DCD presents info on 2nd ADU possible permitting options for Council’s review & approval. Public Works contract with AIMS to clean Burwell/ Warren sewer pipe, and renew 5-year contract with Otis for City’s 9 elevators. Sadly, due to hunger, I missed the last 30 minutes of this meeting. I will get the video and amend this post in the next couple of days.

CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MINUTES by Anna Mockler 5:00 PM

Current Council Meetings are available for viewing online. Please visit the Bremerton-Kitsap Access Television’s Kitsap Government Meetings website. For more information on schedules, committees, etc., visit https://www.bremertonwa.gov/155/City-Council For study session videos, email the address below with special request.

Public questions or comments may be submitted ahead of time to City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us

A. BRIEFINGS on AGENDA ITEMS

1. Public Works Agreement with Pipeline Video Inspection LLC dba AIMS Companies for Burwell/Warren Sewer Pipe Cleaning and Video Inspection

Bill Davis presents. To complete video inspection of 24″ diam pipes, then prepare contract for bid. 6 (7?) companies submitted a bid. Daugs asks why Bremerton can’t do it — Davis explains that traffic and scope are beyond our capacity. She asks what disruptions to residents. Davis: it’ll be nighttime work, for about 2 weeks, with one lane closed in each direction. Goodnow asks about noise. Davis: they’re not too loud; Knuckey chimes in to say It’s Loud. 8pm-4:30am, for 2 weeks, it’ll be noisy wherever the VacuumThing (couldn’t catch the name) is operating. There’ll be a jet with a large nozzle to dislodge debris, then the VaccuumThing sucks up all the debris. It moves from location to location, but it’ll make noise in its immediate vicinity. Daugs asks how will we communicate about this upcoming disruption? Davis: door-hangers 48-72 hours before the event. Wheeler says he’ll be on call throughout the project and no email will remain in his in-box for more than half a day. Moved to Consent Agenda.

2. Five-Year Contract Extension Addendum to Maintenance Agreement with Otis Elevator Company for Elevator Service, Maintenance and Monitoring

Knuckey presents. 7 locations with elevators, total of 9 elevators. 5 years ago contract with Otis included clause for extension for another five years. Sullivan asks is there any increase to current costs of $30K/yr. Knuckey: Page 19 shows current costs. Page 35 shows the Addendum, which shows CPI (Consumer Price Index) increases. Current, $2700.00 / month – this year, about $33K/yr. Sullivan asks Knuckey to repeat. He does. It has increased a total of $7K over 5 years, a little over $1K/yr in past 5 years. Daugs asks about Convention Center elevators — Riley signs on to say that there is cost-sharing among Convention Center tenants, including Kitsap Transit, and the City. Wheat asks: Have there been any issues with the company’s performance, or have we been happy? Knuckey: I just asked this question of the contract manager, who said that there have been zero issues. Simpson, in absentia, presented by Gorman: Was Otis sole bidder? Have we put this out for bid to make sure we’re getting best deal? Knuckey: in 2016 we sent out RFPs to five potential bidders, and only one bidder responded. So no RFPs this time around — we’re happy. Moved to Consent Agenda.

3. Discussion regarding Potential Zoning Code Amendment to allow two (2) Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) per Single Family Lot (Information only)

Allison Satter presents. Discussion, Two ADUs Zoning Code Amendment. Staff has prepared 4-ish different options for Council feedback (sic). Council should give direction to staff on how to proceed regarding 2 ADUs. In Dec 2020, Council adopted changes unanimously for revised standards on: Maximum size increased; reduced design criteria; eliminated parking requirements; removed owner-occupancy requirement. Options — 1) do nothing, and code remains as is, 1 ADU per single-family lot. 2) Adopt Planning Commission recommendation — allow 2 ADUs WITH a requirement for parking space for the 2nd ADU. 3) In Seattle, a 2nd ADU must be either a) affordable, less than 80% AMI, and rent/utilities less than 30% of household income OR b) meet Green Building Standards, like LEED certification. Thus, we have option 3A: Adopt Planning Commission recommendation WITH the affordability requirement standard (as above) AND a 12-year commitment. These are consistent with multi-family tax exemption standards (MFTE). Option 3B — add Green Building Standards, e.g., sustainable resources, energy system, passive solar design, water mgmt. Option 3A+3B — like Seattle’s either/or. Option 4 — something else that Council wants to put forth that allows 2 ADUs in some other way.

Daugs asks what do nearby jurisdictions do — County, Poulsbo, Bainbridge, etc. Allison points to correct portion of the packet. Short version — County, and others, are looking at similar Zoning Code amendment. Daugs asks how long affordability will last — Satter repeats: 12 years, follows with title for 12 calendar years. (I ask myself — who will monitor & enforce?) Daugs goes on to ask about existing unpermitted multiple ADUs — what will happen?  Parking requirement for 2nd ADU is Planning Commission’s recommendation. Daugs wants to make sure it stays affordable, and neighborhoods don’t gentrify. [Two minutes missing, 5:36-5:38). Goodnow says other jurisdictions reduce parking space requirements if you are near 7-day, every 15 minute public transit. He worries about unintended consequences — “if we make this too difficult, are we not going to have more housing stock?” Wheat: Shares Daugs concerns about gentrification; Goodnow’s concerns about MFTE. If we’re going to incentivize adding supply, seems like we’d want to do that. She’s done a lot of research on results of adding market-value housing only — result, it appears we will help bring about more affordable housing only by mandating it. Asks Allison Satter about Kitsap Co’s ADU proposals — Satter says they’re looking to us for a lead. Wheat emphasizes her approval of the Option 3A including both 80% AMI AND 30% max of household income to rent & utilities.It is unfair to assume that simply providing more market value housing is a magic bullet for providing more affordable housing. Because it isn’t. Younger: references an article he sent out about unintended consequences of ADUs. The article supports the view that removing the owner-occupancy requirement leads to runaway gentrification. He mentions all the places around us, like Port Orchard, that retained the owner-occupancy requirement. Tacoma has increased ADUs 12-fold since removing the owner-occupancy requirement. Permitting (making legal) the illegal ADUs does, in fact, increase gentrification.  Younger supports Option 3A, the affordability standard. He wants to know more about the process that this will lead to a clear permitting process, and he wants assurances that there will be enforcement and oversight. He has ideas about how that can be done. So odd to be in total agreement with Younger on both these points — owner occupancy is important, and affordability is vital, certainly more important than green building standards. Wheeler assures there will be monitoring, even micro-monitoring, based on our inspection program of City commercial buildings. He mentions that 8-year MFTEs are getting no penalty at all, but state law permits him to impose penalties on [agency / situation not clear to me] and he’s done so. Sullivan agrees with Wheat that this, by itself, won’t fix anything, but if we don’t include an affordability component, we won’t increase affordable housing stock. Go Sullivan! Impressed by her increasing confidence over the past 2 years. Daugs asks so, these displacement fees: does that money get to actually help the displaced tenants? Wheeler: Yes. Daugs — has that been successful? Wheeler — so far, yes. Nobody has become homeless, we protected them until they could find livable, affordable shelter =- a place where they can be safe. So these fees (MFTEs and code violations) are paid to people who were living in housing not suitable for humans (per Wheeler) and their new place is an upgrade. They get to stay under a lousy roof until the developer and the Mayor’s team arrange a new, better home. Pres Gorman intervened to say hey, I think we’re getting off the track. Andrea, you were shaking your head, what do you want to say. Spencer makes a heated case for the compassion and humanity shown the displaced tenants, and that ALL the fees collected went directly to housing the tenants, nothing to administrative or overhead costs. Have never seen Andrea Spencer heated before. I was proud of her. Daugs speaks up for the nearby regular public transit option (a powerful statement, since she’s on Kitsap Transit Board). Daugs makes a canny comment — when new tenant moves in, who’ll do the calculations and paperwork to make sure new tenant is paying 80% AMI & rent/utilities 30% of income, i.e., monthly rental changes from tenant to tenant. Spencer & Satter reassure her. Daugs wants “the parking not to be stressed in this one” which I don’t know what that means. Goodnow agrees with Wheat and Younger about unintended consequences. He wants affordability. “As a recovering Planning Commissioner…” he wants to know, what is our goal here? give residents what they want? affordable housing our little bit of ask, or are we trying to really create affordable housing? [2 minutes missed, 6:15-6:17) Younger hammers home the importance of owner occupancy.requirement. [Several minutes missed as smoke alarm went off.] Gorman thinks the affordability requirement won’t do anything much, we should build different tiers, “one for “wealth-builders” and one for people who just want a place to live.” Asks about green building standard, doesn’t think it’s “the way I want to go”. He wants to guard against Airbnb-ing, and I’m right there with him on that. So, the affordability option of 3A. Wheat has more questions abour 80%AMI — where do we get the stats? Kitsap County standards would call for a single person to pay $1300/month in rent and utilities, so what’s the allowable 80% income? Spencer says she’ll get back to Council on that exact figure. Wheat deeply doubts that even Option 3A won’t truly create affordable housing, as most developers will be discouraged by the requirement. 70% of public comments indicated … something. Sorry. I tore my trapezius and I have to go take ibuprofen now. Wheat goes on to passionate plea for all people to be housed. Several of us on the Council have experienced housing insecurity. She would welcome lots of feedback from others on how well affordable ADUs reduce that insecurity. It bothers her that we’re considering affordability only now, with 2nd ADUs, but mot in our every day view of community eeds. She specifically expresses her skepticism that limiting Council action on affordable housing to these second ADUs is a sop to our collective conscience. She calls for a comprehensive plan for affordable housing being available to our community. Because this is a hard, hard, complex issue. She’s leaning towards Option 2 because of community support and Planning Commission recommendations. Gorman asks if DCD can proceed from this point. Spencer does a masterly job of recapping — do you want to draft an ordinance, or do you want to do Study Session 2/10, then public hearing 7 days later, or study session 2/10 and defer public hearing to 3 weeks later.

Sadly, due to acute hunger, I missed the answer to this question AND to everythimg following. from about 6:45 onwards.

B. GENERAL COUNCIL BUSINESS

o Briefing on Agenda for Remote Joint Planning Session – Council President Kevin Gorman

o Briefing on Proposed Healthcare System Legislation – Council President Kevin Gorman

o Race Equity Advisory Committee Briefing (01/14/21 Meeting) – Chair Leslie Daugs

o Public Works Committee Briefing (1/19/21 Meeting) – Chair Eric Younger

o Finance, Investment & Parking Committee Briefing (1/26/21 Meeting)

o Other General Council Business

C. ADJOURNMENT OF STUDY SESSION and so it came to an end, around 7:20 pm.