Chambers, Mr. Haarstad expressed concern with current development and PLACED ON THIS OR expansion plans of the hospital specifically related to lack of tree planting in the FUTURE AGENDAS: parking lot, as well as the impingement of lighting on area residences. He also (Cont'd) expressed concern on the matter of required storm drainage, and his concerns were heightened when the hospital purchased the lot adjacent to his property. Mr. Haarstad expressed the hope that errors made on the other parking lot would be corrected in the future, and he suggested that the City and Clallam Transit should address the hospital's transportation needs so that employees don't need to rely on personal cars. He felt this especially important in view of off-street parking requirements, as well as the fuel shortage. Brief discussion followed, and Mayor Headrick advised Mr. Haarstad that the City Council has representatives serving on the Transit Board, so perhaps the matter could be addressed at the Transit meetings. FINANCE: 1. Water Utility Materials, Project 04-05: Water Utility Materials Deputy Director of Public Works & Utilities Kenworthy summarized information relative to the purchase of Water Utility materials, and Councilmember Pittis suggested that, in keeping with past practice, the Mayor should receive the authorization to sign the associated contracts. Therefore, Councilmember Pittis moved to authorize the Mayor to sign the contract for Schedule A items from Hersey Meter in the amount of $33,935.81, including sales tax, and Schedule B items from H. D. Fowler in the amount of $50,136.12, including sales tax. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Braun and carried unanimously. "F" Street Substation 2. "F" Street Substation Rebuild, Project 01-28: Rebuild Deputy Director Kenworthy reviewed the bids relative to the "F" Street Substation Rebuild, and Councilmember Williams moved to award the bid and authorize the Mayor to sign the contract with Tice Electric Company of Portland, Oregon, in the amount of $106,892.10, including sales tax. Councilmember Rogers seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 2004 Water Main 3. 2004 Water Main Improvements, Project 04-01: Improvements The scheduled 2004 Water Main improvements along the north side of 2nd Street between Chambers and Ennis Streets were summarized by Deputy Director Kenworthy. Councilmember Rogers moved to award the bid for the 2004 Water Main Improvements, Project 04-01, to Jordan Excavating of Port Angeles, Washington, and authorize the Mayor to sign the contract in the amount of $176,295.07, including sales tax. Brief discussion ensued concerning the accuracy of the Engineer's Estimate, as well as the lack of opportunity and appropriateness for co-locating other utilities in the same vicinity. A vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. Equipment Purchase - 4. Equipment Purchase - Vehicle Replacements, Project 04-02: Vehicle Replacements Deputy Director Kenworthyreviewedbids received on the vehicle replacements, noting this constitutes the annual equipment replacement asset forth in the budget. Ruddell Auto Mall bid below the State bid. Councilmember Braun moved to authorize the City Manager to sign contracts and purchase orders with Ruddell Auto Mall for the 8 new pickups and 2 new vans in the amount of $161,032.12, including sales tax. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Pittis and carried unanimously. Councilmember Rogers expressed pleasure with the effort to include local dealers in the bidding process. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilmember Erickson moved to accept the Consent Agenda, to include: 1.) City Council Minutes of March 15, 2004 special meeting and March 16, 2004 regular meeting; 2.) Expenditure Approval List - March 26, 2004 - $1,101,001.06; 3.) -4- CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5226 April 6, 2004 CONSENT AGENDA: Electronic Payments - March 26, 2004 - $1,887,047.00; 4.) Legal documents (Cont'd) consenting to assignment of Nippon Paper Industries USA's Ediz Hook sublease from Tesoro Marine Services to Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company; and 5.) United Way 2004 Contract. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Braun and carried 6 - 0, with Councilmember Rogers abstaining from the vote due to late arrival at the March 15, 2004, special Council meeting. CITY COUNCIL There were no committee reports submitted; however, Councilmember Pittis related COMMITTEE information garnered from a staffmember from Helena, Montana, who had participated REPORTS & in a trip to Croatia and gained a great deal of value from the trip. CALENDAR: ORDINANCES NOT None. REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARINGS: RESOLUTIONS: NICE Neighborhoods Program & Resolution (New Improvements for Community Enhancement of Neighborhoods): NICE Neighborhoods Program & Resolution Manager Quinnreviewed the strategy of NICE Neighborhoods (New Improvements for Resolution No. 5-04 CommunityEnhancement of Neighborhoods) to stimulate economic development and growth of the community's tax base through public capital investment in areas of high development potential in the City. He noted that, in spite of limited resources, the City should invest in areas where there is a potential for development by putting in the necessary infrastructure. Manager Quinn indicated that the program will enable the City to be proactive, and the funding of projects chosen would be determined through the CFP process. He reviewed in detail the various objectives of the NICE Neighborhoods Program, indicating the development and financial community would be involved in determining needs for project selection. Councilmember Rogers indicated the CED Committee had discussed a program such as this. She was pleased to see it formalized and urged the Council's adoption of the program. Discussion ensued with Manager Quinnclarifying the differences between this program and tax increment financing. The NICE Neighborhoods program is similar to tax increment financing; however, the City would not be issuing bonds or borrowing money for the infrastructure. He acknowledged the two could be very compatible, and he agreed with Mayor Headrick' s observation that more money can be generated through tax increment financing by virtue of the fact that more agencies would likely be involved. Councilmember Pittis, while supportive of the concept, expressed concern with the long-term impact on General Fund services. Manager Quinn indicated this would be a "pay as you go" process so, as the areas are developed, more taxes to the General Fund would be generated. Further, he felt the program shouldbe implemented with a development agreement. Councilmember Rogers spoke in support of improvements to the neighborhoods, and Manager Quinn noted that, because of limited resources, the City will be limited in what it can accomplish in a given year. Mayor Headrick read the Resolution by title, entitled RESOLUTION NO. 5-04 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, adopting an additional strategy of focusing public infrastructure improvements to stimulate economic development and tax base growth through NICE Neighborhoods. Councilmember Williams moved to pass the Resolution as read by title. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Rogers and carried unanimously. -5- 5227 CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 2004 Break Mayor Headrick recessed the meeting for a break at 8:00 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:10 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS - Watershed Plan (Continued from March 16, 2004): OTHER: Community Development Director Collins advised the Council that the public hearing Watershed Plan was continued from the last meeting. The signing ceremony for the Watershed Plan is Resolution No. 6-04 scheduled for 10:00 a.m., April 16, 2004, at the County Commissioner's Office, and the Mayor should plan to attend if the Council adopts the Plan this evening. The final draft of the Plan, dated March 24, 2004, has been reviewed by Orville Campbell, the Council's representative to WRIA 18. Mayor Headrick reopened the public hearing at 8:11 p.m. Orville Campbell, 820 Milwaukee Drive, characterized the overall Watershed Plan and emphasized its important points, noting that the committee had been very concerned about the subject ofunfundedmandates and the associated impacts on the City's budget in the implementation of the Plan. He felt the outcome was very good in the sense that the mandatory budget considerations were really insignificant, and most of the issues in the Plan that were of any consequence were largely optional or, at least, would require external funding sources. Mr. Carnpbell informed the Council that a major goal of the Watershed Plan had to do with the requirement that surface water needs of any future development must be met out of the existing water rights in the County. If, for Port Angeles, that means the City is the holder of the largest water rights that are under- utilized at the present time, then it means that the City's water fights would be used for supplying the needs of a developing UGA to the east and west of the City, from the Elwha to Morse Creek. Mr. Campbell continued that there were a number of issues that arose during the development of the Plan that could not be finally resolved and incorporated in the Plan. One of the issues had to do with the Forest Practices on which the City had taken the position that it did not want to have another body established to be involved in hydrology and forestpractices around the harvesting of timber in the watersheds. So that issue, along with some others, was put into the Appendix for resolution at some future time by the Initiating Governments. Mr. Campbell noted that one of the questions raised by the Council during the previous discussion was related to the subject of enforcement. He indicated there are two aspects, one of which is the subject of third party suits being brought for failure to comply with the Watershed Plan itself, and the other being the liability of the City for the results of implementing the Watershed Plan. He likened the implementation of the Plan to the City's land use Comprehensive Plan in that whenever the City takes action or makes a decision relative to some development, one of the considerations will be the Watershed Plan in the same way that the City's land use Comprehensive Plan is handled today. From a third party lawsuit perspective, Mr. Campbell felt it would appear that the Watershed Plan itself and the adoption thereof would serve as a strong defense against any third party concerns. Another aspect that the City Council will need to deal with at some point is the establishment of the West WRIA 18 Watershed Council, which would be an ongoing body tasked with resolving those issues not currently resolved and providing technical advice and input for the future. He noted there would be a need for City representation on that group. Mr. Campbell informed the Council there is an amendment process included in which the Watershed Plan can be changed, modified, added to or subtracted from, and the process incorporated for those changes would be the same as that instituted for writing the original Plan, with unanimous agreement among the Initiating Governments. He felt it important that the City monitor the near shore marine environment and the proposals that may arise in the future regarding adjustments that need to be made or might need to be made for the harbor and the bluffs west of the -6- CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5228 April 6, 2004 PUBLIC HEARINGS - City, such as the landfill area that can and would impact the City. In closing, Mr. OTHER: Campbell felt the Plan itself is an excellent document considering the fact it was put (Cont'd) together with a tremendous amount of public input and was designed by a committee. He felt the outcome exceeded reasonable expectations in terms of meeting the City's Watershed Plan needs. The enabling legislation identified the need to provide for water resources for Resolution No. 6-04 growing municipalities across the State and to meet the needs of fish. In Mr. (Cont'd) Campbell's view, at least for WRIA 18, the Plan has met that expectation and was, therefore, worthy of the City Council's support. Discussion followed, and Mr. Campbell responded to Councilmember Munro by discussing the process for public input and the method of determining what would be incorporated in the Plan. He felt most everyone realized they must seriously consider the consequences of each and every element in terms of impact on the various entities. There was a spirit of willing compromise in putting the Plan together, and many of the issues that caused concern were mitigated, compromised, or were removed, so the document is one that Mr. Campbell felt the City could feel very good about in that it accomplishes what was intended by the Legislature. There being no further public testimony, Mayor Headrick closed the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. Mayor Headrick acknowledged Mr. Campbell's commitment to this process; he then read the Resolution by title, entitled RESOLUTION NO. 6-04 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, resolving to work under the policies of the Water Resources Inventory Area 18 (WRIA 18) Watershed Management Plan. Councilmember Braun moved to pass the Resolution as read by title. Councilmember Erickson seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. OTHER 1. Appeal of State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Determination for a 20- CONSIDERATIONS: Unit Subdivision and Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Proposal - Dekay: North of Scribner Road East of Albert Street: Appeal of SEPA Determination for 20-Unit Mayor Headrick summarized the appeal of the SEPA determination for a 20-trait Subdivision and subdivision, as well as consideration of a Preliminary Subdivision for Dekay, north of Consideration of Scriber Road east of Albert Street. He asked if anyone was present on behalf of the Preliminary Subdivision - appellants. Dekay Jim Hendrickson, 4519 South Coyote Run Lane, was present to speak on behalf of the appellants, and he inquired as to whether only one person could speak to the issue. Mayor Headrick responded there could be more that one speaker; however, Community Development Director interjected that, in the appeal process, only one speaker is allowed for each side. In this instance, there could be one speaker for the appellants and one speaker for the City. Mayor Headrick asked why the attorney of record was not present, and Director Collins indicated he had asked the same question and was not given a response. Mayor Headrick had the expectation that the attorney would be present and would speak for the group; however, in his absence, the Mayor allowed some leeway by allowing more than one person to briefly address the Council. Continuing, Mr. Hendrickson stated that the appeal noted a terrible drainage problem coming from Coyote Run Lane, running down the hill through Thistle and Rhodes Road and running through one ofthe neighbor's farms. He felt it was something that had to be addressed. They were told that part of the water would be diverted to Peabody Creek, and part of it would be diverted to a natural runoff in between the properties which, Mr. Hendrickson felt, would create more of a problem. Further, he addressed the issue of Old Mill Road, where the City had developed up to Rhodes -7- 5229 CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 2004 OTHER Road which, he thought, was up to City standards. However, from Rhodes Road to the CONSIDERATIONS: County line, he felt the road to be substandard, as already indicated by the City (Cont'd) Engineer. Mr. Hendrickson indicated a traffic counter had been utilized and, not only is the road not wide enough, but there are more cars than actually should be on that Appeal of SEPA road for its present condition. He identified the issue of Mill Creek, noting there has Determination for 20-Unit been no consideration of whether Mill Creek will be bridged. He felt that hadn't been Subdivision and addressed as yet, because the plans haven't been finalized. Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision - Mayor Headrick responded that the issue of Mill Creek wouldn't be finalized, as this Dekay (Cont'd) wouldbe a preliminary approval and, assuming it is approved, a number of conditions must be met before final approval can occur. Mr. Hendrickson acknowledgedthe Mayor' s comments, and he then identified another problem with construction on Scribner Road. If, in fact, the construction were to take place, it would impact six parties who reside on Coyote Run Lane, as Scribner is the only road those parties can use. He noted there is one binding issue in that Mr. Collins, at the Planning Commission meeting, indicated the City owned the right-of- way on Scriber Road or could obtain the right-of-way, which Mr. Hendrickson felt was not the case. He asked that Dave Becket provide further information in that regard. Mayor Headrick informed Mr. Hendrickson that the Council packet contained information relative to the right-of-way, and he indicated that staff had submitted a recommendation on the Scriber Road issue, which is something to be addressed by the developer. If the development is approved, it would be conditioned upon certain things occurring and, if they didn't occur, then there would be no development. Mr. Hendrickson indicated the matter was not that clear at the Planning Commission meeting. Bill Jensen, a Rhodes Road property owner who introduced the water issue, indicated the proposed project adjoins his property on the comer. He resides directly north, having lived in that location his entire life, and he felt there were issues that must be resolved. Having not seen the Council packet, he was not aware of what hurdles the developer must address, but he was familiar with what happened on Rhodes Road at an earlier date, as well as on Thistle and Rose. Mr. Jensen indicated the facilities were not in place in the City to accommodate this development. He indicated he has been in the City for fifteen years without sewer, a service that can't be provided to him, plus the matter of drainage has arisen. The other issue is that related to traffic, because of the substandard roads, and Mr. Jensen stated that the City might deal with Old Mill Road, but couldn't deal with Rhodes Road. He cited another development at Rhodes Road and Old Mill Road, noting a terrible liability exists because of the dangerous traffic conditions and the excessive speeds of those traveling the roads. Mr. Jensen stated his strong opposition to the development under consideration. Mayor Headrick asked Director Collins to explain his recommendations based on the three areas identified in the appeal: additional traffic impact on Old Mill Road, Scriber Road right-of-way, and drainage. Director Collins advised the Council that the packet contained information that was provided by Mr. Oliver, attorney for the appellants. Director Collins then reviewed packet information prepared by staff that addressed the three issues under appeal and, in this particular case as well as in all subdivision and SEPA reviews, adequate street and drainage improvements have been required by either the preliminary subdivision conditions of approval or the SEPA mitigation measures. Those conditions are anticipated to be part of the development project itself. The first issue under appeal that had been addressed by Messrs. Hendrickson and Jensen was related to traffic, traffic safety, and substandard roads. He indicated there are substandard conditions and inadequate right-of-way on both Old Mill Road and Scribner Road. Director Collins added that Albert Street also did not have adequate right-of-way, and those issues were addressed in the conditions or mitigation measures to require the subdivision to have those improvements made to City standards. Old Mill Road would require the same kind of improvement from Rhodes Road to Scribner -8- CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5230 April 6, 2004 OTHER Road except that it is an arterial. Director Collins advised the Council that the City had CONSIDERATIONS: two options for those improvements, one of which is the standard road arterial right-of- (Cont'd) way that is shown on Old Mill north of Rhodes Road, and the other is the new low impact development standards which would require a slightly different form of Appeal of SEPA improvement, which does not include curb and gutter or parking strips in the roadway Determination for 20-Unit design. Regardless of the substandard condition and the traffic, those roads would have Subdivision and to be brought up to the City standard in order for the subdivision to proceed to final Consideration of approval. Once those standards are satisfied, then the traffic needs and the safety issues Preliminary Subdivision - for those road segments would be met. Director Collins continued that Mr. Jensen's Dekay (Cont'd) concern about Rhodes Road was not addressed in this application, because there's no specific access to Rhodes Road throughthis subdivision. There is an emergency access road only that is not usable by the general public, and even the people that own property in the subdivision would not use that roadway for access. The only way they would access Rhodes Road would be through Scribner and Old Mill Road. Director Collins indicated that, in regard to whether those impacts have been adequately described and mitigated, the fact that those improvements would necessarily be made, does in fact mitigate the substandard conditions and would prevent the problems that were described earlier. Director Collins referenced the second question regarding the roadways themselves, the issue of right-of-way, and whether or not the City's standards could be met because of inadequate right-of-way. He indicated this issue would apply to Albert, Scribner, and Old Mill Road, and the developer and the City are obligated to acquire adequate rights-of-way in order to make those improvements meet the standards. Director Collins advised the Council that, in the case of Albert Street, there are only 30 feet of right-of-way at this time, and 37 feet would be necessary in order to meet the minimum standards. The City would require an easement on the property of the subdivision, on the east side of Albert Street, for a pathway. If the property tothe west subsequently subdivides and the rest of Albert Street is dedicated, that pathway could be moved to the west side of the street and, in doing so, the standard requirements could still be met. In the case of Scribner Road, Director Collins felt the City has the ability to acquire all of the right-of-way. However, there was a question raised by Mr. Becket pertinent to his ownership of 30 feet of right-of-way between the City's reservoir and the existing 30 feet of the Scribner Road right-of-way and whether or not the City possesses any access rights over that 30 feet of roadway. Director Collins indicated those issues would have to be resolved in the development of the road in order to put in the standard improvements, which would have to be made in order for the subdivision to move forward. He emphasized that the conditions or the impacts would have to be addressed prior to final subdivision. Director Collins referenced the third issue regarding Scribner Road and whether or not the City's standards would adequately protect Mill Creek. He advised the Council that the roadway currently crosses Mill Creek, and the expected improvements would likely have very little impact different from the existing roadway. The primary change in the roadway would likely be the addition of pavement to the roadway and the creation of biofiltration swales on the north and south sides of the roadway, which would protect the water quality of the drainage going into Mill Creek. He felt that a curb and gutter situation would simply be a trap resulting in the water more rapidly entering Mill Creek. The design that the City now utilizes for low impact development standards would result in improved quality of runoff going into Mill Creek. The final issue identified was the matter of drainage and whether or not the environmentalreviewsufficientlyaddressedthose drainage problems. Director Collins informed the Council that this property was cleared after the first subdivision was approved in 1995, and the clearing of that property exacerbated the drainage going through and offofthe property. When the development was approved, it was approved under standards that were current at that time, requiring drainage retention and detention facilities that would mitigate the drainage problems. Director Collins felt -9- 5231 CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 2004 OTHER that, to alleviate the problems on Mr. Jensen's property or properties to the north, it CONSIDERATIONS: would be helpful to develop drainage facilities with the improvements required from (Cont'd) the subdivision, at which point the drainage that goes off of the site would be returned to what it was before the property was cleared. Further, under those circumstances, Appeal of SEPA there would be a measurable improvement in the flow of stormwater off of the Determination for 20-Unit property, both in terms of the quality of the water coming off the property and in the Subdivision and slowing down of the rate of the water coming offthe property. Director Collins stated Consideration of that this particular subdivision is not required to fix the drainage problems of the area; Preliminary Subdivision - they are only required to make the improvements that adequately retain and detain the Dekay (Cont'd) water coming off of their property and their development. He stressed that the conditions of the approval would require that specific mitigation. Based on the facts, he felt that the appeal issues had all been addressed. He acknowledged that there are substandard conditions and there are problems; however, he believed that the requirements for approval of the subdivision had addressed the issues so that they would be adequately mitigated. Director Collins added that, once mitigated, there would no significant adverse impacts that had not been addressed. Director Collins advised the Council that, before proceeding with the subdivision decision, the Council should make a decision on the SEPA. The two options would be to determine that the adverse impacts and the issues of appeal have been adequately addressed and then hold in favor of the Responsible Official's Determination of NonSignificance. He added that the laws of the City and the State require that the Responsible Official's decision is entitled to substantial weight. The other option he identified would be to determine that there is a probable significant adverse impact that is not adequately mitigated, in which case the Council would define what that impact would be, and an Environmental Impact Statement would then be required. If the Council were to make that decision and decide in favor of the SEPA appeal, then the Council could not move forward on the subdivision this evening. The 90-day time limit set forth in the RCWs would be stopped while the EnvironmentalImpact Statement was being written, and the clock would then start again when the EIS was complete. The matter would be returned to the Council for a decision on the subdivision at that time. Director Collins indicated the process is at the end of the 90 days; in fact, there has already been an extension of time on this particular project. Discussion followed, and Director Collins responded to an inquiry from Councilmember Pittis, clarifying that Old Mill, from Scribner to Rhodes, must be improved to arterial street standards. Councilmember Williams noted there are two different City standards that could be applied, and Director Collins clarified that either standard would meet the requirement for safety and traffic movement. With one standard, there is a required 40-foot roadway, with curb and gutter, and, with the other standard, there is a 24-foot roadway with no parking lanes and a separate walking path to protect pedestrians. With the latter standard, there would be biofiltration swales on both sides and, with either improvement, the traffic needs would be met. Director Collins cited Old Mill Road as an example where there could be the application of the low impact standard for arterials. There is currently less than 20 feet of pavement, and the ditches do not meet City standards. In addition, there is no walking path that is provided at this point, so those improvements would have to be made, or curb, gutter, and sidewalks would have to be added. Responding to a question from Councilmember Williams, Director Collins clarified that 24-foot widths are required of arterials, and 20-foot widths are required of access roads. City Engineer Kenworthy and Director Collins expanded on the width requirements, noting that the new pavement would increase 5 - 6 feet in most places, and there would be a separation of pedestrian facilities by the ditches themselves. The ditches would be much wider than those that presently exist. Councilmember Williams focused on the area between Rhodes, Old Mill Road, and Crabapple Place, asking if the zoning was RS-7, to which Director Collins responded the area was RS-9, plus he thought the area from Laurel to Canyon Edge, south of View - 10- CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5232 April 6, 2004 OTHER Crest was RS-9. He felt there may be some RS-7 zoning along Peabody. CONSIDERATIONS: Councilmember Williams observed that most of that area would result in large lots - (Cont'd) larger than in the mainpart of town, to whichDirector Collins agreed. Councilmember Williams then sought clarification from Director Collins as to the location of the City Appeal of SEPA limits and the Urban Growth Area. Director Collins indicated there's a slight UGA Determination for 20-Unit area west of Old Mill Road that runs down towards Valley Creek that is not in the City Subdivision and limits now, but for the area south and to the east of the comer of Scribner and Coyote Consideration of Run, there is no urban growth area. He added that, several years ago, the Coyote Run Preliminary Subdivision - residents approached the City about extending the Urban Growth Area in the hopes of Dekay (Cont'd) getting a sewer to that area. The request didn't go forward, and no decision was made. Councilmember Williams further queried as to whether some of the appellants were inside the City or inside the County. Director Collins felt they were both. Councilmember Williams indicated that the entire area has been problematic in that there have been complaints about water drainage in the areas of Canyon Edge Drive, Ahlvers, Galaxy Place, and the area south of Dogwood. He cited the area of Albert and Rose where there is water runoff, and he felt that this type ofinfill represents the classic example of what will be the urbanization of a rural area. As that progresses, he could see these difficulties being exacerbated. Director Collins felt that the proposed development would alleviate some of the water problems cited, pointing out that the way this property was clear cut has caused more runoff. Once the property is developed and the drainage requirements put in place, there should be an improvement. Director Collins cited the more developed parts of the City, where the water is adequately handled. He felt that it's not the amount of impervious surface, but the facilities for storm drainage that determine whether there will be a flooding problem. Otherwise, the question might be asked why Mr. Jensen's property, which is very undeveloped, has a lot of stormwater. Director Collins continued that it's not because of impervious surface on Mr. Jensen's property but, as Mr. Hendrickson said, there's a problem with water running down Coyote Run and then coming onto this property and then going off this property to Mr. Jensen's property and ultimately down into Canyon Edge or Galaxy Place or other areas of the City. The drainage improvements would mitigate the stormwater problem by retaining the water on the site, releasing it slowly so that it doesn't inundate those properties further downhill to the north. Councilmember Williams asked, in clearing the area and getting it prepared for grading, wouldn't the City's development regulations have some kind of best management practices to alleviate the water existing in the area. Director Collins responded that the City does have best management practices for the development process. However, this process started in 1995, and the property owner abandoned the process and didn't make the completion of the improvements that would have helped mitigate the situation. Thus, there is a situation that is unmitigated and the approval and improvements that would follow this approval would begin to mitigate the problem. Councilmember Williams then asked about safeguards for surrounding neighborhoods when a developer goes in, begins to clear property, and then doesn't follow through. Director Collins indicated that temporary erosion controls are in place, and City Engineer Kenworthy explained that, under current standards in place on clearing and grading, the City can require a bond to assure that those things are put in place, and the bond remains in place until permanent facilities are complete. Engineer Kenworthy anticipated that, prior to the start of grading, the City would require an erosion control bond to assure these are maintained, and the bond would be based on the amount of the construction of facilities, installation and maintenance. Councilmember Williams indicated the area was cleared in 1995, recalling there were some homes on Rose in the early 90s that had some significant water problems. City Engineer Kenworthy was aware that water problems existed in that area prior to this area being cleared, which is typical of the entire stretch of the City in this particular area. This is where the groundwater comes to the surface in this area, as the water doesn't go into the ground readily, so with new development, the City now has -11- 5233 CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 2004 OTHER regulations that require detention to assure that the new development will not exceed CONSIDERATIONS: the runoff of the pre-development state. The water is held back and released at a (Cont'd) controlled rate. It is expected that, any time land is cleared, there will be more runoff, something that can't be stopped short of injecting it back into the ground. The outflow Appeal of SEPA of water can be controlled so there is no increase in downstream damage. Determination for 20-Unit Councilmember Williams asked, in setting that flow, if the City was looking at pre- Subdivision and 2004 or pre- 1995, and Director Collins responded the date would be pre- 1800, which Consideration of is when the property was forested. Preliminary Subdivision - Dekay (Cont'd) Councilmember Williams cited previously expressed concerns relative to the proliferation of cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets, and he noted packet maps in this specific area where streets were going into cul-de-sacs. Councilmember Pittis, making a point of order, urged the Council to direct its attention to the issue at hand, and Councilmember Williams indicated he was attempting to determine ifa full EIS needed to be done. Discussion and debate followed, and Councilmember Williams inquired as to why the City wasn't making a larger loop instead ofdead -end streets. Director Collins noted there is a BPA power line that prevents access, but Councilmember Williams noted that issue didn't stop Old Mill Road from going under the line. Director Collins indicated there was no desire on the part of the City to create that connection because of the substandard nature of Thistle, Eunice, Rose, Albert, and Rhodes. Councilmember Williams felt that, in upgrading Old Mill south of Rhodes, there should be no problem with upgrading the rest of the neighborhood at the same time in order to perhaps facilitate infill and more consolidated development. Director Collins stated that the developer's responsibility is to provide access to a fully improved street, not to improve every street. Councilmember Williams observed the NICE neighborhoods concept wouldbe a perfect example of putting the City's program into perspective for a long-term program in order to avoid spending a great deal of money trying to get sewers and storm drainage into areas where the infrastructure has been done piecemeal. Councilmember Williams moved that the issue be sent back for an Environmental Impact Statement. Mayor Headrick asked for a second to the motion, and Director Collins suggested the appeal process should be completed, believing it would next go the applicant for input and then an opportunity for rebuttal by Messrs. Hendrickson and Jensen. The motion, therefore, died for lack of a second. Councilmember Pittis inquired as to where is the discharge off the site for the stormwater system, and Director Collins thought the discharge would go to the northwest across Albert, which is required to be improved all the way to the north property line which would be the intersection of the BPA power line. Director Collins, again responding to Councilmember Pittis, explained there would be two natural drainage areas. There would be a low area just to the west of the cul-de-sac and then, once that area overflows, it would go to the north along the Albert Street right-of-way or the extension of Albert Street, if there was right-of-way there. There would be a small drainage channel that goes north and south, and Director Collins submitted that the engineer for the applicant could better answer the question. City Engineer Kenworthy explained that storm drainage, as currently proposed, would be detained in detention facilities in Albert, and the northerly cul-de-sac at the intersection and would then follow naturally north to a depression area as depicted on the map. Councilmember Munro, noting the drainage issues currently experienced by those down water residents, asked about the means to solve those problems. Director Collins indicated there would need to be some stormwater facilities, as the water comes to Rhodes Road and goes around Park Knoll. The main flooding area occurs at Canyon Edge where the water covers the roadway and can be several feet deep. Having lived in that area, he could attest to the volume of water. The water that goes to the west of Park Knoll sheets across the vacant property that was previously referenced between Crabapple and Park Knoll, and that eventually winds its way into Mill Creek in the proximity of Ahlvers Road. Councilmember Munro asked if down water residents had - 12- CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5234 April 6, 2004 OTHER the means to go back to the property owner in the past, or now, to require some CONSIDERATIONS: correction. City Engineer Kenworthyresponded that, if the water is properly detained (Cont'd) on the property and the discharge is not at a rate higher than pre-development rates, then the down water residents would have no recourse against this property. He added Appeal of SEPA that downstream properties are always obliged by law to accept water from upstream Determination for 20-Unit properties. They have a right to defend themselves, but not to require the upstream Subdivision and properties to stop the discharge of natural waters. Conversely, if the property owner Consideration of didn't properly retain the water and there was increased flow, then they would have a Preliminary Subdivision - course of action. Councilmember Munro observed there has been increased flow since Dekay (Cont'd) 1995 and nothing has been done, and Director Collins indicated the effort is now underway to make the necessary improvements. City Engineer Kenworthy clarified that the City didn't know for a fact as to the amount of water and how much has infiltrated but, at that time, the City had no means to require the same mitigation as today, plus there was no bond on the project. Generally, if trees are taken down, there is a potential for increased runoff. Councilmember Munro understood that the City would have to acquire right-of-way or easement across property on Scribner and Old Mill Road. Director Collins agreed, saying there is a need for additional right of way on both Scribner and Old Mill Road; however, the City felt it could be more easily accomplished on Scribner than on Old Mill Road. Councilmember Munro observed that the right-of-way would likely have to be obtained from people in this room, and he asked if the City has the right to condemn property. Director Collins responded in the affirmative, noting that the determination as to who pays for the right-of-way would be determined by the City Council. Jim Hendrickson returned to the podium, stating he could not understand how the City could get involved in purchasing rights-of-way, as he felt that could be a legal issue. He felt that if Old Mill Road wasn't addressed adequately, someone would get hurt. The water issue, from his view, would result in water retention systems overflowing during heavy rain. Bill Jensen then returned to the podium, indicating he had a great deal more water on his property now than ever before. He asked the Council to not rubber stamp the project, but to put their best foot forward. Steve Zenovic, 519 South Peabody, #22, speaking on behalf of the applicant, indicated there has never been a denial that there is a drainage issue in the area, but he felt it to be a real stretch to say this piece of property created the drainage issue. This piece of property is doing what it can to solve the drainage issue. Coyote Run is part of the drainage issue; all those areas south of Scribner Road that are in this drainage basin have been cleared without any control by the City because of timing. His client did not clear this property but, rather, the previous landowner cleared the property. The applicant is realistically accepting the burden for this piece of property, but he didn't know if it was too realistic to expect them to inherit the burden of all other landowners who happen to be sitting in the audience complaining about drainage who have previously exacerbated the probleml Mr. Zenovic indicated that Old Mill Road is currently substandard, something that was identified at the Planning Commission. It has vehicle traffic at 1000 ADT and can only support 400 ADT, and he agreed it needs to be improved. He asked, however, where the line is drawn in terms of one subdivision in an area fixing all the infrastructure problems for the entire area. Mr. Zenovic felt that, if the applicant addresses the issues and hasn't argued about dealing with Scribner Road or drainage, they have stepped to the plate to address the issues on an environmental level, consistent with the scope of the project. He felt that Director Collins' determinations were reasonable and appropriate. Mayor Headrick asked if the problem on his client's property was worse than it was in 1990, and Mr. Zenovic was certain that it was. According to his recollection, it was -13- 5235 CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 2004 OTHER logged by the previous landowner and then sold, so around 1994-1995, it was harvested CONSIDERATIONS: and, at that point in time, he didn't think there was a clearing and grading ordinance, (Cont'd) so it could be done without any control. Mayor Headrick asked Mr. Zenovic of his opinion on the mitigation measures proposed and what would they do to his client's Appeal of SEPA property and runoff if those conditions were met. Mr. Zenovic indicated that the Determination for 20-Unit conditions established at their post-development runoff rate cannot exceed pre- Subdivision and development, which was established at second growth or fully forested land. So, the Consideration of developer was committed to taking it back to a situation that is better than what they Preliminary Subdivision - have right now. Mayor Headrick asked how that is accomplished, and Mr. Zenovic Dekay (Cont'd) responded it would be based on the storage system, as they place over-sized pipes in the ground, size the system to handle the water from the subdivision in such a manner that, other than up to a 100-year storm, they are storing the water in the ground and metering the outflow. Councilmember Rogers asked how long the current developer has owned the property, and Mr. Zenovic believed it was purchased in 1995. Councilmember Braun asked if the present owner was aware of the water problems in the area above and below prior to or during purchase; Mr. Zenovic said that matter was never discussed, and that he could not speak for the owner. Councilmember Erickson asked if, because of the conditions placed in the SEPA, this wouldbe considered a Mitigated Determination of NonSignificance. Director Collins responded there weren't any mitigation measures in the current DNS. The prior DNS, which was adopted, had two mitigation measures, one being the improvement of Old Mill Road, and the other being the extension of the waterline utility service on the south property line of the development. He emphasized that those two mitigation measures were still in effect. Mayor Headrick indicated this is a two-part process, the first being whether Council accepts the City Official's Determination of NonSignificance for the development, recognizing there are certain mitigating procedures or factors that need to come into play in order to justify the Determination of NonSignificance. Presumably, the mitigation measures, according to the determination, are necessary in order to have the DNS. If there are no mitigation measures, then presumably an Environmental Impact Statement would be justified. Councilmember Williams asked Manager Quinn if the City had the ability in City funds to assist with an EIS on a much broader scope, recognizing that smaller parcelswere only a minor contribution to a problem but, in the aggregate, may be just one more piece of a larger problem. He agreed with Mr. Zenovic's characterization that this parcel didn't create the problem for the entire area but, at the same time, this is the focal point at the moment. Councilmember Williams suggested that, through some sort of development fund at the City, there might be a way to look at the entire area from Laurel to Peabody, out Canyon Edge, connecting back into Thistle up to Scribner, over to Old Mill and back down into the creek. Manager Quinn responded that the current CFP process of the City would be the most logical way to deal with these kinds of issues, with the adoption of the NICE Neighborhoods Program and those kinds of issues in the CFP process. The City has not budgeted for this particular project, as it was not anticipated. Manager Quinn agreed there is a placeholder of $100,000 that has been set aside for the NICE Neighborhoods program on which, however, staffwould likely bring back a development agreement that would push it up to $400,000, because of the impact of a proposed sewer capacity issue in the Park and Campbell neighborhood. He felt this same kind of process could be used for drainage, and it would be a reprioritization of the Council in the CFP process. Councilmember Piths, referencing Packet Page 144, cited the proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground and runoff of water impacts, asking if the statements noted were the limit of mitigation in the DNS as of now. Director Collins responded that the City standards must be met and, he thought, the developer was willing to meet those standards for the specified drainage improvements. Councilmember Pittis was - 14- CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5236 April 6, 2004 OTHER confused by the statement that there were no mitigations, and Director Collins clarified CONSIDERATIONS: there were two mitigation measures previously, but they wouldn't make this a Mitigated (Cont'd) DNS. When adopting the more recent DNS, the City did not adopt any mitigation measures specifically, because those were already proposed by the applicant or Appeal of SEPA required by conditions of the subdivisions. He added that the subdivision conditions Determination for 20-Unit adequately address the same concerns that were in the previous mitigated DNS, such Subdivision and as the upgrade of Old Mill Road to City standards. Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision - Councilmember Williams moved to reject the DNS and require an Environmental Dekay (Cont'd) Impact Statement. Councilmember Braun seconded the motion. Councilmember Piths stated his desire to have the motion narrowed to water, as he was comfortable with the transportation issues. He felt that stormwater was another issue, but Councilmember Williams felt the Council should consider the circulation, eventually out through Canyon Edge, back up through Scribner, down through Albert. At some point, he felt, there would be traffic all over the area. Councilmember Braun commented that eventually there will be additional developers go further to the south, which will again create a problem. If the City were to take care of some of what is in existence now, he felt the benefits would be realized in 20 ~ 50 years from now. Councilmember Pittis expressed the opinion that this subdivision is out of line, is not in the appropriate order, and the public interest would not be served by the subdivision, but he was willing to talk about the environmental issues first. Councilmember Braun called for the question, and a vote was taken on the motion, with Councilmembers Williams and Braun voting in favor and Mayor Headrick and Councilmembers Pittis, Munro, Erickson, and Rogers voting in opposition. The motion, therefore, failed. Councilmember Piths felt that the real problem is one that is exacerbated by being up against the Park, serviced poorly by existing roadways, and serviced poorly by utilities. He noted one must "leap frog" over undeveloped land to get to it. Councilmember Pittis, therefore, moved that the Preliminary Subdivision be denied. However, Mayor Headrick indicated the Council was still addressing the issue of NonSignificance, so Councilmember Pittis withdrew the motion. He subsequently moved to accept the Determination of NonSignificance. Councilmember Erickson understood the incorporation of mitigation standards, and she reiterated the notion this would then become a Mitigated Determination ofNonSignificance. Mayor Headrick restated the motion to deny the appeal and accept the Determination of NonSignificance. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Erickson. Mayor Headrick and Councilmembers Pittis and Erickson voted in favor of the motion, and Councilmembers Williams, Braun, Rogers, and Munro voted in opposition. The motion, therefore, failed. Mayor Headrick reviewed the two motions, both of which failed, and Councilmember Pittis indicated that a 20-lot subdivision, being realistic, could only afford to do so much, and he agreed there was a bigger issue relative to the basin whether the City requires this subdivision to solve all the problems. He felt he had enough environmental information to make a decision, and he felt it was out of order of development sequence for a number of reasons. Manager Quinn advised the Council that, under SEPA, there are two basic choices, one being a Determination of NonSignificance and the other being an Environmental Impact Statement. The EIS has been rejected and the DNS hasn't been approved. It appeared to him that the issue was whether the City should consider making a determination for a DNS with mitigations. He felt this is a mitigated DNS, since there are two conditions incorporated in the DNS. But others could be added if so desired by the Council. The Council could then proceed to the plat, and Director Collins indicated there are more conditions that are in the subdivision recommendations that can be considered mitigations. There is no requirement for mitigation measures if there's a standard that is being required of the subdivision itself; the standard of the subdivision does not have to be duplicated as a mitigation measure. Conditions of the subdivision are requirements of the City in approving the subdivision. Councilmember Williams felt it was a perfect argument for adding the mitigation measures to the DNS, because if the - 15- 5237 CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 2004 OTHER Mitigated DNS was approved and the preliminary subdivision not approved, then the CONSIDERATIONS: conditions of the preliminary subdivision wouldn't fold in to the development. (Cont'd) Director Collins indicated that all conditions of the subdivision could be mitigation measures of the DNS, and that if the subdivision is not approved, the DNS would be Appeal of SEPA moot. Determination for 20-Unit Subdivision and Councilmember Williams moved to accept the Mitigated DNS by adding Consideration of Conditions 1 - 7, Findings 1 - 22, and Conclusions A - E, as set forth in Exhibit Preliminary Subdivision - "A" which is attached to and becomes a part of these minutes. The motion was Dekay (Cont'd) seconded by Councilmember Pittis, who suggested a friendly amendment correcting Conclusion A language from "short plat" to "long plat", which was agreed to by Councilmember Williams. A vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. Councilmember Pittis moved that the Preliminary Subdivision be denied on the basis that it is leap-frogging or circumventing undeveloped properties and the public interest is not served by doing those extensions excessively to the subdivision. Councilmember Williams seconded the motion. Discussion followed, and Councilmember Williams felt this subdivision is a much more complex situation, and Councilmember Pittis expanded on his position. Councilmember Munro challenged the thinking by indicating there was a long process ahead if the Council were to grant preliminary approval. He recognized, for the property owners present, that a subdivision in a rural area is a big change, but it is zoned appropriately and it is in the City limits. Preliminary approval requires that a lot of work be accomplished, and it appeared to him that, if the development did occur and Old Mill Road were fixed, Scribner Road were improved, and the drainage did not worsen, he asked Council's consideration of approval at this point. Councilmember Munro felt that preliminary approval meant the developer and the engineer had a huge amount of work to do and must return to the Council for final approval. Councilmember Rogers added that she agreed with the zoning and she respected all of the properties represented this evening, realizing the impact of change, but she straggled with the fact that this developer might take the fall for an area that hasn't been completely or properly planned. Her concern was what would happen with the next developer, as the City has a responsibility to fix the area so that it is good for all citizens. She straggled in that the developer was at the wrong place at the wrong time, but the City has a responsibility to recognize there is a problem to solve. She concurred that, while she knew preliminary approval could be very threatening, there was an entire list of tremendous goals and accomplishments to be done. She felt there will be development in the City, and this matter must be addressed at some point in time. Councilmember Williams agreed it would be developed at some point, but he felt this development was ahead of its time, reminding him of a subdivision on the west side where a developer had to put in several blocks of sewer line and a roadway. At that point, those individuals got their money back, and the City worked with them to get it done correctly. He suggested the City go back anddeal with the area and determine how this subdivision would fit in the piece of the larger puzzle to everyone's benefit and, perhaps, on the City's side, deal with some of the infrastructure problems at the same time. Lengthy discussion followed as to fight-of-way acquisition, and Councilmember Erickson felt that the right-of-wayissue was one of a Comprehensive Plan nature. She felt it to be the developer's responsibility to acquire right-of-way. Councilmember Pittis pointed out that the City wouldn't be lending its power of eminent domain to the developer. Manager Quinn agreed, noting that the Council has a potential policy decision regarding assistance to developers, no different than what was discussed with the NICE neighborhoods. The City has the power to condemn property for public purpose, such as rights-of-way to build roads. If one of the obstacles to future - 16- CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5238 April 6, 2004 OTHER development of this area is that the transportation / roadway system is inadequate in CONSIDERATIONS: terms of right-of-way, then that area will never be expanded as it will be an excuse and (Cont'd) an obstacle to never allow development in that neighborhood. Manager Quinn continued that, if the only way to encourage future assessed value increases and Appeal of SEPA development of the area is to remove the obstacle, the City may be the only one able Determination for 20-Unit to remove the obstacle with the power of condemnation for public right-of-way. Subdivision and Consideration of Discussion followed, and Manager Quinn indicated that prior or current property Preliminary Subdivision - owners may not necessarily control their drainage and it affects the whole area, which Dekay (Cont'd) may be one of the potential issues that the City might address and assist to open the area up for development. He delineated ways in which the City could assist in the resolution of the drainage issues. Councilmember Pittis felt this would be one of the most expensive areas to serve because of the lack of infrastructure, but Councilmember Erickson felt that was insufficient reason to deny the subdivision. Councilmember Munro wondered if the City could work with the developer to resolve some of these problems, and Councilmember Rogers added that, when the stormwater ordinance was adopted, consideration was given to the areas for prioritization. Although that work is still in process, she assured everyone that Canyon Edge was one of the higher priorities. She noted that, concurrently, the Stormwater Utility is being done, there is a CFP process, and the NICE Neighborhoods approach is proceeding. She felt the City has a responsibility to the entire area, as another subdivision in the area, not too far from the one in question, was approved. Mayor Headrick repeated the motion to deny the preliminary approval of the plat. A vote was taken on the motion, with Councilmembers Pittis, Williams, and Braun voting in favor of the motion, and Mayor Headrick and Councilmembers Munro, Erickson, and Rogers voting in opposition. The motion, therefore, failed. Councilmember Erickson moved to approve the Dekay Preliminary Subdivision, citing Conditions 1 - 7, Findings 1 - 22, and Conclusions A - E, as set forth in Exhibit "A" which is attached to and becomes a part of these minutes. Councilmember Munro seconded the motion. A vote was taken on the motion, with Mayor Headrick and Councilmembers Munro, Erickson, and Rogers voting in favor of the motion. Mayor Headrick summarized that the preliminary approval is agreed upon with all of the conditions that need to be met. The City may or may not assist the developer, but from his perspective, he voted in favor of the motion, not because he thought it would happen, butif the developer felt he could meet all of the conditions, Mayor Headrick felt that would be in the community'sbest interest, as well as the neighborhood's best interest if the developer could deal with some of the stormwater issues. He indicated the expectation is for the developer to deal with the stormwater issues, the widening of Old Mill Road, and the widening and paving of Scribner Road. Councilmember Williams indicated that, for the record, he had voted in opposition to the motion. Councilmember Rogers concurred with the Mayor's comments, but the City is in the process of starting to look at this year's CFP; she felt the Council had received its marching orders loud and clear. Councilmember Pittis indicated he did not want to spend money on residential property in this area, because of the high costs. Clerk Upton informed Mayor Headrick that, for the record, those who voted in favor of the motion were Mayor Headrick and Councilmembers Munro, Erickson, and Rogers. She asked the Mayor to ask for those voting in opposition. Mayor Headrick asked for a show of hands for those voting against approval of the Dekay Preliminary Subdivision, and Councilmembers Pittis, Braun, and Williams voted in opposition. The motion, therefore, passed. Extend Meeting Beyond Councilmember Williams moved to adjourn the meeting and continue it to 10:00 p.m. another time and date. The motion was seconded by Councilman Braun. A vote was taken on the motion, with Councilmembers Williams, Pittis, and Braun voting in favor, and Mayor Headrick and Councilmembers Rogers, Munro, and Erickson voting in opposition. - 17- 5239 CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 2004 Extend Meeting Beyond Councilmember Munro moved to extend the meeting beyond 10:00 p.m. The 10:00 p.m. (Cont'd) motion was seconded by Councilmember Rogers and carried by a majority vote, with Couneilmembers Braun and Williams voting in opposition. 2003 Year-End Report 2. 2003 lear-End Report: Finance Director Ziomkowski, aided by PowerPoint slides, presented the 2003 Year- End Financial Report. She advised the Council that total expenditures of $65 million were 10% more than in 2002, with most of theincrease incurred in power purchases. Personnel represented 24% of the budget with an increase of 4%, and capital and capital projects of $5.9 million increased by 13%. Debt Service increased by $600,000 or 21%, most of which was in Water and Wastewater Funds. Intergovernmental expenditures of $2.4 million increased by 5%, and include utility taxes, the PenCom Fund, and the County jail. Director Ziomkowski reviewed in detail the General Fund, noting an increase in revenues of 4.2% for a total of $13,865,886. Operating expenses were $12,956,960 or 2.9% less than in 2002. Director Ziomkowski noted that 50% of the General Fund revenue increase was experienced in the "tax" category in the amount of $198,924. The other half of the increase was in "charges for services". The City experienced an 8% growth in sales tax in 2003. Property taxes decreased as a result of the Nippon settlement. Director Ziomkowski informed the Council of upcomingconcems in the area of property taxes, such as lack of growth, the impacts of Initiative 747, and the impact of a proposed initiative that would decrease property taxes by 25%. In reviewing the Utility Taxes for 2003, Director Ziomkowski indicated the Utility Taxes were 11.4% over 2002 and 1.9% more than budgeted. In responding to an inquiry from Councilmember Williams, she indicated that approximately 40% of all utility taxes can be attributed to Nippon. She then reviewed General Fund expenditures, indicating that expenses were 2.9% below budget and 2.8% below 2002. The largest savings in the General Fund canbe attributed to reduced jail expenses, plus the City realized a savings in personnel costs. Director Ziomkowski reviewed the six-year financial forecast, Lodging Tax funds, as well as the Street Fund. She discussed the Governmental Capital Projects and the associated funding of those projects, and the status of the different utility funds. Director Ziomkowski completed the report by reviewing the Internal Services Funds and the City's investment portfolio, which experienced an average return of over 2.5% with almost $40 million invested. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None. QUASI-JUDICIAL: INFORMATION: Manager Quinn directed the Council' s attention to an open position on the AWC Board of Directors, District 12, in the event one of the Councilmembers was interested in running for office to fill the vacancy. Councilmember Rogers showed interest in the position. Manager Quinn referenced the projects update included in the packet, and he noted the letter concerning Clerk Upton's election as Secretary of the Washington Municipal Clerks Association. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Manager Quirm called for an Executive Session to discuss a property issue. The meeting, therefore, adjourned to Executive Session at 10:40 p.m. It was then determined that the subject matter was not defined enough for Executive Session. RETURN TO OPEN The meeting returned to Open Session at 10:55 p.m., and it was agreed by consensus SESSION: that the matter under consideration should be referred to the Community & Economic - 18- CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5240 April 6, 2004 Development Committee. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m. -Richard A. He~&ick,'~Mayor B~cky J. Upt~ Ci~erk - 19- Exhibit "A" CONDITIONS, FINDINGS, AND CONCLUSIONS IN SUPPORT OF DEKAY 5241 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION: Conditions: 1. The interior cul-de-sacs shall be curvilinear with access to Lots 1, 10, 11, and 20 only from the cul-de-sacs, not from Albert Street. Albert Street and the interior cul-de-sacs shall be improved to the City's low impact development standards including 20' of asphaltic paving with a 4' walking path separated from the road way by a ditch constructed to City standards. Emergency vehicle 20' all weather access road is to be provided from Thistle to Eunice Street with the roadway barricaded in such a manner (to be approved by Public Works and Utility and Fire Departments) as to prevent access from the project to Thistle Street. The interior cul-de-sacs shall be named and dedicated to the City per the plat. Signage shall be placed on Albert Street, Scribner Road, and the interior cul-de-sacs indicating that on-street parking is prohibited along both sides of the streets. An additional 30' of right-of-way shall be dedicated along the south side of existing Scribner Road such that Scribner Road shall be improved to the City's low impact development standards including a 20' asphalt surface 10' each side of the centerline with a ditch and 4' walking path along one side of the right-of-way to Old Mill Road. The intersection of Scribner Road and Old Mill Road will be designed with an improved vision clearance and Old Mill Road will be improved to City arterial street standards. 2. Fire hydrants shall be placed and spaced as required by the City's Fire Department to a maximum 1000' of separation distance. Wording shall be placed on the final plat and recorded with the County Auditor upon filing of the final subdivision indicating that all residences shall be fitted with residential sprinkler systems prior to occupancy. 3. Prior to final plat approval, an 8 inch water service shall be extended to the lots as required by the Public Works and Utilities Department from Scribner Road along the southerly right-of-way to Albert Street to the proposed lots and connecting to the existing water main at Thistle/Eunice Streets. Installation of a 6" water main to service Lots 1 - 10 shall be done with water main hot taps by City personnel or an approved contractor. Water mains are to be within the City right-of-way or within an approved and dedicated 20' utility easement and off-site drainage easements will be required. A pressure reducing valve will be required at the BPA crossing. 4. Electric utility service to the subdivision shall be underground and be coordinated with other utilities in the trench. 5. Stormwater improvement plans shall be submitted for approval per the City's Urban Services Standards and Guidelines and installed prior to final plat approval. 6. An 8" sanitary sewer main shall be installed within the City fight-of-way approximately 5 off the centerline within the City right-of-way per the Public Works Department. Side sewer lateral connections are to be 6" pvc and within the right-of-way with a 10' horizontal separation from water services. 4" x 4" pressure treated posts shall be placed at each end of the laterials, marked, and buried to a depth indicated on the post. Findings and Conclusions - Dekay Preliminary Subdivision 5242 April 6, 2004 Page2 7. Building address numbers provided by the City's Building Division shall be placed on the lots. Findings: 1. Preliminary approval is for a 20-unit subdivision submitted by Zenovic and Associates on January 9, 2004, for Richard Dekay. The site is approximately 7.92 acres in size, nearly rectangular in configuration and is located northeast of the intersection of Albert Street and Scribner Road in the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 15, T 30 N, R 6 W.W.M. The east and south lines of the subdivision form the City's property lines in this location. 2. The property was annexed to the City in 1991 with the condition that the previously platted 75-1ot subdivision be resubdivided to City standards prior to any sale of the individual lots. The lots were previously platted while in the County as part of Fogarty and Dolan's Second Addition. A 22 lot with an additional utility lot preliminary subdivision was approved on July 5, 1995, but was not finaled within the five year time period and so expired. 3. The site's east and south boundaries form the City's east and south City limits in this location. The east and south portions of the site also border the Peabody Creek channel and ravine and with the property owner being the Olympic National Park. The site slopes to the northeast at approximately a 5% grade in the area. Peabody Creek in this area is identified as a Type 3 creek in Section 15.20 of the City's Municipal Code which requires a 100' non disturbance corridor. The most southeastern lot in the proposed subdivision is located approximately 192 feet from the creek bed. If after clearing it is discovered that any portion of the proposed lots contain the top of the creek ravine, a 25 foot non disturbance buffer will be required for buildings. 4. The subject property is identified by the Port Angeles Zoning Map as Single Family Residential (RS-9) which allows a density of up to 9 units per acre. The proposed drawing indicates that each lot in the proposed subdivision will be at least 9,000 square feet in area. 5. The purpose of the City's RS-9, Residential Single Family zone is a low density residential zone intended to create and preserve urban single family residential neighborhoods consisting of predominantly single family homes on larger than standard Townsite-size lots. Uses that are compatible with and functionally related to a single family residential environment may be located in this zone. Because of land use impacts associated with nonresidential uses, few nonresidential uses are allowed in this zone and then only conditionally. This zone provides for a variety in the urban land use pattern for the City's single family residential neighborhoods, following a curvilinear street system of nonthrough public and private streets with irregularly shaped lots, minimum 75-foot front lot lines, and 60-foot rights-of-way for collector arterial streets in large rectangular blocks and usually located in outlying areas with large tracts of vacant buildable land. 5243 Findings and Conclusions - Dekay Preliminary Subdivision April 6, 2004 Page3 6. Chapter 16.08 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code (PAMC) sets forth local requirements for the approval of subdivisions and Section 16.08.050(B)(1) PAMC provides that the Planning Commission shall examine the proposed plat, along with written recommendations of the City Departments, and shall either approve or disapprove the submittal. A recommendation thereon shall be forwarded to the City Council within a period of 90 days after a preliminary plat has been submitted to the City Planning Department. The City Council shall either approve or disapprove the proposed preliminary plat at a public meeting. 7. The Revised Code of Washington RCW 58.17 contains the State's guidelines for the uniform division of land within the State. Section 58.17.110 requires a city to inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of a subdivision and determine if appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys and other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, and schools and shall consider all other relevant facts including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school and whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision. A proposed subdivision shall not be approved unless the city can make written findings that these provisions are made. 8. Section 16.08 PAMC requires that the final plat shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within five years after City Council approval of the preliminary plat. Said preliminary approval shall become void unless a final plat is submitted and approved by the City within the five year period. 9. The Port Angeles Public Works, Light, Parks, and Fire Departments reviewed the proposed short plat. Their comments and specific conditions have been incorporated in the Department's recommendation and conditions of approval. Water, power, garbage pickup, telecommunications, sewer, and emergency services are available within acceptable standards to the site or will be extended through conditions to the preliminary plat. 10. The subject property is identified as Low Density Residential (LDR) on the Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan land use map. 11. The Comprehensive Plan requires concurrency for streets, water service, sanitary sewer service and electrical service. The proposal has been reviewed with respect to the Comprehensive Plan and the following Plan policies are found to be most relevant to the proposal: Growth Management Element Goal A; Land Use Element Goal A, Policy A.2, Goal B, Policy B.1, B.2, B.3, and B.4, Goal C; Transportation Element Goal A, Policy A.3, A.6, B.11, B.14, and B.18; Utilities and Public Services Element Policy C.2; Capital Facilities Element Goal A, B, Policy B.1, B.3, B.4, B.5, B.6, B.7, C.2, C.3, C.4, and C.5. 12. The site is currently served by Old Mill Road and Scribner Road. Scribner Road is not fully improved. Old Mill Road is a collector arterial and is a designated school walking route but is not a designated bicycle route. The City's development standards will require 5244 Findings and Conclusions - Dekay Preliminary Subdivision April 6, 2004 Page4 improvements to Scribner Road and the immediate access street - Albert Street - will be required such that the final roadway is an improved width of 20' with a ditch and 4' pedestrian walking path. A 20' all weather emergency access road is requested from the City's Public Works and Utilities Department from Eunice Street to Thistle Street with the roadway barricaded in such a manner that access from the project to Thistle Street is not encouraged. 13. The City's low impact development standards for suburban areas were adopted in 2003 with the understanding that subdivisions developed under the reduced standards would not allow for on-street parking. Site development and design for residential lots developed under the lower impact standards need to accommodate resident parking and visitor parking on-site. Roadside ditches developed under low impact development standards should be kept free of debris by adjacent property owners. 14. The owner of a construction site where a total of five acres or more of land area is disturbed that has a discharge of stormwater to a surface water or storm sewer system must apply to the State Department of Ecology for a General Permit for Stormwater Discharge Associated with Construction Activities. 15. Building permits are required for all structures within the subdivision. All local building and Fire Codes shall be complied with during construction including residential sprinkler systems. Information will be filed with the plat identifying the requirement so that property owners are aware of the requirement prior to purchase. 16. The Port Angeles School District has been notified of the development to allow them to plan for needed public school facilities and routes. The Port Angeles School District had no concerns as the school population is low. 17. Property owners within 300 feet of the proposed subdivision were mailed notice of the proposal on January 12, 2004. The property was posted on January 12, 2004, and publication appeared in the Peninsula Daily News on January 15, 2004. Written comments were received from ten area neighbors who do not favor development of the property (comments are attached with this report). A significant change in the quality of life that exists for neighbors in the sparsely developed suburban area is anticipated as well as concerns relating to the expected impact to Scribner Road which is currently a narrow gravel roadway. The extension of Albert Street north to the Thistle/Rose Street area is also of concern to at least one author as the Thistle/Rose Street area contains undeveloped, narrow, gravel, streets that are a significant concern without any added traffic. The applicant does not propose an access to the Thistle/Rose Street area from the subdivision. 18. The City's Parks Department responded that they are aware of the preliminary proposal and although area is below the level of service standard for the area for parks, they do not believe the level of service for the area will be hampered as a result of the proposed development. The nearest public park play area is more than one-half mile from the site. The Port Angeles High School is located north of the site more than one-half mile from the site with the closest public elementary school being Jefferson Elementary School. The nearest public playground area is at the Port Angeles High School. 5245 Findings and Conclusions - Dekay Preliminary Subdivision April 6, 2004 Page5 19. The site will be serviced by the City's Police, Fire, and Public Works Departments and phone service from Qwest. All utilities including potable water, sanitary waste, and refuse collection are available in the area. 20. A previous Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS g629) was issued for a previous proposal to resubdivide the property into 22 lots and one utility parcel on June 13, 1995. Mitigation measures were included to address needed road and water utility upgrades. The current application resulted in the issuance of an adoption of a previous mitigated determination of nonsignificance (MDNS g629) and a new determination of nonsignificance (DNS gl 055) on February 5, 2004, without the imposition of additional mitigation measures as the issues covered under the previous MDNS are addressed by the applicant in the current application or with similar conditions as part of the preliminary approval for the new 20-lot subdivision. On March 9, 2004, a new determination of nonsignificance (DNS gl 056) was substituted for DNS g 1055, following additional review of the rights-of-way and drainage information by the City's Public Works and Utilities Department. This action satisfies the City's responsibility under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). 21. The Planning Commission's decision is a recommendation to the City Council. The Commission acts as the City's hearing body for preliminary_ subdivision approval. Reports are advisory only to ensure conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of the City's Comprehensive Plan and to planning standards and specifications adopted by the City. 22. The Port Angeles School District has been notified of the development to allow them to plan for needed public school facilities and routes. A School District representative indicated that the general school population is low at present. Conclusions: A. As conditioned, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the Port Angeles Subdivision Ordinance, Chapter 16.08 PAMC, and Chapter 58.17 RCW of the Washington State Subdivision Act C. As conditioned, appropriate provisions have been made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school. D. As conditioned, signage educating residents and visitors as to the prohibition of on-street parking will ensure that interior streets remain passable for public safety situations where on-street parking could prevent ease of passage for emergency vehicles and sight distance safety issues. 5246 Findings and Conclusions - Dekay Preliminary Subdivision April 6, 2004 Page6 E. As conditioned, the public interest is served in the platting of this subdivision as articulated in the City's Comprehensive Plan, Subdivision, and Zoning Ordinances. The subdivision provides for development of new homes within the City of Port Angeles consistent with the State of Washington Growth Management Act. Adopted by the Port Angeles City Council at its meeting of April 6, 2004. Richard Headrick, Mayor $. tspf Tc C ri'