Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
04/17/02 AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA APRIL 17, 2002 1. PRE-COUNCIL STUDY SESSION: 5:~-5:30 P.M. A. General Council Business 2. CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M. A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Invocation 3. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting - April 10, 2002 (#AB02-072) B. Budget Adjustment Request 2002-07 Regarding Project Manager (#AB02-073) 4. CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS 5. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS 6. MAYOR'S REPORT 7. PUBLIC RECOGNITION - (Comments limited to 3-minutes) 8. NEW BUSINESS A. Confjrmatio~ of Driscoll and Hunter as Land Use Hearing Examiner aCid. Budget Adjustment 2002-08 (#AB02-074) B. Community Development Corporation Small Business Revolving Loan Program (#AB02-075) 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES A. Public Hearing and Ordinance No. 4794 (Second Reading) Amending Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 15.06 Setting Fees for Improper Stormwater Inflows (#AB02-069) B. Public Hearing and Ordinance No. 4795 (Second Reading) Amending Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 21.02 by Providing the Regulatory Measures for Automobile Dealership Group Signs, Subject to Certain Conditions (#AB02-070) C~,~(~-, Public ~;tearing~d Ordin/ence No. 4.,7,86 (Secon~/Readinc,)'Amend. j/g ~0r'~t~ Brem/efl:°n IV/tu~nicipal/Cdde Cha~ 21'02 bY,~°vidin~Ptfle Regu/j~t°ry Me/a'sures/tb Prom~ Adaptive'Reuse of I~iblic and,~emi-Pubti'c Buildings .J ,~ (#AB02-0'71) D. Public Hearing and Ordinances (First Reading) Amending Shoreline Master Program Relating to Appeals to Hearing Examiner; and Amending Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 21.02 Regarding Administrative Hearing Examiner Process and Procedures (#AB02-076) 10. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING Page A2 Bozeman plans 1,000 points of contact · New communications team Deputy City Clerk Paula Johnston. veys. · Menees would be in charge of · Witherspoon will draft press formed inside CityHall. employee recognition, the employ-releases, and write feature stories ee golf tournament and "Employee for the local press and the Web site. of the Month" nominees. · City staff will also produce By KELLY EVERETT "improve our image in the region · Burnette would produce brochures, signs and progress st~#w, ite~ in order to attract investment and Bremerton-Kitsap Access Tele- reports on the committee. Fearing the public may be left grow the dty's tax base." vision (BKA'I) programs such as "We~l make about 1,000 contacts out of the redevelopment loop, the The new communications com- the "Mayor's Roundtable," "In,de a day with our citizens," sitd Bremerton,""I'own Hall Meeting," Bozeman. BY, AT is covering us mayor said he's going to beef up mittee includes the mayor;, and the weekly council meeting about 200 hours a month and we communications between the dty Administrative Services Director broadcasts, want to expand this. and the public. Kathy McCluskey; Deputy Mayor · Johnston and Eley will be in '`we need to release more press Bremerton Mayor Cary Sherril Huff Menees; Purchasing charge of runningand updating the releases, write features on impor- Bozeman said his plan, which he Manager Bill Eley; Heidi dty'sWeb site, as wellas creating a rant employees and communicate presented at theWednesday, April Witherspoon, copy writer;, BKAT dtizens' e-mail directory to dissem- better with the local papers," said 17 City Council meeting, will also Director Charlene Burnette and inate information and conduct sur- the mayor. So, what's up with the City Council? Bremerton City Council mem- foot Manette Elementary School at reported that '`world Changers," a District 5 meeting, Thursday, Apr~ bers reported the following bUsi- 13th Street and konsides Avenue. religion-based group that travels the 25, at the church at10th Street and ness at the weekly meeting Aprfl l7: Neighbors said they feared the new country repairing homes for VenetaAvent~e, 6:30p.m. · The second and final reading oI ordinance would allow a business to seniors, needslocalvolunteers. The · Kitsap Transifs chiet~ Dick a new ordinance to expedite "adap- move into the long-empty building, group vall be intown July29-Aug. 2. I-Iayes, vall give a progress report on tire rouse" of surplus government creating traffic hazards on narrow, Call 4785375. transit issues at the joint District 8/9 buildings was postponed tmill the residential streets. The building, · ICatsap County Commissioner meeting, Thursday, Apr~ 25, 6:30 Council's next regular meeting, built in 1952, was occupied by the Tim Botldn w~l speak on '~3m~qrt pau., at the city's Public Workscen- Apri124, due to concems voiced by Navy1984-1999. Growth in Urban Areas" at ter, 100 Oyster Bay Road. neighbors of the old 28,242-square- · Daren Nygren, District 3, Coundlman Mike Shepherd's next -- I~l,/~verete ~R CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 17, 2002 SPEAKERS LIST If you wish to make an announcement, inform the Council of an issue, or ask a general question...Please provide information below so staff will be able to contact you. Thank you. NAME ADDRES S/TELEPHONE TOPIC Reminder: The next Council Meeting will be on Wednesday, April 24th AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: aP,",l k 17, 2002 ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING - APR I t_ I 0, 2002 ORIGINATOR: CAROL ARENDS, PRESIDENT DATE SUBMITTED: ^PR IL 12, 2002 2. CLEAtLkNCES: (Comment onback if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS: E1NT)ORSEMENT [] INFORMATION [] APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT: MAYOR: 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: 5. RECOMMENDATION: 6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 7. NOTICE OF ACTION: PULLED ~ TABLED ~ APPROVED ~ DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED ~ DATE: COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: .~. kGENDABILL NO.:_ (~'.~-- t, q '"' '~.;.'~ 9. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: 10. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES;: 11. RESEARCH SOURCES: TAPE #1827 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CiTY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 10, 2002 The weekly meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4th Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, April 10, 2002, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President Carol Arends presiding. Council members present were Mike Short, Will Maupin, Eric Younger, Mike Shepherd, Daren Nygren, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Council Member Ed Rollman was absent. Also present were City Attorney Roger Lubovich; Deputy City Clerk Paula Johnston; and Council Assistant Christine Grenier Ellingson. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council Member Cecil McConne/I, followed by the invocation provided by Reverend G.T. Johnson formerly of Brownsville United Methodist Church. President Arends made the following announcements: (1) The regular Pre-Council Session, which is open to the public, was held in the Council Conference Room to discuss general Council business from 5:15 P.M. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting - March 27, 2002 (#AB02-063) B. Minutes of Meeting -April 3, 2002 (#AB02-064) C. Minutes of Meeting - Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Montgomery Watson Harza for WB-6 Pump Station Project (#AB02o065) #0040 MISIC/U (McConnell/OIsen) Move to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090 have been recorded on a listing that had been made available to the Council. #0060 M/SlClU (YoungedMcConnell) On April 10, 2002, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: Check numbers 269826 through 270024 in the amount of $297,696.37; and Regular Payroll in the amount of $1,054,291.34 for the period ending March 31, 2002. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Will Maupin reported on the Board of Health Facilities Committee Meeting he attended; and announced the monthly Smart Growth Forum will be held tonight from 7:00-9:00 PM at the Washington Mutual Building located at 500 Pacific Avenue. The topic will be "Economics and Infrastructure: Who Pays and Why?" with guest speakers Randy Young, Consultant from the firm of Henderson & Young, and Jim Warjone, Chairman and General Partner of the Port Blakely Mill Company. Eric Younqer reminded the public that the next District 6 and 7 Meeting will be held on Thursday, April 11t" starting at 6:30 P.M. at the Public Works and Utilities building located at 100 Oyster Bay Avenue in the Conference Room. The topic will be "Problem Properties and Code Enforcement". Mike Shepherd announced his next District Meeting would be held on Thursday, April 25t~ beginning at 6:30 P.M. at Memorial Lutheran Church located at the corner of 10t" and Veneta to discuss "Problem Properties and Code Enforcement" and "Smart Growth and Why It's Important to TAPE #1827 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes April 10, 2002 Page 2 of 6 Bremerton". Daren Ny.qren commented on a meeting he attended with Manette business owners this morning to discuss traffic issues like speeding to improve pedestrian safety in those neighborhoods. He asked that people who wish to provide comments on this issue to contact him. Cecil McConnell commented on the District 1 and 2 Meeting that was held on Tuesday; and stated that yard waste will be taken via the Oyster Bay Facility during next week. No items can be larger than eight feet long or loads as large as a pick-up truck. Citizens can receive more information by calling 478-5920. Wayne Olsen thanked citizens who attended the District 1 and 2 meeting and looked forward to holding another meeting possibly in June; encouraged people to attend the Armed Forces Festival events like the parade and pancake breakfast to be held on May 18th; announced that the YWCA Women of Achievement Award Luncheon will be held on Aprit 23rd. People who are interested may call the YWCA office for more information; and researched the possibility of crosswalks in proximity to Lyon's Field. Carol Arends reiterated that the combined District 6 and 7 Meeting will be held at the Public Works and Facilities building at 100 Oyster Bay Avenue not the usually scheduled School District Administration Building located at 134 Marion Avenue. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Bozeman Sandra Ha, as, Chairman of Armed Forces Festival, announced that a Scholarship Contest and . Dinner will be held at the Elks Club on April 23. Tickets are $30 and includes roasted chicken and dessert. Otherwise the tickets are $5 for general seating for the program only; and introduced the Armed Festival Ambassadors: Heidi Bay, Ashley Bean, Sandra Bennett, Steven Ishmael, Halley Shockley, Julia Sweet. Mayor Bozeman then provided updates on the following topics: Conference Center and Hotel Project Public Safety Bond Issue Shipyard and Navy Parking Garage Library Re-Location Naval Museum Maritime Park Water Transportation Research Institute Public Safety Building East Park West Park Redevelopment Bremerton Marina Mayor Bozeman also proclaimed April 20, 2002 as "Earth Day 2002" and the proclamation was accepted by Don Larson, of the Kitsap Diving Association. Paul Lucas, Administrative Analyst and Safety Officer, presented the "2001 Employee Safety" Award to Terry Murphy, Computer Maintenance and Management Technician for the Wastewater Treatment Plant, and the "2001 Department Safety" Award to Bremerton Fire Department which was TAPE #1827 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes April 10, 2002 Page 3 of 6 accepted by Fire Chief Al Duke. Paul Lucas added that over the last three years the City has reduced on the job injuries by 44%. Last year had shown the lowest number of injuries recorded in the past ten years. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Don Larson, Kitsap Diving Association, pointed out the benefits of planting trees in the downtown area and introduced willing volunteers: Gre.q O'Gwen, Boy Scout District Commissioner for Sinclair District; Andy Lloyd, Assistant Scout Master to Troop 1528; and Charlie Wood, Steve and John, O'Gwen of Boy Scout Troop 1528. Don Larson also announced that on April 20th there will be the Sinclair Inlet Clean-Up at 11A.M. Volunteers may meet at the boardwalk. 8A- REAPPOINTMENTS TO THE BREMERTON KITSAP ACCESS TELEVISION CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMI'I-I'EE (#AB02-065): Mayor Bozeman summarized that the terms have expired for two members of the Bremerton Kitsap Access Television Citizen Advisory Committee: Gregg McClellan and Gary Smith. He recommended both individuals be approved for reappointment. There were no comments from the public. #1140 M/S/C/U (Younger/Shod) Move to confirm the reappointments of Gregg McClellan and Gary Smith to the Bremerton Kitsap Access Television Citizen Advisory Committee. 8B - INTERGOVERNMENTAL PURCHASING AGREEMENT WITH SMITH TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT TO REPLACE A BACKHOE (#AB02-067): Gene Sampley, Director of Public Works and Utilities, pointed out that the City of Bremerton is replacing a backhoe, which is no longer fits the prerequisite for service in the fleet. Last year we "piggy backed" on an accepted bid from the City of Everett. Smith Tractor and Equipment has agreed to accept the same bid this year. The City of Bremerton has an interlocal agreement with the City of Everett to use this bid. Pursuant to RCW Chapter 39 and City of Bremerton purchasing policies, City Council's approval to purchase said backhoe from the City of Everett bid is requested. The total cost of this backhoe will be $56,940.80. There were no comments from the public. #1215 M/S/C/U (Short/Nygren) Move to approve the purchase of a backhoe from bid #200-312 and an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Everett. 8C - AMENDMENT TO 2002 BUDGET TO IMPLEMENT THE MANAGEMENT/PROFESSIONAL COMPENSATION AND CLASSIFICATION STUDY TO REFLECT THE FINAL PAY BAND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CONSULTANT (#AB02-066): Carol Conley, Human Resources Manager, stated that approval of the 2002 Budget Amendment will amend the Management/ Professional Pay Plan to reflect the recommendations pursuant to the study would be reclassified and paid in accordance with the study of their current reclassification, whichever is higher. All increases would be retroactive to January 1, 2002. The amount required to fund this amendment is $49,436. There were no comments from the public. #1300 M/SIC/U (Shepherd/McConnell) Move to amend the 2002 budget in the amount of $49,436 to reflect the recommendations of the consultant for the Management/Professional positions in order' to maintain the integrity of the study. Employees who were proposed to receive salary increases pursuant to the study would be reclassified and paid in accordance with the study or their current TAPE #1827 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes April 10, 2002 Page 4 of 6 reclassification, whichever is higher, 9A- PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) AMENDING BMC 15.06 SETTING FEES FOR IMPROPER STORMWATER INFLOWS (#AB02-067): Gene Sampley, Public Works and Utilities Director, explained that when the City's utility rates were amended by ordinance in July 2001 for the rate change to be implemented January 1, 2002, the fees for improper stormwater discharges to the sanitary sewer system which had been set by prior ordinance to become effective February 1, 2002 were inadvertently deleted from the rate structure. The proposed ordinance will remedy this error and will set the improper stormwater discharge rates to take effect as of May 1, 2002. There were no comments from the public. Mr. Short commented that the disconnecting is part of the storm water comprehensive plan. Mr. Sampley added that the disconnection is also part of the combined sewer overflow reduction program. Mr. Younqer asked Mr. Sampley to describe the smoke test. Mr. Sampley explained that a smoke cannister is placed into the sewer system and staff are able to trace smoke back to the actual source of storm water. Following the test, residents were notified if there was a need for the disconnection. Mr. Younqer asked what needs to be done after the disconnect. Mr. Sampley answered that if a resident notifies the city of the disconnect, the bill will be adjusted. However, an inspection will be done to confirm that the disconnect has been done. #1575 M/S/CU (McConnell/Olsen) Move to approve on first reading the ordinance sett, i..n. g for improper stormwater discharge. 9B - PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) AMENDING THE ZONING CODE TEXT BY PROVIDING REGULATORY MEASURES FOR AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP GROUP SIGNS, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS (#AB02-068): Chris Hu.qo, Building and Planning Director, pointed out that this request for the Zoning Code Text Amendment was submitted by the Haselwood Auto Group. The amendment will allow placement of a sign to identify an automobile dealership group, subject to certain conditions. The amendment would apply only to a limited area that currently contains a majority of the dealerships in Bremerton. The Planning Commission has reviewed this proposal, conducted a public hearing and adopted Findings and Conclusions at their January 15, 2002 meeting, and recommends City Council approval. The Council must conduct a public hearing prior to its final decision and action on the proposed ordinance. He clarified that this ordinance applies to a single business owner of multiple dealerships or franchises. Mr. Younqer asked if all dealerships have been notified of this proposed ordinance. Mr. Hu(lo responded that since this issue is a legislative matter the dealerships have not been notified individually, but legal notice was given in the newspaper. Mr. Younqer also asked what the maximum size the sign would be for the auto group. Mr. Hu.qo responded that the sign would be either 150 square feet or a less visible ground level sign of 200 square feet. He clarified that the sign would not be flashing or animated. Mr. Shepherd asked how this ordinance will accomplish the findings of fact and that this issue could be addressed next week. Mr. Huqo clarified that the Findings of Fact were derived from the Planning Commission. Jerry Powers, representative of Haselwood Auto Group stated that this sign would replace the existing sign. Mr. Shepherd asked if the replacement sign would result in a net reduction in sign TAPE #1827 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes April 10, 2002 Page 5 of 6 size. Mr. Powers answered the sign would be slightly larger but the sign would be located further back from the road. Mr. McConnell pointed out that an arterial street can be interpreted differently and would like clarification on what streets would be affected. He requested that the listing be added before second reading. Mr. Short asked what the size of the sign would be. Mr. Huqo answered 50 square feet for every franchise or 200 square feet for that particular dealership. However, if the sign is located on poles then the limit would be 150 square feet. ..Mr. Maupin believed that having signs intended to advertise cars and car dealers should not pose a problem. Mr. McConnell asked if there are more than 4 franchises in a dealer group would additional signs be allowed. Mr. Huqo affirmed that the limit would be 150 square feet irregardless of the number of franchises. Mr. Olsen asked for an estimate of the Parr Ford Sign. Mr. Huqo stated that the sign is about 300 square feet. #2120 M/S/C (Shepherd/Nygren) Move to approve the attached ordinance on first reading. Voted in Favor of the Motion: Short, Olsen, Nygren, Shepherd, Younger, Maupin, Arends Voted Against the Motion: McConnell Vote: 7-Yes; 1-No Motion Carried. 9C - PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) AMENDING THE ZONING CODE TEXT BY PROVIDING REGULATORY MEASURES TO PROMOTE THE ADAPTIVE REUSE OF PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC BUILDINGS (#AB02-069): Chris Huqo, Building and Planning Director, mentioned that the Bremerton School District has initiated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code Amendments intended to promote the reuse of public and semi-public buildings that are no longer needed to serve their original primary purpose, provided that a new use is compatible with the surrounding planned environment. The Planning Commission has reviewed this proposal, conducted public hearings, adopted Findings and Conclusions at their July 17, 2001 meeting, and recommended City Council approval. The Council approved the related Comprehensive Plan Amendment on August 1, 2001. The Council must conduct a public hearing prior to its final decision and action on the proposed Ordinance in order to implement the zoning text amendment. It should be noted that the attached zoning text indicated as "revised" has been refined at the suggestion of the City Attorney to better address the compatibility issue. It is recommended that the revised text be approved. He added that this ordinance would allow flexibility for buildings in residentially zoned areas. The building must be in 5 years of its originally intended use before conversion. There were no comments from the pub#c. Mr. Nvqren asked if a permit request were to go to the Hearing Examiner and there were a disagreement among neighbors over the request, what criteria would the Hearing Examiner use. Would the criteria include the current code or would language in the ordinance specify the criteria. TAPE #1827 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes April 10, 2002 Page 6 of 6 Mr. Huqo stated that zoning code specifies the criteria for special use permits. Also, the location must not cause unreasonable impacts to the adjacent neighborhoods. This ordinance brings out further the issue of compatibility. Mr. N¥_qren asked how parking would be addressed if there were concerns if the change in use would create more traffic flow around building. Mr. Huqo answered that the parking would need to be provided by the business. Mr. Shepherd asked Mr. Hugo to compare park surplusing in relation to this issue. Mr. Huqo clarified that the ordinance language is written to apply only to buildings not parks. Mr. Maupin supported this ordinance in that the goal of smart growth is partially achieved. Mr. M¢Cormell requested that a figure be included in the second reading of the ordinance. Mr. HuclO pointed out that other cities are in current practice of adaptive reuse. #2650 M/S/C/U (Shepherd/McConnell) Move to approve the attached ordinance on first reading. With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 6:55 P.M. Prepared and Submitted by: CHRISTINE GRENIER ELLINGSON Council Assistant Attest: PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk CAROL ARENDS, City Council President City of Bremerton CA/PJ/cge c: Normal Distribution File AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: Apri ,200 ORIGINATING DEPT: BUDGET ADJUSTMENT 2002 #7 ORIGINATOR: R DATE SUBMITTED: April .8(2002 2. CLEARANCES: Comment of back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS: Budget Adi. Request No. 2002 #7 Fiscal & Budget Corn ~.t.~-~ Operations Comm. ~ ENDORSE~ ~~N APPROVED BY OOUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL: MAYOR ~ ~ , ~UNCIL PRESIDENT 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: This budget adjustment will add one Project Manager position to the authorized staffing of the Department of Public Works and Utilities. The position will be funded from current appropriations ar~will provide construction oversight to several utility capital projects. 8. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve Budget Adjustment Request 2002 #7 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Treasurer ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: , Mayor EXPIRATION DATE: 12/31/2002 REVIEW DATE: N/A 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED ~ AMENDED~i~~ COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: : ,~,, · .~ 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Authorized positions will remain at current levels, 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS~ FACILITIES~ EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: As documented in the attached Budget Adjustment Request. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST Requesting Department: UTILITIES Adjustment Number: 2002 #7 Approval Authority Required: ~--~Treasurer [-]Mayor ['- Fiscal & Budget ~Council SOURCE OF FUNDS: USE OF FUNDS: Description Amount Description Amount Add One Project Manager Position 0 NARRATIVE: This adjustment provides authorization for an additional Project Manager position. Funding for the position will be from current appropriations. The position will provide construction oversight to several utility capital projects. Department Head Signature Date DireCtor Date Treasurer Comments: r-~ Rec°mmended ~-~N°t Rec°mmended ~ Treasurer's Signature Dat~ Mayor Comments: ~ Recommended ~ Not Recommended F'~ Approved ~"~ Denied Mayor's Signature Date Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Approved [----] Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date ORIGINAL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of FOR AGENDA OF: April 17, 2002 Driscoll & Hunter as Land Use Heating Examiner and ORIGINATING DEPT: DCD_ / approval of associated personal services contract. ORIGINATOR: Chris Hugo DATE SUBMITTED: April 9, 2002 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back 3. EXHIBITS: [f~necessary) Admin Services~~,o = ~ Proposed professional services contract Treasurer .... Legal ~ Fiscal / Budget Operations DCD ~..~ECTO R 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council confirms the Mayor' s appointment of the Land Use Hearing Examiner. The Mayor proposes the appointment of Driscoll and Hunter under the terms of the attached professional services contract. The contract proposes that services be provided at a flat monthly fee. The contract also mctudes a provision for a review of performance after t~Ma~4v~gs to insure satisfactory service. This appointment also initiates termination of the contract with the interim heanng examiner. 8. RECOMMENDATION: Motion: To approve the appointment of Driscoll and Hunter as the City's Land Use Hearing Examiner under the terms of the proposed contract. MOTION: TO APPROVE BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. 2002-08. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director of Planning and Building ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director of Planning and Building EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED TABLED APPROVED _ DISAPPROVED AMENDED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE: 11. AGENDA B1LL NO: :"' '~ "-' ~- 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS (cont.): 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT (cont.): 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The City would continue with the interim heating examiner under the hourly rate for services specified in that contract. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: The current interim examiner bills for services on an hourly rate. This has created unanticipated costs for hearings that are continued, for travel time, and for inefficiently-managed heating sessions. The proposed contract is for services at a fiat, monthly fee that will stabilize costs for predictable budgeting. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR LAND USE HEARINGS EXAMINER FOR CITY OF BREMERTON THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this 10TM day of April, 2002 by and between the City of Bremerton (City), a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Washington, and the firm ofDriscoll & Hunter (Heatings Examiner), Suite 607, 101 Yesler Way, Seattle, Washington 98104: WITNESSETH WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City and its citizens to provide a land use regulatory hearing system to fairly implant land use regulations; and WHEREAS, the City has inadequate staff to conduct the business of a Land Use Heatings Examiner Office; and WHEREAS, the City's liability exposure for improper procedures used in making land use decisions can be reduced by using a Hearings Examiner system; and WHEREAS, the undersigned Heatings Examiner has extensive experience in providing Hearingg Examiner services; and WHEREAS, the City has investigated the specific expertise of the Hearings Examiner and finds that they are in fact qualified to perform the tasks; NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Hearings Examiner mutually agree as follows: The duties of the Hearings Examiner shall be: 1. (a) To conduct land use, code enforcement heatings and business/regulatory license revocation hearings for the City. Included in this duty shall be the review of materials provided by the City staff prior to heating; research of legal issues anticipated at the heating; holding preheating conferences on certain cases; the conduct of hearings, including issuances of oaths; description of the land use Hearings Examiner system to those in attendance at the heating; the receipt of testimony and evidence at the public heating; creating a clear and understandable record of the proceedings; and making decisions on post hearing motions. Hearings shall be held once every month. If hearing days exceed one per month those heatings shall be considered extraordinary hearings. Contract for Heatings Examiner Services Page 1 (b) To draft Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law to support decisions or recommendations made for each case. (c) To draft and periodically upgrade Rules of Procedure of Heatings Examiner for use in the City. (d) To stay current on all land use legislation in Washington and all Washington Appellate Court decisions regarding land use and procedural issues. (e) To have a regular conference with the Planning Director and staff to inform them of the changes in land use law in Washington. (f) To meet yearly with the City Council to discuss the state of the Heatings Examiner system and recommend changes to it, if needed, and to provide training in decisionmaking processes to help reduce liability exposure. (g) To provide annual statistical data on the cases heard by the Hearings Examiner office. (h) To be available for extraordinary hearings (which include night hearings, multi-day heatings and those days of hearings that exceed one per month) when scheduled by the City. 2. Compensation for the Hearings Examiner shall be $2,750 per month for all duties and activities set forth above except extraordinary hearings shall be invoiced at the rate of $150 per hour for James M. Driscoll and Theodore P. Hunter. The rate shall be $100 per hour if LeAnna Drevecky performs the Hearings Examiner duties for extraordinary hearings. 3. The Hearings Examiner shall provide its own secretarial services. The City shall provide the room for the heatings; equipment, including working taping equipment; and a recording secretary for the proceedings. The City shall be responsible for all notice of public heatings and for distribution of final decisions. 4. The City shall be the keeper of the official record. The City shall provide Heatings Examiner copies of all exhibits and copies of tapes of testimony, if requested. The City shall be responsible for all notice of public hearings and for distribution of final decisions. 5. The Heatings Examiner shall invoice to the City on a monthly basis a statement of its services. Payment of services shall be within 30 days. 6. The services of the Hearings Examiner are to commence pursuant to this contract on May 1, 2002, reviewed following four months, and be re-negotiated within one year following this date at the request of either party. Following the end of the Contract for Hearings Examiner Services Page 2 one-year term, the contract shall automatically renew on a month-to-month basis unless re-negotiated. 7. The Heatings Examiner or the City may accomplish termination of this contract before the expiration date by giving a 60-day written notice of termination. In the event of termination, matters pending shall be completed and compensated pursuant this contract. 8. The Heatings Examiner shall be free of any supervision or other influence from the City Administrator or any other official or employee with respect to any decision or recommendation made by the Hearings Examiner on a specific case, issue or permit. HEARINGS EXAMINER: CITY OF BREMERTON Driscoll & Hunter Dated: Dated: Contract for Heatings Examiner Services Page 3 CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REOUEST Requesting Department: ADMINISTRATIVE SERV. Adjustment Number: 2002 #8 Approval Authority Required: [-]Treasurer F-']Mayor ~-- Fiscal & Budget ~--~Council SOURCE OF FUNDS: USE OF FUNDS: Description Amount Description Amount Increase: Increase: Beginning Cash 33,000 Professional Services 33,000 Remaining unallocated beginning cash = $182,000 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide expenditure authority necessary to fund the hearings examiner function for the current fiscal year. De'l~artment ~lead S~ u~~ Date'/ ' / - ' Director Signature Date Treasurer Comments: [----~ Recommended ~ Not Recommended Treasurer's Signature Mayor Comments: ~ Recommended ~ Not Recommended F-~ Approved ~ Denied Mayor's Signature Date Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Approved ~ Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: April 17, 2002 Community Development Corporation ORIGINATING DEPT.: DCD Small Business Revolving Loan Program ORIGINATOR: Deborah Pearler-Stewart DATE SUBMITTED: April 2, 2002 2. CLEARANCES: 3. EXHIBITS: 4~t/,]^ Small Business Development Corp Director of~nt Small Business Revolving Loan C~ty Atto~ Fund Development Fiscal and Budget Committee Heard at City Council study session 3/6/02 Operations Committee Heard at City Council study session 3/6/02 MAYOR: ~ ~'O~NCIL PRESIDENT ~-c~c~. ~'~/~ ~¢-L~ 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Community Development Staff requests $60,000 from old CDBG loan payments to support a Community Development Corporation to be set up in conjunction with Kitsap County. The Corporation will develop an economic development gap financing revolving loan program for businesses that qualify under the CDBG program and that have well thought out plans, ability and records. The CDBG funds will be used for the salary of the loan officer and for loans as needed. 8. RECOMMENDATION: I move to approve awarding $60,000 to support development of the Community Development Corporation 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION ~~ PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMEND COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: AGENDA BILL NO () ~- C~ ~ ~-' 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: None 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The loan program may not be initiated. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES~ EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: None 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: SMALL BUSINESS REVOLVING LOAN FUND DEVELOPMENT KRCC Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council Appoints CDC Board ,! CITY Of ~ COUNTY __ Provide Initiate Corporate Initial Loan Provide Provide Officer // t \ Funds Development Provide Personnel ~ Monitor ~ Space Beneffis Funds Monitor Funds COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CDC BOARD MAKEUP / Reviews' ~ J Manage ~ I Continue I REVOLVING LOAN PROGRAM Part Time 1 Loan Officer Provide Technical CDC Marketing and ecure and Monitor Financ ~Assistance and Financial Development usiness Loan Packagin Support, Manage RLF WA Portfolia C.A.S.H. Small Business Devel. Corp. Cascadia Others Small Business Community Development Corporation Issue: · There is no local mechanism to provide gap financing for small business retention, start-up or expansion in Bremerton and Kitsap County. Process: · Develop an economic development gap financing revolving loan program for businesses that qualify under the CDBG program and that have well thought out plans, ability, and records. · Solicit additional funds fi~om f'mancial institutions under the CRA Provide equity or operating capital to the business to make a loan attractive to conventional financial institutions · Maintain and monitor the portfolio Goals: · Promote economic development by t.he City and County to take a proactive approach in assisting the development, retention and growth of s mall businesses. · Expand access to capital for businesses and therefore increase/maintain the number of living wage jobs. Request: · $60,000 for ¼ salary of loan officer and for loans · Anticipate need for on-going funding (Pierce County took ~ 10 years to be self- supporting) AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL ORIGINATING DEPT: Tr~er Amending BMC 15.06 Setting Fees for Improper ORIGINATOR: Rich Hanna Stormwater Inflows, DATE SUBMITTED: 03/12/2002 2. CLEARANCES:~ ecessary) 3. EXHIBITS: Dir. Public~n Proposed Ordinance City Attor -- i/v:V(~../. .~' ~ Fiscal & Budget Operations /~/7 ~'~/ 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: When the City's utility rates were amended by ordinance in July of 2001 for the rate change to be implemented danuary 1,2002, the fees for improper stormwater discharges to the sanitary sewer system which had been set by prior ordinance to become effective February 1,2002 were inadvertently deleted from the rate structure. The proposed ordinance will remedy this error and will set the improper stormwater discharge rates to take effect as of May 1, 2002. 8. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to pass on second reading Ordinance No. ~'7~ q setting fees for improper stormwater discharges. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Dir. P/W ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Mayor EXPIRATION DATE: N/A REVIEW DATE: N/A 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMENDED QA .... COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: (~,~.- ~ ~ 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The proposed fees for improper discharge of stormwater to the sanitary sewer system will not be implemented. This will result in a nominal loss of revenue to the wastewater utility. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS~ FACILITIES~ EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: Nominal increase in wastewater revenues if approved. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: ORDINANCE NO. ~ 7 q ~ AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington amending Appendix A of Chapter 15.06 of the Bremerton Municipal Code as amended by Ordinance Number 4766, re-establishing rates for Inappropriate Stormwater Inflow to the Wastewater System and deferring the assessment of the same to a date later than as originally established. WHEREAS, Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 15.06.050, requires that a schedule be adopted by the City Council for rates associated with Improper Stormwater Inflow; WHEREAS, the City Council established Improper Stormwater Inflow rates in 1999 pursuant to Ordinance Number 4685, as reaffirmed by Ordinance Number 4735, which were added to and set forth in Appendix A of Chapter 15.06 of the Bremerton Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Ordinance Number 4766, while amending Appendix A of Chapter 15.06 of the Bremerton Municipal Code, inadvertently deleted the Improper Stormwater Inflow rates that were established in Ordinance Number 4685, as reaffirmed by Ordinance Number 4735, from said appendix and therefore Appendix A of Chapter 15.06, does not currently provide for rates associated with Improper Stormwater Inflow; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to re-establish rates relating to Improper Stormwater Inflow and defer assessment of the same from the date originally established to May 1, 2002; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That Section of Chapter 15.06, Appendix A of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "RETAIL STORMWATER RATES" is hereby amended to read as follows: RETAIL STORMWATER RATES Within City Limits Outside City Limits Monthly Service Charge Single Family Base Charge (per account) $4.00 N/A Inappropriate Stormwater Inflow.ord Page 1 Exception: Duplex W/2 Meters (per account) $2.00 N/A Multiple Family Base Charge (per ISU) $4.00 N/A Commercial Base Charge (per ISU) $4.00 N/A Public School Districts (per account) $4.00 N/A Low Income Senior and Low Income Disabled Citizen Rate (per account) $2.50 N/A Multiple Family & Commercial Rate Adjustment Water Quality (per ISU) $(0.50) N/A Water Quantity (per ISU) $(1.50) N/A Stormwater Penalty for new Multiple Family & Commercial development without on-site detention (per ISU) $.50 N/A IMPROPER STORMWATER INFLOW RATES. The following rates are established for Improper Stormwater Inflow, based upon the stormwater ISU for each lot and adiusted annually on the following schedule: EFFECTIVE DATE RATE May 1, 2002 25% Stormwater Fee for Property May 1, 2003 50% Stormwater Fee for Property May 1, 2004 75% Stormwater Fee for Property May 1, 2005 100% Stormwater Fee for Property After Mayl, 2005, the Improper Stormwater Inflow Rate will remain at 100% of the Stormwater Fee for a property unless otherwise modified by the City Council. The fees shall be deposited in the Wastewater Fund (No. 451). SECTION 2. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. Inappropriate Stormwater lnflow.ord Page 2 SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force ten (10) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. APPROVED by the City Council the . day of ., 2002 PASSED by the City Council the day of ., 2002 CAROL ARENDS, Council President Approved this day of ., 2002 CARY BOZEMAN, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: KATHLEEN MCCLUSKEY, City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney PUBLISHED the day of ,2002 EFFECTIVE the day of ,2002 ORDrN. e4CE NO. 7 q q R:\LEGAL\OrdinancesXStormwater Inflow.or&doc Inappropriate Stormwater Inflow.ord Page 3 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL I. SUBJECT: Public Hearinq &Ordinance to amend FOR AGENDA OF:.Apri! 10, 2002 BMC Chapter 21.02 (the Zoning Code) by providing the DEPT. OF ORIGIN: DOD / Regulato~ measures for automobile dealership group signs, ORIGINATOR: Chris HuRo, Direct~/~ Subject to cedain conditions. DATE SUBMITTED: March 21, 2002 2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back if necessa~) 3. EXHIBITS: DCD Director: o PC Findings & Conclusions City Attorne~ o PC Minutes January 15, 2002 City Clerk: __ / 0 3ta Eepo Fisca & Budget Council[Com~~~~~./ Operat,ons Comm.: ~ ~~.~_~ / o Ordinance to amend Zoning Text ENDO~T~F~TION __ APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL: MAY~~ ~ C~CIL PRESIDENT 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: This request for Zoning Te~ Amendment was submitted by the Haselwood Auto Group. The amendment will allow placement of a sign to identify an automobile dealership group, subject to ce~ain conditions. The amendment would apply only to a limited area that currently contains a majority of the dealerships in Bremedon. The Planning Commission has reviewed this proposal, conducted a public hearing and adopted Findings & Conclusions at their Janua~ 15, 2002 meeting, and recommends City Council approval. The Council must conduct a public hearing prior to its final decision and action on the proposed Ordinance. 5. RECOMMENDATION: Move to pass the attached Ordinance # J~"~ ~ on second readin,q. 6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Christopher R. Hugo ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Christopher R. Hu.qo EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 7. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED TABLED~ APPROVED~ DISAPPROVED AMENDi~_~ COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE: 8. AGENDA BILL NO.: 9. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 10. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: The community would lose the benefit of consolidating some currently allowed signage on one sign structure and controlling all signage through a master sign plan process. 11. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: The proposed amendment will create no operational changes for the city, with the possible exception of increasing vehicle sales and tax revenue to the city. 12. RESEARCH SOURCES: Comprehensive Plan Zoning Ordinance File Site Visits AGBillHazSignMar15 · , J ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the Bremerton City Council amending the Zoning Code, Chapter 21.02.330(k) (Sign Provisions) of the Bremerton Municipal Code, by adding a new section to create an automobile dealership sign district and to create a provision for automobile dealership group identification signs pursuant to certain conditions including an approved signage master plan. WHEREAS, The Haselwood Auto Group has filed an application for Zoning Text Amendment requesting an amendment to the zoning text that would allow signage to identify multiple auto dealership groups; and WHEREAS, existing sign regulations encourage multiple signs directing attention to multiple vehicle dealerships, creating uncoordinated individual signs and visual clutter; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to encourage coordination of signage for dealerships pursuant to a master plan approach; and WHEREAS, a majority of Bremerton's auto dealerships are located in the area located west of SR 3, south of Kitsap Way, and north of SR 3/304, making it feasible to create an "Automobile Dealership Sign District; and WHEREAS, allowing owners of two or more dealership franchises within that district to have a single sign to identify the dealership group, subject to certain conditions including limitations on total sign area, sign orientation, and a requirement for a Signage Master Plan is likely to resuk in improved coordination and reduced proliferation of signs; and WHEREAS, such coordination and control of signage is supported by the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, The Bremerton Planning Commission, during their regularly scheduled meeting on January 15, 2002, determined that this amendment request was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with the City's Development Regulations Amendment criteria, which is contained in BMC 21.02.925, adopted Findings and Conclusions in support of its recommendation to approve this Development Regulations Amendment; and WHEREAS, The Bremerton City Council conducted a public hearing on April 10, 2002 to accept public comments pertaining to the proposed Development Regulation Amendment to consider the Planning Commission recommendation; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.330(k) is hereby amended by adding a new sub-section to read as follows: (3) Automobile Dealership Sign Provisions. i. This subsection designates the area bounded by Kitsap Way on the north, SR 3 on the east, Harlow Drive/Auto Center Boulevard/Union Avenue/3rd Street on the west, and the intersection of SR 3 and SR 304 on the south as the Automobile Dealership Sign District. ii. No regulation in the Automobile Dealership Sign District shall be interpreted to obviate any of the other provisions of the Bremerton Zoning Code, Chapter 21.02 BMC, that are applicable to a given property or proposal. iii. Automobile dealers in the district listed in (i) above may erect one sign identifying the dealership group and the brands of vehicles sold in the group, subject to the following provisions: a. Two or more franchises under common ownership constitute a dealership group. b. The total area of a group identification sign shall not exceed fifty (50) square feet for each dealer franchise in the group. c. No group identification sign shall be more than one hundred fifty (150) square feet if mounted on a pole, or two hundred (200) square feet if mounted on the ground. d. The square footage of any group identification sign shall be deducted from the total signage allotment of the parcel upon which the sign is placed. e. Group identification signs shall front on an arterial street. All dealers shall be required to submit a signage master plan for all dealerships in a dealership group prior to the approval of a group identification sign. SECTION 2. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force ten (10) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. APPROVED by the City Council the day of ,2002 PASSED by the City Council the day of ,2002 CAROL ARENDS, Council President Approved this day of ,2002 CARY BOZEMAN, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: KATHLEEN MCCLUSKEY, City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney PUBLISHED the day of ,2002 EFFECTIVE the day_ of ,2002 ORDINANCE NO. ~t'7 '~) ~' RSLEGAL\Ordinances~ZonJng Ordinance 3-02.doc are trying to accomplish here. I agree with Joan that we need to return it to the Planning Department. The last time we actually worked on this, we had some suggestions (wording), and I don't see that those suggestions were implemented because it was unclear the last time. The staff has to help us on this and get it clearer. I think that if everybody understands the intent and can take the language and apply it if they are looking at a map and can understand what this could do for our neighborhoods and infill - they would be a lot more comfortable with it. The intent, again and the language are not meeting." Commissioner Kosusko stated that he agreed. The zoning code is a technical document that people in the planning, development and building profession need to be able to understand. The general public, of course, should also be able to understand it. Just as with legal documents, sometimes we go to a lawyer if we cannot understand a legal document. I don't want to be self preserving here, but if you don't understand the zoning or development codes, maybe you go to Planning staff or an architect or a builder that works with those thing. I can understand this document because I work in the field, but there are vague qualities to it that I think need to be looked at. The two exceptions at the end are mutually exclusive of each other (and should not be used in the language). In other parts of the zoning code there are pictorial examples of how something might apply. This is certainly a case where that would be helpful. I~ would encourage the department to come up with a couple of examples. Commissioner Kennedy, stated that, "I think it has to be spelled out that it relates to the road frontage and not shoreline or back-yards or alley ways." Commissioner Kosusko stated that this exists in the zoning code - so it applies to .zoning. It does not apply to-:shoreline, that is a separate code. He further explained that 'perhaos the word'front-yard should be further modified to be clear that you are talking · about zoning front yards and not shoreline front yard. Commissioner Cockburn added that if it is city-wide it doesn't always even'pertain to shoreline. There was a short discussion about whether to continue this item completely (including public testimony), or return it to the Planning Department. Commissioner Kosusko decided after this discussion and input from staff to re-opened public testimony and entertain a motion to continue the item until the next regularly schedule meeting. A motion was made by Commissioner Moshay to continue this item, with public hearing to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. The motion was seconded by Comimssioner Wood. Called for a vote: Cockburn: yes: Dingfield: yes; Kennedy: yes: Moshay. yes: Wood: yes; and Kosusko: yes. The motion carried. 4. PL02-0002 - Proposed Zoning Text Amendment. Citv of Bremerton proposal to amend BMC 21.02.330 for all parcels zoned for automobile dealerships and related uses in that area generally bordered bv Kitsap Way in the north, State Highway 3 in the east, Harlow Drive/Auto Center Boul~vard/Union'Avenue/3rd Street in the west, and the intersection of State Highways 3 and 304 in the south. Proposal is to create an automobile dealership sign district and to create a provision for automobile dealership Planning Commission Meeting January L5.20{)2 Page 14 of i6 groups to establish auto group identification signs pursuant to an approved signage master plan. Commissioner Cockburn excused himself from this item due to a conflict of interest since he works for an auto dealer. Laura Freed presented the staff report to the commission. She stated, "I am here to discuss the proposed amendment to the sign code. Particularly this proposal would created a provision in the code for automobile dealership groups. A dealership group is defined as two or more franchises under common ownership. Allow dealerships to put up an identification sign of the dealership group rather than just one brand of car. The details are: 1. The total area of a group identification sign will not exceed 50 square feet for each dealer franchise in the group 2. No group identification sign shall be more than 150 square feet if mounted on a pole or 250 square feet if mounted on the ground. 3. The square footage of any group identification sign shall be deducted from the total signage allotment of the parcel where the sign is placed. 4. Group identification signs shall front on an arterial street. 5. All automobile dealerships will be required to submit a master plan for signage for all dealerships in their group prior to the approval of such a group identification sign. Nothing in this particular district should be understood to obviate any other parts of the sign code. There was no public comment. [NOTE: From this point forward, the tape of the meeting was unintelligible.] A motion was made by Commissioner Moshay to approve the proposed zoning text amendment (PL02-0002) adding a provision in the sign code for automobile dealership identification signs. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Dingfield. Called for a vote: Cockburn: abstained; Dingfield: yes; Kennedy: yes: Moshay: yes: Wood: yes: and Kosusko: yes. The motion carried. VI. Business Meeting A. Chair Report: 1. There was no report from the chairman. B. Director's Report 1. ~Ir. Hugo was unavailable. Ms. Dn Ralph gave the Director's Report. She reported that the mayor has applications for Planning Commission. This is a priority for the mayor. C. Study: None. Planning Commission Meeting January ~5. 2002 Page DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2002 Zoning Text Amendment STAFF REPORT with FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS PROPOSAL: Proposed Zoning Code text amendment to add a new section to BMC 21.02.330 (Signs) to create an automobile dealership sign district and to create a provision for automobile dealership group identification signs pursuant to an approved signage master plan. DATE OF REPORT: January 10, 2002 APPLICANT OR PROPONENT (FILE NUMBER): Haselwood Auto Group 500 Union Avenue Bremerton, WA CONTACT: Jerry Powers 360-405-6208 LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: This proposal applies to all parcels zoned for automobile dealerships and related uses in that area generally bordered by Kitsap Way in the north, State Highway 3 in the east, Harlow Drive/Auto Center Boulevard/Union Avenue/3rd Street in the west, and the intersection of State Highways 3 and 304 in the south. BACKGROUND: Automobile dealers have in the past placed signs to advertise their brand as a mandate of the automobile manufacturer whose car they sell. In addition, auto dealers have wanted to place additional signs for advertising purposes and to direct buyers to their showrooms. This has resulted in a piecemeal installation process for signage at car dealers. This presents difficulties for staff in that permitting one more sign means that the total allotment of signage space already on site must be reviewed each time there is an application for a new sign. The sign code limits the number and size of both pole or monuments signs, as well as building signage. The limit on the number of pole and monument signs has, in some cases, precluded the placement of a dealership group sign. PROPOSED ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT: Amend BMC 21.02.330, Subsections K and L, by adding a new section that reads as follows: "(3) Automobile Dealership Sign Provisions. i. This subsection designates the area bounded by Kitsap Way in the north, State Highway 3 in the east. Harlow Drive/Auto Center BoulevarcVUnion Avenue/3rd Street in the west, and the intersection of State Highways 3 and 304 in the south as the Automobile Dealership Sign District. 3¢ ii. No regulation in the Automobile Dealership Sign District shall be interpreted to obviate any of the other provisions of the Bremerton Zoning Ordinance that are applicable to a given property or proposal. iii. Automobile dealers in the district listed in (1) above may erect one sign identifying the dealership group and the brands of autos sold in the group. a. Two or more franctfises under common ownership constitute a dealership group. b. The total area ora group identification sign shall not exceed 50 square feet for each dealer franchise in the group. c. No group identification sign shall be more than one hundred fifty (150) square feet if mounted on a pole, or two hundred (200) square feet if mounted on the ground. d. The square footage of any group identification sign shall be deducted from the total signage allotment of the parcel upon which the sign is placed. e. Group identification signs shall front on an arterial street. f. All automobile dealers shall be required to submit a signage master plan for all dealerships in a dealership group prior to the approval of a group identification sign. SEPA STATUS: SEPA review for this proposal is pending. DECISION CRITERIA: In order to approve a zoning text amendment, it must be found to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the amendment must be internally consistent with the balance of the zoning code. The following findings of fact are pertinent to the subject code amendment: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan is largely silent on the issue of urban design, and as such provides no guidance or vision for signage in the community. However, there are two planning goals that address the need for high quality, attractive signage. Goal #14 - Community Image calls for "identifiable, livable neighborhoods that provide a variety of residential opportunities complimented [sic] by recreational, shopping and social support services" (Planning Goals p. 6). This suggests that proper signage that directs patrons to the businesses they want and need to visit is a suitable addition to Bremerton's built environment. Goal #5 - Economic Development encourages economic development that is consistent with adopted Comprehensive Plans. 2. The proposed text is consistent with the rest of the City of Bremerton Zoning Ordinance. There is nothing in the proposed text that affects the other provisions of the sign code. This amendment is designed to provide more flexibility for auto dealership groups while protecting Bremerton from visual clutter associated with signs that are too big, too bright, and too many. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed zoning text amendment will alloxv signage that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the rest of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposed text amendment promotes the public interest and poses no adverse impacts to the community. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the background, findings of fact, and conclusions articulated above, it is recommended that the subject zoning text amendment be approved. Approved by the Bremerton Planning Commission on Attest: / / Afidy Kosusk"'6 Chair / Secretary ZONES. · =! - '-- S ~-~ ,'/ - G 3~ AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL I. SUBJECT: Public Hearinq &Ordinance to amen(] FOR AGENDA OF: BMC Chapter 21.02 (the Zoning Code) by providing the DEPT. OF ORIGIN: DCD regulatory measures to promote the adaptive reuse of public ORIGINATOR: Chris Huqo, Dire~'r~,/U"'_ .. and semi-public buildings. DATE SUBMITTED: March 21, 2002 2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS: DCD Director: ~ o PC Findings & Conclusions City Attorne~i~'~ ~-' ~ o PC Minutes 3/20/01 & 7/17/01 City Clerk: %-,,,-t~v,_~ o Staff Report F,scal & Budget Councd .C_f~m, ~~-.~.;~..-¢-.¢' o Ordinance to amend Zoning Text Operations Comm.: ~L .~k~. ~ .. .......... E N DO RS~~ _~~____.~O N, __APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR Sd BMITTAL: MAYOR --~_~~' COUNC~-LPRESIDENT .~/.~...~.~. ~"~C.~-I,-','/-~,~,~.._..~ 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The Bremerton School District has initiated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code amendments intended to promote the reuse of public and semi-public buildings that are no longer needed to serve their original primary purpose, provided that a new use is compatible with the surrounding planned environment. The Planning Commission has reviewed this proposal, conducted public hearings, adopted Findings & Conclusions at their July 17, 2001 meeting, and recommended City Council approval. The Council approved the related Comprehensive Plan Amendment on August 1,2001. The Council must conduct a public hearing prior to its final decision and action on the proposed Ordinance in order to implement the zoning text amendment. It should be noted that the attached zoning text indicated as "revised" has been refined at the suggestion of the City Attorney to better address the compatibility issue. It is recommended that the revised text be approved. 5. RECOMMENDATION: Move to pass the attached Ordinance # /IL? ¢~' on second readinq. 6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Christopher R. Huqo ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Christopher R. Huqo EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 7. NOTICE OF ACTION N~ PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED AME COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE: 8. AGENDA BILL NO.: 9. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: '10. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: If the proposed ordinance is not approved, the city will lose the capability of allowing obsolete public buildings to be utilized for activities that are compatible with their surroundings, resulting in vacant structures, demolition of substantial buildings, and a lack of revenue- generating opportunities for tax-supported entities such as the Bremerton School District. 11. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: The proposed amendment will create no operational changes for the city. 12. RESEARCH SOURCES: Comprehensive Plan Zoning Ordinance File Site Visits ORDINANCE NO. q "7 ~] ~ AN ORDINANCE of' the City Council of' the City of' Bremerton, Washington, amending the Zoning Code, Chapter 21.02 of.the Bremerton Municipal Code, by adding a new section, Section 21.02.155 entitled "Adaptive Reuse o£ Public and Semi- Public Buildings" to allow certain uses in surplus public and semi- public buildings, subject to approval of. a Special Use Permit that demonstrates compatibility of uses with the surrounding area. WHEREAS, the Bremerton School District has initiated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code amendments that would allow the reuse of. surplus public and semi-public buildings £or certain uses, provided that those uses would be proven compatible with the surrounding area and subject to a Special Use Permit: and WHEREAS, fire stations, libraries, churches, and park buildings, in addition to schools are common to residential neighborhood settings and occasionally become surplus: and WHEREAS, such buildings are often substantial structures that became an integral part of'a neighborhood setting and can be put to useful purposes after they are declared surplus for their originally intended use; and WHEREAS, the absence of' a provision in the Zoning Code allowing £or adaptive reuse would be likely to result in the demolition of. such buildings when and i£ they were declared surplus: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code Text amendments on March 20, 2001, continued the hearing, and on July 17, 2002 adopted Findings and Conclusions in support of.its recommendation to approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (File # PLO 1-0010) and Zoning Code Text Amendment (File # PLO 1-0011)~ and WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Comprehensive Plan amendment on August 1, 2001, but not the Zoning Text Amendment, which was apparently withdrawn to allow for refinement o£ language: and WHEREAS, a SEPA Determination o£Nonsignificance was issued £or both the Comprehensive Plan amendment and Zoning Code amendment on March l 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, The Bremerton City Council conducted a public hearing on April 10, 2002 to accept the public comments pertaining to the proposed Development Regulation Amendment to consider the Planning Commission recommendation; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF TI-BE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. A new section is hereby added to Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 21.02 to read as follows: 21.02.155 ADAPTIVE REUSE OF PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC BUILDINGS. (a) When the need for a certain public or semi-public building in any zone no longer exists, the building use may be converted to those uses listed in the zone in which it is located, except that when it is located in any residential zone, it may be changed by special permit to a use allowed in Figure 140, Professional Office (PO) Zone, Categories 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and the following listed uses of Category 11: consultants, computer assistance and training (but not repair), office/business assistance services, and general offices. To qualify for the special use permit, the public or semi-public facility must have been constructed for the stated public or semi-public use and operated as such use for a minimum of five years. (b) The special use permit shall not be granted unless the applicant establishes that the proposed use, when appropriately conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding residential uses. The Administrative Hearing Examiner may impose conditions to ensure compatibility. The conditions may include, but are not limited to, restrictions on hours of operation, location and amount of parking, types, size, density and location of landscaping buffers and berms, and restrictions and/or conditions for noise attenuation. SECTION2. Severabili~_. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force ten (10) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. Zoning APPROVED by the City Council the day of ,2002 PASSED by the City Council the day of ,2002 CAROL ARENDS, Council President Approved this day of ,2002 CARY BOZEMAN, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: KATHLEEN MCCLUSKEY, City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney PUBLISHED the day of ., 2002 EFFECTIVE the day of ,2002 ORDINANCE NO. q 7 q (o RCLEGAL\Ordinances~Zoaing Ordinance 3-22.doc 3 L~5 Zoning BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS PL01-0011: Proposed Zoning Code Text Amendment to provide the regulatory measures for the adaptive reuse of public and semi-public buildings. FINDINGS: 1. A proposed new Comprehensive Plan policy for adaptive re-use of public and semi-public buildings expresses the community's interest in extending the economic life of these buildings. 2. The pending new policy states an appropriate balance among the community's interests in economic activity, resource conservation, and neighborhood preservation. 3. The pending policy provides adequate guidance for the regulation of public and semi-public buildings that are proposed for adaptive re-use in neighborhood settings. 4. The proposed zoning text amendment provides that adaptive re-use of public and semi-public buildings will be allowed only by special use permit to insure that new occupancy does not create undue operational impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. 5. The proposed zoning text amendment limits new uses to those residential and non-residential uses that are considered to be the most compatible with residential neighborhoods. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed zoning text amendment will directly implement the pending new Comprehensive Plan policy to encourage adaptive re-use of public and semi-public buildings that is compatible with existing neighborhoods. 2. The proposed amendment meets the consistency requirement of the Growth Management Act. 3. The proposed amendment's reliance on the special use permit process, including public hearings, is an appropriate method to insure that community interests in compatible development are satisfied. the Bremerton Planning Commission on~U 1 7; ~f Approved by Attest: Andy Kos C'~ Hugo Chair Secrlatary own judgment and come up with a decision. David St. Pierre, Assistant City Attorney indicated for clarification to the public that these are legislative matters. The fact that they have closed in the past and possible decided that they needed additional information is allowed with legislative actions as often as they wish. They could hear this matter every planning commission for the next 10 years if they wish. This is a legislative matter and not a matter that affects an individual project so by opening the meeting for additional testimony today they have in fact cured any defects that the same petitioner had indicated had occurred before. Should they decide to close now, that would be it. Mr. Coombes noted that any development that occurs on the site regardless of the zone would be subject to storm water control, erosion control, buffers to adjacent residential zones and those would all be considered at the time of development. Open to the Public (Comments of a neutral nature) - none Testimony on this item was closed. They will be deliberating on this item on April 10 or 17. 9. PL010010 Regarding the Bremerton School District Comprehensive Plan Policy Text Amendment Application to amend the land use sections of the comprehensive plan. Commissioner Dingfield rescued herself from this issue. Ron Carpenter, Bre .merton School District asked if Chairman Kosusko would rescue himself -- from this issue due to prior statements regarding this issue that implied his mind was made up. Chairman Kosusko stated he would rescue himself from this issue. Commissioner Kennedy took over the meeting - a quorum still exists. Mr. Coombes showed a copy of the amended text on the overhead projector which reads . "adapting the use of public and semipublic buildings. Promote the reuse of public and semipublic buildings that are no longer needed to serve their original primary purpose providing that any new use is consistent with the surrounding planned environment". Commissioner Boyd asked if a motion to approve was necessary. Mr. St. Pierre said that this was just like everything else on the agenda tonight. Vice Chairman Kennedy stated they were just taking testimony. Ron Carpenter, Bremerton School District Facilities Director stated this is being submitted by the city planning staff for the Bremerton School District stated this is needed to accommodate use of many public and semipublic buildings in the community. The Bremerton School District would like to work with the community to use its viable buildings when they are done with them. Planmng Commission Meeting - March 20, 2001 Page 15 of 20 Open to the Public (Public in Favor of this project) - Terry Kesner, 3408 Forest Dr. NE, Bremerton indicated that this building is pan of thc fabric of Manette. It would be terrible to sec it tom down. The building has a great future ahead of it. The Navy and Bremerton School District have maintained it nicely. It fits into the neighborhood and the building should be given a second chance. We should keep what we've got and keep this building. Open to the Public (Public Opposed to this project) - none Mr. Coombes clarified that this is not site specific but is city wide. John Dickinson asked if the schools or other public buildings would be eligible for HUD money for improvement so that a regional recreational complex could be generated. To him, he thinks this would be a better utilization of the properties. Ron Carpenter stated that underneath the existing state laws, the school board cannot just hang onto surplus property but must sell it to someone. Property cannot be given away to the citizenship. Testimony was closed. Deliberation would be scheduled for April 17. Commissioner Dingfield and Chairman Kosusko returned to the meeting. 10. Regarding the City of Bremerton Park Ave. Zoning Map Amendment Application. PL01-007 Mr. Coombes indicated this is being done to bring the zoning in line with the comprehensive plan designation. The comprehensive plan designation is MU which is Mixed Use and the area is the East side of Park It's one lot deep and there is an alley behind it from the corner of Pacific between 6th and Park. The Northeast comer of 6* and 1 lthis already zoned commercial and the southeast corner of 11th and Park is already zoned commercial as well. This is brining in line the other areas designated in the comprehensive plan as MU to a mixed use zone. Open to the Public (Public in Favor of this project) - none Open to the Public (Public Opposed to this project) - none Testimony closed. Deliberation wilt be April 10 or 17. 11. Regarding the Olympic College campus zoning map amendment application. PL00-0047. Mr. Coombes indicated the comp plan designates this as school, and they want to bring the zoning in line with that. There are 5-6 parcels between Lincoln and the Chester fight of way which was vacated to the college north of 13a~. There is one additional parcel on the west side of Lincoln in the middle of the block between 13th and 14th. The comp plan states that that whole block west of Lincoln would eventually conform in zoning as is proposed for these specific sites. Planning Commission Meeting - March 20. 2001 Page 16 of 20 Draft Minutes for Approval DRAFT Planning Commission Meeting May 1,2001 I. Call to Order The meeting xvas called to order by Chairman Kosusko at 5:43 p.m. II. Roll Call Those present were: Chairman Kosusko, Commissioner Berkowitz, Commissioner Boyd, Commissioner Coburn, Commissioner Dingfield, Commissioner Kennedy. Quorum certified. NOTE: Commissioner Moshav entered the meeting at 6:07pm III. Approval of Agenda Mr. Hugo asked that item 7 be deferred PL00-0047, Special Use Permit Application for Olympic College until May 15th. A motion was made by Commissioner Berkowitz and seconded by Commissioner Kennedy to approve the agenda with the recommended revision that item 7 be deferred until May 15. Called for a vote: Berkowitz: yes; Boyd: yes; Coburn: yes; Dingfield: yes; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes: Kosusko: yes. Agenda approved. IV. Approval of Minutes Txvo sets of minutes were presented. The Februa~ 20 minutes on page 5, Commissioner Dingfield's comments and Commissioner Kosusko's comments have been contused. There is still an item that says one of the commissioners which should be Commissioner Dingfield. At the top of the page Chairman Kosusko asked if consisted" should be "consistent"Pt The same thing happened on the next quote from Mr. Hugo. Commissioner Kennedy moved that the February 20 minutes be approved as revised and the minutes of the April 17 meeting be approved. Commissioner Kosusko seconded the motion. Called for a vote: Bard: yus. Berkowitz: yes; Coburn: yes. Dingfietd: yes; Kosusko: yes. Kennedy: yes, Coburn: yes. Minutes approved. V. Public Meeting 1. Call to the Public (public comments on any item not on tonight's agenda't: Chairman Kosusko described hoxv the public hearing portion o£ the meeting would be conducted. 2. Hearing: Chairman Kosusko noted that the first two items are continued items where testimony has been previously closed. Mr. Hugo asked that testimony on these two items be reopened. The request will be to set the public hearing for the next regular meeting and to allow testimony tonight if' there is any present in response to the advertised notice. Commissioner Dingfield excused herself. Chairman Kosusko indicated that he would stay until they started hearing testimony and will then excuse himself also. Mr. Hugo stated that there is a proposal by the Bremerton School District to sell the Manette School to another owner for another use. The initial proposal is essentially a change to the comprehensive plan land use map. This presented difficulties as it had the appearance of being a spot zone but the School District had been advised by the department staffthat this was the way to go before Mr. Hugo's arrival. Mr. Hugo advised a proposed policy and zoning code text amendment as another solution which would allow reuse of public and semipublic buildings. According to Growth Management, there must be a policy in support of regulator,./actions. The last para~aph of the staff report indicates that the 95 Comp Plan includes no policies to support adaptive reuse. The proposed policy addition is intended to provide an initial tbundation for the zoning code text amendment to allow adaptive reuse under the conditions proposed including the requirement for a Special Use Permit pursuant to a public heating process to ensure that issues of compatible use and development are addressed. The policy language proposed is to promote the reuse of public and semipublic buildings that are no longer needed to serve their original primary, purpose provided that any new use is consistent with the surrounding planned environment. We propose to add that to Element E, Land Use under section 3A in the Comp Plan. The policy has relevance to several ~owth management act goals including goal l - urban ~owth, goal 2 - reduce sprawl, goal 3 - transportation, 4 - housing, 5- economic development, and [3 - historic preservation. The proposed zoning code amendment proposes to add a new section to the Bremerton Municipal Code, 21.02315 that limits the range of uses that these buildings could be used for and indicates that the special permit could only be approved by public hearing and a finding that the building is suitable t'or the proposed use. A Determination of Non-Significance was issued for this on March 17, 2001. The cnter/a for revision of comprehensive plan amendments were pointed out -oniy the first criteria seems to apply in this instance. This regulation also proposes to meet the consistency rule tbr the zoning amendments. Chairman Kosusko asked for clarification of some or' The allowed uses. *Ir. Hugo indicated that the public could comment on the suggested [tses and the commissioners could make suggestions to expand them or narrow them as they see fit. Chairman Kosusko indicated that public testimony on the item ~vouId be reopened and be sought on May I5 at [tie regularly scheduled meeting. No one was present who wished to give testimony on this item at this time. Commissioner Kennedy moved that testimony on items 1 and 2 be reopened and be taken on May 15, 2001. Commissioner Boyd seconded the motion. Call for vote: Berkowitz: yes; Boyd: yes; Coburn: yes, Dingfield: excused; Kennedy: yes; Kosusko: yes. Commissioner Dingfield re-entered the meeting. 3. PL00-061 Loveless Brook Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment Application. Chairman Kosusko indicated that this item is to change the Comprehensive Plan Map designation from VG with a concurrent zoning map change to GB, General Business, for the eastern 600 feet of the property into MU Mixed Use with current zoning map change to Mixed Use for the remaining Portion of the property. Commissioner Moshay entered the meeting at 6:07. Lee Wyatt, Planning Dept. Senior Planner, indicated the applicant has requested amending the original application that they had in from General and Highway Commercial to CG with a time current zoning map amendment to general business for the eastern 600 t'eet of the property and Mixed Use with concurrent zoning map change to MX for the remaining portion of the property. The project is a little under 10 acres which is currently lo;vv density residential on the back half, the front portion of the property is general commercial highway. In the or/ginal request, there was no verbiage addressing the front 600 feet of the property and the applicant's amended request is for a concurrent comprehensive plan map and official zoning map amendment. The proposed comp plan amendment would extend the G-C classification by 400 feet to approximately 600 feet west of Wheaton Way xvhich would be an additional 200 feet past the portion that is already designated commercial general highxvay. The back of the property xvould then be changed from low density residential designation to mixed use. The concurrent official zoning map amendment would rezone the front 600 feet of the property from single family residential to General Business and like the comprehensive plan amendment, the west portion of the property would then be rezoned from single family residential to mixed use. There is one single family residence in approximately the middle of the property. It's fairly heavy forested around the perimeter. Commissioner Boyd asked if this would mean the all of the first 600 feet along Wheaton Way would be business. Mr. Wyatt stated that was correct but it would only apply to this parcel. Chairman Kosusko indicated testimony xvould be limited to 3 minutes each. William Palmer, Land Use Planning Consultant. representing the Loveless Brook applicants. Asked the commissioners to turn their attention to page l i) or'the staff'report. The conclusion is that tine proposed discovered that other directors have had the same issue on other projects. It's been a standing issue in the community for some time so this project did not initiate this discussion in the City of Bremerton. Public Testimony on this item was closed. Commissioner Kennedy stated she is pleased to see that the staff has brought this issue forward and they have done a great job in cleaning this up. Commissioner Kennedy moved that the commission approve the Planning And Building Department 2001 text amendment PL01-0017 regarding required buffers and yard setbacks. Commissioner Boyd seconded the motion. Chairman Kosusko stated he was confident that this is a separate item which has been a problem that has existed within the code for some while. Call for the vote. Berkowitz: yes; Boyd: yes; Coburn: yes; Dingfield: abstain; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes; Kosusko: yes. 4. PL010010 Bremerton School District Comprehensive Plan policy text amendment application to the land use section of the comprehensive plan to facilitate adaptive reuse of existing outsource public and semi-public buildings city wide. Commissioner Dingfield recused herself. Mr. Hugo indicated the staff had made a full staff report previously, and they have nothing new to add on the policy proposal. Rod Carpenter, Bremerton School District Facilities Director indicated that this has appeared before the council before. There are many public and semipublic buildings in the city that have some life left to them and this will allow an opportunity for these buildings to be used in a compatible situation if they are located in a residential district. This was brought to the forefront because of the Manette school building which was used by the Navy for many years as an office building and is still a viable building. Testimony Open to the Public. Open to the Public (Public in Favor of this project) - none. Open to the Public (Comment that are neutral in nature) - none. Testimony was closed to the public. Commissioner Berkowitz moved that the application PL 01-0010 for policy text amendment by the Bremerton School District be approved. Commissioner Boyd seconded it. Chairman Kosusko indicated that he ~'elt this was the appropriate avenue for public buildings. Planning Commission meeting May !.5. 2001 P:~ge 9 or' 1.7 Commissioner Kennedy indicated she was in favor of the amendment as consistent with guidelines of GMA, this takes existing buildings and put them into reuse which encourages in-fill development in the existing urban areas without destroying or tearing down something and also allows reuse of a building no longer suitable for its original purpose. Chairman Kosusko indicated the items discussed by Commissioner Kennedy were under goals I and 2 and goal 3 transportation, measures to promote in-fill development through adaptive reuse and urban revitalization, housing as well and further goal 5 - economic development -increasing the city's economic base by attracting in-fill development so over and over the GMA talks about in-fill development. Also, historic preservation, goal 13. Call/:'or vote. Berkowitz: yes; Boyd: yes; Coburn: yes; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes; Kosusko: yes. 5. PL01-0011 Bremerton School District zoning code Text Amendment Application to provide for regulatory measures for the adaptive reuse of public and semipublic buildings city-wide. Commissioner Dingfield recused herself. Mr. Hugo indicated the staff had made a complete report at the last hearing. Ron Carpenter, Bremerton School District Facilities Director indicated that most of this text has been recommended by Mr. Hugo so he would defer discussion on that to Nix. Hugo. Open to the Public (Public in Favor of this project) Terry Pessner, 3408 Forest Dr., Bremerton stated that one of the areas they are looking at is day care for 12 or fewer kids. There is no private sector that can turn that around as it is too few children. He asked that they consider the 12 or fewer kids limitation on that. Open to the Public (Comment that are neutral in nature) none. Open to the Public (Public opposed to this project) - none. Testimony closed to the public. Chairman Kosusko asked what determined what uses were allowed and not allowed. Mr. Hugo stated that he looked at the types of uses within the zones and looked at each one in terms of traffic it might .generate and when traffic would primarily occur. He took out things that looked like they would generate traffic throughout the day. Chairman Kosusko asked about the day care requirement issue which was raised. Planning Commission meeting May 15. 2001 Page 10 of 17 Someone stated that a special use permit would be required for 13 or more children. 5Ir. Hugo stated that since this is all done by Special Use Permit maybe the question of number can be addressed at the time of public consideration. Commissioner Boyd moved that PL01-0011 zoning code text amendment be approved which will implement the policy which was just approved for adaptive reuse. Commissioner Moshay seconded the motion. Call for vote. Berkowitz: yes; Boyd: yes; Coburn: yes; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes: Kosusko: yes. Commissioner Dingfield returned to the meeting. 6. PL010024 City of Bremerton downtown development policies. Mr. Hugo indicated that the staff has made presentations on this prior. No staff report has been prepared yet, so they request that it be removed from the agenda. Chairman Kosusko indicated that the public could speak on this if they would like to, but this will be continued to a future meeting. There has been a request by the staff for a special meeting on June 5. Commissioner Kennedy moved that a special meeting be held to deal with downtown Bremerton goals and policies and other agenda items as requested by the planning director. The motion was seconded by a commissioner. Chairman Kosusko indicated the meeting would be on June 5 in this chamber at 5:30. Call for vote: Berkowitz: yes; Boyd: yes; Coburn: yes; Dingfield; yes; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes; Kosusko: yes. A five-minute break was taken and the meeting was reconvened at 7:25. 6. PL00-0061 Loveless Brook Inc. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment Application at 3915 Wheaton Way'. Mr. Hugo indicated that the staff reporting on this is concluded. Chairman Kosusko stated that this item has been closed to public testimony. Commissioner Cockburn asked for clarification on the Mixed Use zone Chairman Kosusko indicated that Mixed Use zone does not allow [t~e extensive commercial development that general commercial does. Planning Commission meeting May tS, 2001 Page Government Center decision for the County. They have to make sure that parking has been addressed. Commissioner Dingfield had major concerns about the foot ferry passengers. There was a lengthy discussion about the walk-on ferry passengers and "kiss and ride" areas. She stated that we (City of Bremerton) will become a walk-on ferry destination and that our terminal is unfriendly. The group decided that the best way to address this issue was to modify General Policy #3 by changing it to read, "Parking implies including both on street and off street facilities should be managed to emphasis short term use over long term use ensuring an adequate supply for shoppers, visitors and ferry passenger pick-up and drop off." A motion was made by Commissioner Kennedy to approve PL01-0024 as revised and seconded by Commissioner Dingfield. Called for a vote: Cockburn: yes; Dingfield: yes; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes; and Kosusko: yes. Motion carried. VI. Business Meeting In the interest of time, Chairman Kosusko moved to the Business Meeting portion of the agenda, directly to Old Business - Adoption of written findings. Mr. Hugo made a statement reminding the public that the Commission made decisions to recommend all of these items to the City Council for approval. These items are now reviews of dram findings and conclusions in support of those actions. The commission received these facts and conclusions last in an effort to expedite the editorial changes. D. Old Business: a. PL01-0010 - School District, Adaptive Reuse Policy, Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Mr. Hugo read the facts and conclusions directly from the draft Findings and Conclusions Report. He then asked if there were any questions. There was no questions or discussion. Commissioner Moshay made a motion that the Commission adopt the findings and conclusions for PL01-0010 as written. Commissioner Kennedy seconded the motion. Called for a vote: Cockburn: yes; Dingfield: abstained; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes; and Kosusko: yes. Amendment adopted. b. PL01-0011 - School District, Adaptive Reuse, Zoning Text Amendment. Mr. Hugo read the facts and conclusions directly from the draft Findings and Conclusions Report, He then asked if there were any questions. There was no questions or discussion. Commissioner Kennedy made a motion that the Commission adopt the findings and conclusions for PL01-0010 as written. Commissioner Moshay seconded the motion. Called for a vote: Cockburn: yes; Dingfield: abstained; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes; and Kosusko: yes. Amendment adopted. c. PL01-0008 - Parking Ratio, Zoning Text Amendment. Mr. Hugo read the facts and conclusions directly from the draft Findings and Conclusions. He then asked if there were any questions. There was no questions or discussion. Commissioner Moshay made a motion that the Commission adopt the findings and conclusions for PL01- 0010 as written. Commissioner Kennedy seconded the motion. Called for a vote: Cockburn: yes; Dingfield: abstained; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes; and Kosusko: yes. Amendment adopted. Planning Commission Meeting July 17. 200 t Page 5 of 7 PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT 2000 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT ST,AFF REPORT PROPOSALS: Policy to allow adaptive reuse of public and semi-public buildings. Zoning Code text amendment to provide the regulatory measures for adaptive reuse. DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 23,2001 APPLICANT OR PROPONENT (FILE NUMBERS): Bremerton School District (PL01-0010; PL01-0011) CONTACT: Chds Hugo, Director- Planning and Building Department; Phone: 3601478-5243 LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: This proposal will apply to the entire city. BACKGROUND: Every community has an array of buildings that exist to serve specialized community functions. Many of these are public and semi- public buildings that are located in residential neighborhoods to provide local access to services and activities - schools, fire stations, libraries, churches, and park buildings are common to neighborhood settings in almost every city. The existence of these facilities is recognized as an inherent part of the neighborhood fabric, but changes in urban growth, the emergence of new technology, and changes in community needs and expectations can make these buildings obsolete for their use or no longer viable for service in their location. In most cases, these public or semi-public buildings were built to high construction standards with very durable materials such as bdck, concrete, stone and steel. As such, they represent a valuable structural resource to adapt to new uses that still serve community needs, either public or private. Cities that recognize the value that these buildings represent in terms of remaining economic life and conservation of construction materials find ways to give the buildings a new life by allowing uses not otherwise permitted in those locations. These new uses are limited to activities that pose minimal environmental and operational impacts on the surrounding areas. Such adaptive reuses are becoming increasingly popular as a strategy to support the revitalization of older urban areas. The 1995 Comprehensive Plan includes no policies to support adaptive reuse. The proposed policy addition is intended to provide an initial foundation for the Zoning Code text amendment to allow adaptive reuse under the conditions proposed, including the requirement for a special use permit pursuant to a public headng process to insure that issues of compatible use and development are addressed. PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT: The following new policy is proposed to add to Element E. Land Use, Section 3.A.: Promote the reuse of public and semi-public buildings that are no longer needed to serve their orfginai primary purpose, provided that any new use is consistent with the surrounding planned environment. PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT: Proposed new section, BMC 21.02.315- When the need for a certain public or semi-public building in any zone no longer exists, the building may be converted to those uses listed ir~ the zone in which it is located, except that when it is located in any residential zone, it may be changed by special permit to a use allowed in Figure 140, PO zone, Sections 1., 2., 3., 4., 6., and the following listed uses of Section 11: Consultants, Computer assistance and training (but not repair), Office/Business Assistance Services, and General Offices. The special permit may only be approved after public hearing and a finding that the existing building is suitable for the proposed use and that the proposed use is not unduly detrimental to the surrounding properties. To qualify for the special permit hearing, the public or semi-public facility must have been constructed for the stated public or semi-public use and operated as such use for a minimum of five years. COMPLIANCE WITH GMA GOALS: The proposed policy has relevance to the following GMA goals: Goal 1. Urban Growth; Goal 2. Reduce Sprawl: This proposed policy encourages infill development in the serviced urban area by allowing reuse of public and semi-public buildings that no longer are suitable for their odginat purpose. Goal 3. Transportation: Measures to promote infill development through adaptive reuse and urban revitalization also help promote efficient transportation systems. Goal 4. Housing: Adaptive reuse of schools and other public and semi-public buildings for housing adds to the availability and affordability of housing. Goal 5. Economic Development: Increasing the city's economic base by attracting infill development through adaptive reuse adds market opportunity for new economic enterprise. Goal 13. Histodc Preservation: Adaptive reuse is a cost-effective mechanism to preserve historic buildings by providing new economic opportunities for the structures. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION (SEPA): A Oeterminatic~n of Non-Significance was for this non-proiect action in accordance with WAC 197-11 on March 17, 2001. DECISION CRITERIA: The Comprehensive Plan specifies the procedures and conditions under which amendments to the Plan may be approved. Section 2. D. of Plan Element K. states that "Each component of a Plan amendment package shall be reviewed and approved only if it meets the [following] criteria:' (- the five criteda are listed on page 2. of Element K. -). The criteria as presented are primarily relevant to map amendments, not policy amendments - only the first criterion seems to apply to this policy amendment and is addressed in the discussion of GMA compliance above. However, the published cdteda are the only ones adopted to apply to decisions of this type. ZONING CONSISTENCY: The approval criteda for amendments to the Zoning Code text relate to internal consistency. The proposed zcning text amendment is intended to implement the proposed adaptive reuse policy and maintain regulatory consistency with the Comprehensive P/an. The amendment must also be fcund to be consistent with ali other provisions of the Zoning Code. ORIGINAL AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING AND ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING EXAMINER ORDINANCES FOR AGENDA OF: 04/17/02 & 04/24/02 ORIGINATING DEPT: City Attorney ORIGINATOR: Roger Lubovich DATE SUBMITTED: 04/09/02 2. CLEARANCES: 3. EXHIBITS: Ordinances CITY ATTORN.E _, .~-~'-~/ CITY CLERK-'~t,~.. C...~___ C O MML~IT.Y.~. E_E~..LD P~NT UNDO S T . ON C Cm P S D NT FOR SUBMIT : 4. SU~Y STAT~NT ~D ~QUI~NT FOR CO~ClL ACTION: On Octo~r 12~ 2001, Ord~ce NO. 4228 was adopted emab~s~g the position of liebig Ex~er. S~ce adoption of that ord~ce, it was dete~ed t~t additioml code revisio~ were necess~ to ~plemem the he~g e~er process as ~tended. A review of the city code ~d other ord~ces ~d regulmio~ ~ now ~en perfomed. Proposed for consideration ~d adoption ~e two comp~on ord~ces that ~e basica~y housekeep~g me~es. ~e ~st ord~ce, NO. ~, mends the Shore~e Mamer Progrm ~d the ~cond ord~ce, NO. ~., mends c~pter 2. v~ious other tkles of the Brememon M~cip~ Code. ~ese ord~ces mend ~d updme the A~trmive He~g Ex~er process ~d proced~es for conduct~g he~gs, ~g decisio~ ~d reco~endmions ~d he~g appeals ofa~strmive decisio~ to estab~sh a comprehe~ive He~g ex~er system. 8. ~CO~NDATION: 1) a. To approve on ~m read~g ord~ce NO. ~ mend~g the Shore~e Master Progrm relm~g to appe~s to the he~g ex~er. b. To approve on ~m read~g ord~ce NO. ~ mend~g c~pter 2.13 relm~g to the he~g ex~er, the zo~g code Title 21, ~d v~ous other titles of the Breme~on M~cip~ Code. 2) a. To pass ordinance NO. __ on second reading. b. To pass ordinance NO. __ on second reading. 0,,;-- () /G 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED _ TABLED _ APPROVED _ DISAPPROVED AMENDED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS (cont.): 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT (cont.): 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES 7. RESEARCH SOURCES ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, amending Sections (c)(2) and (c)(4) of Chapter 7 of the City of Bremerton Shoreline Master Program relating to appeals of administrative decisions regarding shoreline substantive developments, and providing for appeals of such decisions to the Administrative Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC. WHEREAS, the current provisions of Chapter 7 of the City of Bremerton Shoreline Master Program relating to appeals of administrative decisions on applications for shoreline substantive development permits provides for appeals of such to go to the City Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the City has recently established a hearing examiner system to hear matters including appeals of administrative decisions; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to update it's Shoreline Master Program provisions to allow for appeals of administrative decisions on shoreline substantive development permits to the Administrative Hearing Examiner; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE' CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section (c)(2) of Chapter 7 of the City of Bremerton Shoreline Master Program relating to the review process for shoreline permits is amended to read as follows: (2) Review Process: In general, shoreline permits are reviewed by the City using the same procedures used for zoning permit applications. However, additional public notice may be required by the Shoreline Master Program. The procedure for processing shoreline permits is as follows: a. Proposal Requiring Zoning Approval: If a proposal requires a zoning permit, variance, rezone or site plan review for development to proceed: The shoreline permit will be reviewed using the same procedure as the applicable Zoning Ordinance authorization. Shoreline Master Program b. Proposal Not Requiring Zoning Approval: If a proposal does not require any formal zoning approval for the development to proceed; and 1) A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is required: The permit application will be reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Director of Community Development. 2) A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit or Variance Permit is required: The permit application will be reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the P!m~ning Con~nissienAdministrative Heahne Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC. SECTION 2. Section (c)(4) of Chapter 7 of the City of Bremerton Shoreline Master Program relating to final action or applications for shoreline permits is amended to read as follows: (4) Final Action a. A decision by the Director of Community Development o~ ............. ~, ._ ........ s .... shall become final unless ~foc--Revie,~an appeal is filed t_Qo th.e Administrative Hearine Examiner pursuant to Chapter ~. l.~ BMC within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of the decision.. ,,o' ........... ~,, ,.,o~, ~,,,~,:*'~'~ ~-,, ,_r~,,,.¥,.,..,."~,' 10, Section 9.. of 4he b. ^ '~;~: ~ ~ ,~c,..,~ .... An open record decision or a decision on appeal by the C~ty' r~,_ ..... ......... :~Admm~stratt-. ' . 'v.e" Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC shall become final unless a Request for Review is filed with the Shorelines Heatings Board, as prescribed in RCW 90.58.180. 3 A Request for Review may Be filed directly with the Shorelines Hearing Board at the option of tire applicant, as provided for in RCW 90.58.180. SECTION 3. Severabili~_. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. Shoreline ~Vlaster Program SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force ten (10) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. APPROVED by the City Council the day of ,2002 PASSED by the City Council the day of ,2002 CAROL ARENDS, Council President Approved this day of ,2002 CARY BOZEMAN, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: KATHLEEN MCCLUSKEY, City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney PUBLISHED the day of ,2002 EFFECTIVE the day of ,2002 ORDINANCE NO. R:\LEGAL\Ordinances\Shoreline Master Progam Amendment.doc Shoreline Master Program ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, amending Chapter 2.13 of the Bremerton Municipal Code relating to the Administrative Hearing Examiner and further amending various Chapters of the Bremerton Municipal Code as they relate to the Administrative Hearing Examiner process and procedures for conducting hearings, making decisions and recommendations and hearing appeals of administrative decisions, including provisions relating to the Planning Commission, Chapter 2.12, the Municipal Court Hearing Examiner, Chapter 2.62, business licenses, Chapter 5.02, regulatory licenses, Chapter 5.03, right-of-way use permits, Chapter 11.03, Uniform Building Codes, Chapter 17.04, Uniform Fire Code, Chapter 18.01, subdivisions and plats, Chapter 20.04, Shoreline Development, Chapter 21.04, SEPA substantive authority, Chapter 21.12 and further amending various provisions of Chapter 21.02 relating to land use applications including processing of applications, public hearings on land use applications, decisions of land use applications, notices of decisions, development agreements, annexation zoning, PUD applications, special use permits, variances, rezones, exceptions to development regulations, amendments to development regulations, site plans, violations of the Zoning Code, wetlands and stream applications, and appeals of various land use decisions. WHEREAS, the City Council recently adopted Ordinance No. 4778 establishing an Administrative Heating Examiner system for the purpose of conducting open record hearings and making recommendations or decisions on various land use applications, conducting appeals of administrative determinations and performing various other functions; and WHEREAS, following adoption of Ordinance 4778 and a comprehensive review of the Bremerton Municipal Code, it was determined that numerous other provisions of the Bremerton Municipal Code needed to be amended in order to resolve conflicts of provisions, inconsistent applications of processing of land use applications as well as other matters including appeals and to further establish a more comprehensive system for processing these matters; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Administrative Hearing Examiner SECTION 1. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 2.13 entitled "Administrative Hearing Examiner" is hereby amended to read as follows: CHAPTER 2.13 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING EXAMINER. '9 I 1 1 IID,-,,.It-I~,,~ ~.13 .....010 Purpose. The ;"+~-'~'~ p~ose in creating ,,n .......................... s ......· ......... ;,; - - chapter is to: (1) Separate the l~d use regulatoW ~nction from the l~d use plying process; (2) Ensure procedural due process and appe~ance of fairness in re~latoW heahngs ~d decisions; (3) Provide an efficient and effective land use regulatow system which inte~ates the public heahng ~d decision-making processes for land use matters; (4) Provide for consistency and predictability in decision maMng and the application of policies ~d regulations adopted by the city; m~d [ (5) Provide a forum for conducting public hearings required by the Bremeaon M~icipal Code ~'-~ *"-n'4~: ........... ~ ~r ~:~; .... ,; ...... ,~ .......... ,,~ ; .... ~ ' and (6) Provide a forum for hearing appeals of administrative decisions and other matters as established by the Bremerton Municipal Code. 2.13.020 Creation. The position of the Administrative Hearina Examiner (also refen'ed to in this chapter as "hearing examiner" or "examiner") is hereby created. The Administrative Hearing Examiner shall review and inte~ret land use regulations; conduct hearings, render decisions, and make recommendations on l~d use applications; hear appeals from a~inistrative orders, recommendations, permits, decisions or determinations made by a city official as set [brlh in this chapter, .and review and hear other matters as provided for in the Breme~on Municipal Code and other ordinances. The term "administrative heafina examiner" shall likewise include the examiner pro tern. 2.13.030 ~Appointment and removal. 2 Administrative Hearing Examiner The Administrative Hearings Examiner shall be appointed by the Mayor subject to confirmation by the City Council. The appointment may be made as a contract employee or as i d p d pl ~,~ an .n e en ent contractor Tr+~..~ ^ ,~,~,;,.;o,..,,;,~ ............... a v ............. r a te~, o~ .... ................. v ........... ~ oncon ons dete~ined appropriate by the City Council. ...... n,; .... ~ ...... a ......... :~,= ~.~, ,.~.~ o ..... ;~ The Exminer(s) pro tern shall be selected by and serve at the easu.re of the Mayor o~w~ .......................j ........ j .. ........ tn thc absence or ll~e inability of the Administrative Hearing Examiner to act, or when expetlise is needed to hear a pa~icular matter, the examiner pro tern shall se,we in place of the Administrative Hearing Examiner and shall have all the duties and powers of the Administrative Hem-ing Examiner. The Administrative F[earing Examiner may be terminated in accordm~cc with the contract temps. ~ Exminer pro tern mav be temainated b~ the Mavor at will. 2.13.040 Qualification and removal. Exminers shall be appointed solely with regard to their qualifications for the duties of their office and will have such training ~d expehence as will qualify them to conduct administrative or quasi-judicial heahngs on regulatou enactments ~d to disch~ge the other functions confemed upon them. Examiners shall hold no other elective or appointive office or position with the City of Breme~on. Pm ....................... ~;~- pro +~ may be removed by +h= ~ ..... 2~ at 2.13.050 Improper influence, conflict of interest and appearance of fairness. No city official, elective or appointive, shall attempt to influence the A~inistrative Heating examiner in any matter officially before him so as to constitute misconduct of a public office under Chapter 42.20 RCW or a violation of the appe~ance of fairness doctrine. No member of the council shall pa~icipate in any proceedings on appeal from the Administrative Heating Exminer's decision if to do so will constitute a conflict of interest or violation of the appearance of fairness doctrine. The Administrative Hemng Examiner shall conduct all 3 ~7 Administrative Hearing Examiner proceedings in a manner to avoid conflicts of interest or other misconduct and to avoid violations of the appearance of fairness doctrine. If such conflicts or violations cannot be avoided in a particular case, the examiner shall assign an examiner pro tem to act in his absence. 2.13.060 Organization, rules. The Administrative Hearings Examiner is empowered to adopt rules for the scheduling and conduct of hearings and other procedural matters related to the duties he is required to perform. The rules shall include any procedural rules for conducting hearings as set forth in the Bremerton Munic al Code, ,. ............. . .......................... s ....... ~ .the ~, ............................. j ........ The rules shall provide for the process to be effective and efficient while assuring that the participants are afforded an opportunity to present their case without unnecessary emphasis upon formal procedure. The examiner shall have the authority to subpoena witnesses, and to the extent necessary to assure a fair hearing and to afford each party the opportunity to present their case, may allow limited discovery if it is not unduly burdensome, will not unnecessarily delay the proceedings, and the information is not otherwise available. 2.13.070 Jurisdiction. (!) The Administrative Heating Examiner shall have jurisdiction over-to_2 (a) conduct hearinas, render decisions, make recommendations and to hear appeals of administrative decisions on land use applications as.specified in Title 21 of the remerton un c a o e, as amen e , ,.,,,~ ~,,,,,,, ,,,,,,, ,,,.~,.,o ~,,~ .......... y C CUll ci-~. (-3-)- (b) :r-o conduct public hearings on all Local Improvement Districts, Road .... ~, ........... D~t;tncts and Utility Local Improvement Districts mid make final deciaions w:th Administrative Hearing Examiner (lc) ~,.~ ............an appeal of a department director's administrative decision gwhen, provided..,o...,,.~,.. ~ ..... ~ ..... in the Bremerton Municipal. Code *",,,~,, ......... ~,,: -.,,~,*~ .......... v,~. ,o,~a;o;"' (dL~hear code enforcement matters pursuant to provisions of the BremeAon Municipal CodeTo ..... i,,~+ ~.~ ............... l ....~..;.: ....... ~;~'" ....; ........... ;-~ by (e) conduct public hearings when required under the provisions o~th.e State v' _ .... En ~ronmental Policy Act; conduct open record public heafinls or closed-record appeals accordance with the provisions o f the Bremerton Municipal Code; conduct such otheCllem-~ngs as the city council may from time to time deem appropfiateTo (~hear such other matt:ers as may be designated by the Bremm~on Municipal Code and/or the City Council. (2) It is the :intent that all quasi-judicial appeals of land use decisions, which have prior to the enactment of this chapter been heard by t~e city council and/or the planning commission, now be heard by the administrative hearin¢ examiner pursuant to this chapter, and to the extent other provisions of the Brcmm~on Municipal Code are inconsistent, i ufisdiction such quasi-judicial appeals will be with the administrative heafin~ examiner unless othe~vise required by state or ikderal law. {3) U'nless othe~vise indicated, all other references in the Breme~on Municipal Code to "heating examiner" shall not mean the municipal cou~ hearina examiner except those matters established pursuant to Chapte 2.62 of the BremeNon Municipal Code over which d~e municipal com~ hearin¢ examiner will have jurisdiction. 2.13.080 Duties. The Administrative Hearing Examiner shall have the [bllowin~ duties with respect to appiic'afions ol' matters submitteci befbre him or her. 5 ia Administrative Hearing Examiner _ (1) /tppeals o_fadministrative decisions/determinations. The Administrative Hearing Examiner shall hear open record appeals of administrative decisions/determinations submitted bet'ore him or her, prepare a record thereof, and enter findings of fact and conclusions based upon. these facts, which findings and conclusions shall represent final action unless appealed as specified in Section 2.13.140 BMC, for the followin~ (a) Appeals of all Type I land use adm:inistrative decisions as set fbrth in BMC 21.02.840. (b) Appeals of all T,vpe lJ land use administrative decisions as set forth in iBMC 21.02.845. (c) Appeals of Business License denials, revocations and regulations as authorized pursuant to Title 5 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. (d) Appeals of right-of-way use permit application decisions made pursuant to Chapter 11.02 BMC. (e) Appeals of administrative decisions on shoreline substantial development pem~its pursuant to Section 21.02.935(b)(5) BMC and Chapter 7(c)(4) of the Cit_~ of Bremerton Shoreline Master Pro,am. (f) Appeals of admin.istrative decisions on short subdivisions and plats pursuant to Section 20.04.100 BMC. (g) Appeals of ach-ninistmtive detem~inations applying the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildimzs and the Bremerton [lousing Code pursuant to Section 17.04.070 BMC. {h) Appeals of administrative determinations applying the U'nitbnn Fire Code pursuant to Section 18.0l. 100 BMC. _ (2) Decisions of the Administrative Hearing Examiner. The Administrative Hearing Examiner shall receive m~d exm'aine available infom~ation, conduct open record public bearings, prepare a record thereof: enter findings of fact and conclusions based upon these facts, and render a decision, which decision shall represent the final action on the application, unless appealed, as specified in Section 2.13.140 BMC tbr all Type III land use applications as set l~>rth in BMC 21.02.850. .. {.}) Recommendations of the A~b-ninistra~ive Hearing Examiner. Thc Administrative Hearint~ Examiner shall receive and examine available intbrmalion, cortduct open_ Administrative Hearing Examiner pre-decision public hearings, prepare a record thereof and enter findings of/:act and conclusions based upon those facts, together ~vith a recommendation to the city council, for the following: (a) All Type IV applications as set for in BMC 21.02.855. (b) Local Improvement Districts and utility Local Improvement District formation and assessments pursuant to Chapter 11.04 BMC and Chapters 35.43 and 35.44 RCW. 2.1.3.090 Applications. _Applications for all matters to be heard by the Administrative Hetn-ing Examiner relating to the zoning code set forth in Chapter 21.02 BMC shall be filed with the Department of Community Development. Applications for all other matters to be hem'd by the Administrative Hearing Exmniner shall be filed with the City Clerk. When it is found an application meets the filing requirements of the effected Department, the application shall be accepted. The Administrative Hearing Examiner shall be responsible for assigning a date for the pnblic hearing for each ...application. Hearings on project permit applications are subiect to the notice and hem-lng r.equireme:nts set forth in the Bremerton Municipal Code. 2.113.100 ()pen record public hearing. (1) Before renderin~ a decision or recommendation on any land use application, the Administrative Hearing Examiner shall hold one (I) open record public hearing thereon. (2) For all applications, notice of the time and place of the public hearina shall be given as provided in the ordinance governing the application. If none is specifically set forth_, such notice shall be given at least ten (10) working days prior to such hearimz. (3) The .Administrative l-tearing Examiner shall have the power to prescribe rules and regulations for the conduct of hearim4s under this chapter and also to administer oaths, and preserve order. 2.13.110 Decisions and recommendation. (1) The Administrative Hearint~ Exmniner's recommendation or decision may be to grant or deny the application, or the Administrative Hearing Examiner may recommend or require of the applicant such conditions, modifications mid restrictions as the Administrative Hearing Examiner finds necessaD, to make the application compatible with its environment, with applicable state laws, and to carry_ out the objectives and goals of the comprehensive plan, the zoning t~0de, the subdivision code, and other codes and ordinances oi' thc city. (LTonditions, modifications and restrictions which may be imposed are, but are not limiled to, additional Administrative Hearing Examiner 71 setbacks, screenings in fl~e form of landscaping and fencing, covenants, easements m~d dedications of additional road rights-of-way. Performm~ce bonds or other financial assurances may be required to insure complitmce with conditions, modifications and restrictions. (2) In regard to all Type IV applications set forth in Chapter 21.02.855 BMC,. Administrative Hearing Examiner's findings mid conclusions and recommendation shall be submitted to the city council_Q!~which shall have the final authority to act on such applications. The hearing by the Administrative Hearing Examiner shall constitme an open record pre-decision hearing betbre the :final decision is made by the ciD, council.. The Administrative Heating Examiner shall file its recommendation with the city council at the expiration of the period provided for reconsideration, or if reconsideration is accepted, within ten (10D_ working days after the decision on reconsideration. (13) When tile Administrative Hearing Examiner renders a decision or recommendation, the Administrative Hearing Examiner shall make and enter written finding_~ fi:om the record and conclusions therefrom which support such decision. The dec/sion shall be rendered within ten (10) working days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings, unless a longer period is mutually g~eed to on the record by th~ applicant and the Administrative Heating Exmniner. Tlle copy of such decision, including findings m~d conclusions, shall be trm]smitted by ilrst class mail, to the applicm~t and other parties of record in. the case requesting the same. . (4) In the case of Shoreline Substm~tial Development permits, pursuant to BMC 21.02.860(d)(4), appeals shall be decided within thirty (30) calendar days ot' filine, o'F the appeal. 2.13.120 Reconsideration. ~ pgr~y of record believing that a decision or recommendation of the Administrative Hearing Examiner is based on en'oneous procedures, errors of law or tact, or the discovery new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing, may make a written request for reconsideration by the Administrative Hearing Examiner within five (5) wo:rkint~ day's of the date the decision or recom:mendation is rendered. This request shall set fbrth the speci errors or new in:['onnation relied upon by such appellant, and the Administrativ_c Iqearing Examiner may, af~ter review o f the record,, take ['urther action as he or she deems proper. Ifa 8 Administrative Hearing Examiner 70.. request for reconsideration is accepted, a decision is not final until after a decision on reconsideration is issued. 2.13.130 Appeal of decision. ............. (!) .4.ny party who feels aagrieved bv the decision or other final action of the Administrative Hearing iExaminer may submit an appeal within twenty-one (21.) calendar days .from the date the final decision of the Administrative Hearing Examiner is rendered to the Superior Court or to another designated forum. (2) No appeal ma,v be made from a recommendation of the Administralive Hearing Examiner. 2.1.3.1140 CiW Council action. (1) Any application requiring action by the city council shall be taken by the adoption of a motion, resolution or ordinance by the city council. When taking any such final action., the city council shall make and enter findings of fact from the record and conclusions therefrom which support its action. The city council may adopt all or portions of the findinas and conclusions :from the Administrative Hearing Examiner' s recommendation. (2) The action of the city council, approving, modifying, or rejecting a recommendation of the Administrative Hearing Examiner, shall be final and conclusive. Appellants have twenty-one {21) calendar days from the date of ci. tv council action to file ~m appeal with the superior court. 2.13.150 City administrative staff are to be considered a person or party. For the purpose ot!BMC 2.13.140 and B.M.C 2.13. 150, the city's administrative start shall be considered a ~'person" and/or "party" and shall have the same rights as any other person or party to make requests for reconsideration to the Administrative Hearing Examiner or to appeal decisions o f the Adnfinistrative Hearing Examiner to superior court or to another desitmated forum. SECTION2. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 2.62.040 relating to the Municipal Court Hearing Examiner is amended to read as follows: 2.62.040 Judges pro tempore, Court Commissioners - Municipal Court Hearing Examiner. Administrative Hearing Examiner Pursuant to RCW 3.50.090 the presiding municipal court judge may designate one or more persons as judges pro tempore to serve in the absence or disability of the elected or duly appointed judge of the court or in addition to the elected or duly appointed judge when administration of justice and the accomplishment of the work of the court make it necessary. The qualifications of a judge pro tempore shall be the same as for judges as provided under RCW 3.50.040 except that a judge pro tempore need not be a resident of the city or county in which the municipal court is located. A judge pro tempore of Bremerton Municipal Court shall receive a salary for each hour in which the judge pro tern serves at a rate equivalent to the hourly salary of the Bremerton Municipal Court Judge. The municipal court judge may appoint one or more court commissioners under RCW 3.50.075. To utilize the services of judicial officers of the court for the purpose of hearing contested matters relating to the interest of the City and its citizens and the operation of various departments of the City, the office c,f municipal court hearing examiner is created in the municipal court. SECTION 3. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 2.62.045 relating to the Municipal Court Hearing Examiner is amended to read as follows: 2.62.045 Municipal Court Hearing Examiner - Procedure - Appeal. The municipal court hearing examiner shall have jurisdiction to receive and rule on appeals by aggrieved appellants of administrative decisions after a written complaint has been denied by the Department Director or designee. Appeals to the offme~qh~municipal court hearing examiner from any final administrative decision covered by the provisions of this chapter shall be made within seven (7) working days from the date of appellant's notification of the decision. Date of mailing shall be considered date of notification. Appeals shall include the appellant's name, address and telephone number, the written decision being appealed and the municipal code section establishing the appeal. Appeals shall be accompanied by a filing fee, pursuant to Chapter 3.01, which shall be refunded if the appellant substantially prevails. The Municipal Court Judge shall adopt rules for scheduling and conduct of administrative hearings. Enforcement of the administrative decision being appealed to the m'unicipal court hear/ne examiner shall be stayed during the pendency of an appeal which has been properly and timely filed provided there is not imminent threat to the public's safety and welfare. 10 -/t2 Administrative Hearing Examiner I! The municipal court hearing examiner's decision shall be final and conclusive unless the appellant or the City files for a Writ of Certiorari in Kitsap County Superior Court within thirty (30) days. Procedures of this section including filing fee, and appeal of the municil~al court hearin~ examiner's decision shall apply unless different procedures are specified in the ordinance establishing the administrative appeal. The municipal court hearing examiner shall have jurisdiction to hear a~le on complaints referred under the City's Code of Ethics, T4t4e-3-Chapter 2.96 BMC, and to receive and rule on appeals of administrative decisions specified in the following Titles of' the Bremerton Municipal Code: (1_~) Health and Sanitation, Title 6; (~_-3) Animals and Fowl, Title 7; (34) Peace, Safety and Morals, Title 9; (4_5) Traffic, Title 10; (5_6) Municipal Utilities, Title 15 A~ll references to hearing examiner in Chapter 2.96 and these titles shall mean municipal c~ourt hearing exm/xiner. · - SECTION 4. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 5.02.310 relating to business licenses is amended to read as follows: 5.02.310 Appeals. Any taxpayer aggrieved by the amount of the fee or tax found by the Treasurer to be required under the provisions of this chapter may file a written appeal with the ',~ t-headministrative hearing examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC within seven (7) working days from the time such taxpayer was sent written notice of such amount. Such notice shall also contain the taxholder's appeal rights. The determination appealed from shall be regarded as pr/ma facie correct. The examiner may reverse or modify an action of the Treasurer and ascertain the correct amount of the fee or tax due if the Treasurer's determination violates the terms of this chapter or is contrary to law. 11 -n,/ Administrative Hearing Examiner /3 SECTION 5. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 5.02.360 relating to business licenses is amended to read as follows: 5.02.360 Revocation of Business License Conditions. The Treasurer may revoke or suspend the business license issued to any person engaged in business activities within the City who is in default in any payment of any license fee or tax owed under Title 3 or 5 of the Bremerton Municipal Code; or who shall fail to comply with any of the provisions of this chapter; or where any licensee or employee of the licensee is engaged in any conduct which violates any state or local laws or ordinances at the licensee's place of business, and of which the licensee has actual or constructive note; or upon the recommendation of the county health department that such business is being managed, conducted or maintained without regard to proper sanitation and hygiene. In the event the Treasurer shall suspend or revoke the license, (s)he shall cause to be served upon the licensee an order by certified mail which states the reasons therefore and the licensee's appeal rights. Such revocation or suspension shall take effect seven (7) working days from the date of receipt of notice by certified mail from the Treasurer unless the licensee files a written appeal with~ the administrative heating examiner before the effective date of the Treasurer's administrative decision of revocation or suspension. A licensee who has been licensed in the preceding license year may continue to engage in the activity for which the license is required, pending decision by the administrative hearing examiner, unless the Treasurer determines that a clear, substantial and imminent hazard to the health, safety, welfare, privacy or property of any person would result. The administrative decision appealed from shall be regarded as prima facie correct. The administrative hem-lng examiner shall hear the appeal, pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC and may affirm or deny the Treasurer's decision to suspend or revoke a license. The decision of the administrative hearing examiner shall be final unless appeal of the decision is ~ pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC. SECTION 6. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 5.03.070 relating to regulatou, licenses is amended to read as follows: 5.03.070 Appeal to Hearing Examiner. gremerton M~micipal Cou~ The Adminislrafive Hearing Examiner shall have jurisdiction to receive and rule on appeals from applicants aggrie~)ed by the City Clerk's decision to revoke 12 '7 ~a Administrative Hearing Examiner the regulatory license of a business or person licensed above after a written complaint has been denied by the department. The administrative appeal under this chapter shall be conducted according to procedures of municipal codeChapter 2.13 BMC. SECTION 7. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 11.02.310 relating to right-of- way use permits is amended to read as follows: 11.02.310 Appeals. An applicant whose application has been denied or permittee whose permit has been revoked pursuant to this chapter must first request the Director to reconsider or reverse the decision. If the Director denies the request, the applicant or permittee may appeal the decision to the Ci~Administrative Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC~. SECTION& Bremerton Municipal Code Section 17.04.070 relating to uniform building codes is amended to read as follows: 17.04.070 Appeals Be. ard~. Appeals of administrative determinations applying the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, U'nifonn Fire Code, Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings and the Bremerton Housing Code shall be heard by the Administrative Heating Examiner, decir, ion shall be finalpursuant to Chapter 2.13 iBMC. SECTIONg. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 18.01.100 relating to the Uniform Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 18.01.100 Appeals Boards. Appeals of administrative determinations appl_,,dng the Uniform Fire Code, City of Bremerton Fire Sprinkler Code, City of Bremerton Fire Alarm Code and City of Bremerton False Fire Alarm Code shall be heard by the Administrative Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 SECTIONlO. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 20.04.100 relating to short subdivisions and plats is amended to read as follows: 13 Administrative Hearing Examiner '77 20.04.100 Procedure Appeal to Administrative Hearings Examiner. Any per-so, applicant aggrieved by the decision of the planning director may request a reviewan appeal of that decision, t~o the Administrative Hearing Examiner. Such mquestappeal must be in writing on a form to be provided by the City and delivered to the Planning Department, with the applicable appeal fee, within five (5) working days from the date of the Planning Director's Decision. Such appeal shall be heard by the Administrative Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 ~Mc~ .... a~,. ~ ............ .~ ....... ~-,~*,~;,,~,~a c,~,- affmgs-of ...... ~;';~"~ .... permits. SECTIONll. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.040 relating to land use decisions is amended to read as follows: 21.02.040 Basis for Discretionary Decisions. Goals, policies and objectives contained in the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan and other adopted documents that have been incorporated into this code by reference, shall be used for guidance by City staff, Lh~_Ad.mi~.~j_s;.ti!:.a_;[i.3;~,...!!~.~rj.!.).g_g,,:~.un.j,_~;~_.~r,_~l~ P4anni.ng~-omn'fis'~;:io~, and the City Council when processing applications and making discretionary land use decisions. SECTION 12. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.060 relating to zoning of annexed properties is amended to read as follows: 21.02.060 Zoning Upon Annexation If annexed property has not previously received a zoning designation as part of comprehensive planning under RCW 35.13.177 and 178, the annexed property shall be administratively assigned provisional zoning under the City designation most similar to the former County zoning. A P4amm~g-.Co~m.mssion..~.hearing to review provisional zoning shall be conducted bv the Plmming Commission or Administrative hearing examiner, as applicable, within sixty (60) days under procedures for rezone petition at no cost to the property owner. SECTION 13. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.070 entitled "Definitions" is hereby amended by adding a definition for Administrative Hearing Examiner to be inserted in said section in alphabetical order and to read as follows: 14 Administrative Hearing Examiner AiDMINISTRATIVE HEARING EXAMINER. A person appointed pursuant: to Chapter' 2.13 BMC to review and interpret land us remtlations: conduct hearings, render decisions, and mak'e recommendations on land use applications: hear appeals from administrative orders, recommendations, l~ermits, decisions or dete___.__m~inations made by~ official as set forth in this Chapter; and to review and hear other matters as provided for in the Brem.erton Municipal Code and other ordinm~ces. The term "administrative hearing examiner" shall likewise include the examiner pro tern. As used in this Chapter, "Administrative Hearing Examiner" shall not mean the Municipal Court Hearing Examiner established pursuant to Chapter 2.62 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. SECTION 14. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.070 entitled "Definitions" is hereby amended by amending the definition of Special Use Permit to read as follows: SPECIAL USE PERMIT. A permit which must be acquired before a land use that is listed in the Land Use Tables as "SUP", and not permitted "outright", can be constructed or approved in those zones. Some uses that are not listed at all in the Land Use Tables may be approved by "*'~ m .... ;~,, r- .... ;,,,4~,~ through the SLIP process. SECTION 15. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.150 relating to unlisted uses is amended to read as follows: Section 21.02.150 UNLISTED USES. (a) Any land use that is NOT mentioned in Figure 120 or Figure 140 shall be considered an "Unlisted Use". (b) If the Unlisted Use is clearly similar to a use that is listed in Figure 120 or Figure 140, the Director may make a written administrative determination as to which zone(s) and through which approval process the Unlisted Use may be permitted. (c) If the Director finds no similar uses already listed, finds the proposed use to be sensitive or controversial, finds the use to have potentially adverse impacts, or is unable to arrive at a clear administrative determination, the requested use shall be considered for approval by the,m,,,,~,,,~;"",s Commi~sie, nAdministrative Hearim4 Examiner through the Special Use Permit process. 15 7 ~ Administrative Hearing Examiner SECTION 16. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.160 relating to front yards is amended to read as follows: Section 21.02.160 FRONT YARDS. (a) Through Lots: Through lots have two (2) front property lines with a front yard on each of two parallel or approximately parallel streets. (1) Each front yard shall be subject to the front yard setback requirements of its zone. (2) The Director may grant an Ac~ r.., ..... ~;~,~ m ,~.~ ~;.~.m. ~,~**.~ ..... ,,~t ............ ; ....... " by ~,~;~m;~. desi.~mate_ one street frontage a Rear Lot Line, provided the following are tree: i. More than one contiguous lot is involved, unless the entire frontage consists of one property; ii. The majority of the lots and/or structures within the block or other area being considered are clearly oriented in a similar direction away from the side being considered for designation as the Rear Lot Line. (3) Orientation of the lot or structure shall be considered and the portion of a lot facing views or waterfront may be considered the parcel's Front Lot Line, in which case the property's only street frontage could be designated its "rear". (4) ,',* ...... h ......... ,;~ ~ ...... . ~ ...... . ....... ;,, ............ ~ .... ~ .... .~ owners .......j .................... j ....... 5 ~,,-,t .... ~ owners ........ ~t shall be ta,k~m-m ........... s ...................... } ...... c-hea,,,,~ pr:or t ........................ decision. (b) Comer Lots: All lot lines abutting public streets are considered to be front lot lines and front yard setbacks shall apply. A comer lot having frontage on more than one street will have more than one front yard area, the depths of which wi]] be deternfined by the front setback requirement of that zoning district. Refer to the illustrations in Figure 070(c) for further clarification. 16 ~C) Administrative Hearing Examiner (c) Intrusions into Required Setbacks: Structures shall abide by the required front yard setbacks except as follows: (1) Eaves, cornices, awnings, bay windows, architectural appendages, fireplaces, chimneys and permitted signs may project not more than two (2) feet into the front yard setback; (2) Front yard setback requirements shall not apply to decks, platforms, and porches that do not exceed thirty inches (30") in height above the finished grade; except that raised decks, high or enclosed porches, balconies or similar architectural appendages that extend more than thirty inches (30") above finished grade may project not more than six feet (6') into the front yard setback. (3) Fences, free-standing walls, steps, walks, and driveways. SECTION 17. Bremerton Municipal Code Section21.02.300 relating to mineral resource extraction provisions is amended to read as follows: Section 21.02.300 MINERAL RESOURCE EXTRACTION PROVISIONS. (a) Purpose: (1) To preserve opportunities for mineral extraction by establishing performance standards to mitigate the impact of such uses. (2) To protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the public by establishing performance standards for the operation of extractive industries and for the appropriate reclamation of the site. (b) Allowable Location of Mineral Extraction: The removal for purposes of soil, sand, gravel, quarried stone, or ore may be allowed in any zoning district by a special use permit. (c) Review for Special Use Permit: In addition to standard application requirements, the owner or agent of the quarry shall submit to the Planning Department copies of all documents submitted to the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources. (d) Performance Standards: (1) A non-climbable fence, a minimum of eight (8) feet in height, shall be installed around any mineral extraction site and all of its accessory operations. 17 ~ [ Administrative Hearing Examiner (2) When property is adjacent to developed residential property, streams, lakes, or public rights-of-way, a view-obstructing screen of vegetation at least four (4) feet in height at planting and attaining not less than eight (8) feet in height within three years shall be planted. When conditions of soil and terrain make landscaping impractical, a fence eight (8) feet or wall providing a complete visual barrier shall be installed. (3) Upon termination of quarrying operations at any pit that exceeds a depth of five (5) feet, either the pit shall be back filled to a minimum slope of one (1) foot vertical, to one (1) foot horizontal; or a non-climbable eight (8) foot fence shall be erected and maintained around the t. Planning .................... : ,,.,~ ............. ~ .... s ,~: ,ac r ............. n of' (4) Required minimum distance from adjacent property that is developed shall be in accordance with the following: Parks, Recreational, Facilities, Residential, Commercial, or Environmentally Industrial Sensitive Lands Land Uses To structural 100 feet 20 feet edge of pit, excavation, or stockpiling of materials. To crushing 300 feet 200 feet of rock, processing of stone, gravel or minerals. To any Determined 400 feet blasting, on a case by case basis. 18 ~.~ Administrative Hearing Examiner (5) When a pit exceeds a depth of twenty (20) feet, all dense undergrowth shall be removed from the soil cover for a distance of fifty (50) feet from the edge of the pit. (6) Neither smoke, dust, dirt, fly ash, other airborne particulate matter, toxic or odorous gasses, liquid or solids shall be emitted in quantities from a quarry site as to adversely affect adjacent property. (7) BMC 6.32 shall be observed. (8.) A landscaping and site reclan~ation plan shall be required to restore the site after quarrying activities are completed. SECTION 18. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.330(f) relating to prohibited signs is amended to read as follows: (f) Prohibited Signs: The following signs are prohibited within the City limits of Bremerton and shall be subject to removal through amortization or other means: (1) Strobe lights and signs containing strobe lights or any other flashing, moving or animated features that are visible beyond any property line. Readerboard or message center signs that change copy no more frequently than two second intervals, and time/temperature signs are exempt from this provision. (2) Signs placed or painted on any motor vehicle or trailer that is not operable and routinely used to transport or provide the goods or services being advertised, or that is parked with the primary purpose of providing a sign that would not otherwise be allowed. (3) Any private sign placed within a public right-of-way, on a public sidewalk, or overhanging a public right-of-way; except that signs overhanging a public sidewalk may be permitted if there is a minimum of eight feet of vertical clearance between the sidewalk and bottom of the sign. (Publicly-owned or installed signs not included). (4) Any sign that is determined by Commis.~i.,~n. ar City Co'dn¢i4 the City Engineer to be a hazard to public safety due to its design, materials, physical condition, or placement. (5) Signs painted, attached to, or otherwise supported by rock formations, utility poles, trees, or other plant materials. 19 /~,~ Administrative Hearing Examiner (6) Bench signs, when installed within the public right-of way. When on private property, the size of a bench sign will be counted toward the total allowable sign area. (7) Portable signs within any public right-of-way, and when obstructing a pedestrian walkway, bikeway, or driveway on private property. SECTION 19. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.350 relating to PUD applications is amended to read as follows: 21.02.350 Outline of the PUD Process A PUD application is reviewed by the City in a two-part process; review of a preliminary plan, followed by review of a final plan. The purpose of this process is to minimize development costs prior to a City determination of the acceptability of the preliminary plan for a PUD. (a) Part I: The steps involved in the Preliminary Plan review are: (1) City staff and applicant discuss concept at pre- application conference. (2) City staff conducts neighborhood meeting, if required by the Director, to discuss the concept plan. (3) Applicant submits Preliminary PUD application. (4) City staff conducts technical review of the proposed PUD plan and prepares staff report. (5) ~,~.~2tg~j.g.p.t_'._.reviews the proposals, as presented in the staff report and accompanying d~cumentati~n-a-!~:..d.-.~[!:~}~t~.~.~.9-p~[!-p~r.~!~¢~s-i~)~...p~.J~2.!.?~...J.~4.rj..Bg pursuant to Chap[er 2.13 BMC.: (6) P&mm~g Examiner makes recommendation for City Council action. (7) City Council hea4}~.~a~ebmakes c2_[p.5:.e_d_!:~S2rg,.decision on the Preliminary PUD Plan. (b) Part II: The steps involved in the Final Plan review are: (1) Applicant submits Final PUD application. (2) Director takes action on the Final Plan. 20 ,~ Administrative Hearing Examiner (3) Plans that include a rezone, combination of zones, subdivision, or other matters that require City Council approval will go to the City Council for final action consistent with the initial PUD decision. (4) Record with Kitsap County Auditor. SECTION20. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.390(c) relating to PUD applications is amended to read as follows: (c) No response within the given time frame, when a response is necessary, may delay scheduling of the public meeting on the application before the Gea~si~Administrative Hearing Examiner. SECTION21. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.400 relating to PUD applications is amended to read as follows: 21.02.400 tq~mning.-(?:ommissionAdministrative Hearing Examiner ] Recommendation After technical review of the proposal, the }~ta.m}it-t~-4?,m-u~:issiot~ Administrative i--learinv: Examiner shall conduct all open record public hear:in< to consider the Prelimlnarv P[..D and any subdivision, rezone, combination of zones, or other matters that require Council .~p~¢rovat. A ~2:er i2~[~_~.:[!.:.5._~!:LSi.d_~!:i~i[kZi!,_shall-reco~end(~g City Council approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the Prelimin~ P~ proposal. ::Fh;~¢-hea.~m?shal;t4~-..adve~fised-.m...ae-eo:~,da.~,ee-.~vifh SECTION 22. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.410 relating to PUD applications is amended to read as follows: 21.02.410 City Council Action .......................... ~-~- ............ After eei:~dtt, etm.S.+he,.ffu.~ii.e4~eat4,t~g-tmd,..considefing the recommendations of the ~:~.am~m?~mm~i:~.n~;:~is~ra~t~:?~DL~q~-L~L~L`~)~X~(~i.: the City Council 21 ~.~- Administrative Hearing Examiner shall approve, approve with conditions, deny or remand the Preliminary PUD plan. Written Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law shall support the Council's decision. 02e) Action on the Preliminary PUD Plan shall include the overall layout, circulation, and densities as a guide to preparation of the Final Plan which will be processed administratively. SECTION 23. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.420 relating to PUD applications is amended to read as follows: 21.02.420 Appeal to Superior Court Any party of record may ~appeal~ the City Council's decision to Superior e(2!) ' Court within twenty~on calendar days of the Council's decision-., ......... ,.......,..,......~ ........... ...,.,;*~' .~.,..,.. ........ ~ ...... ~ ........ r r2~, 4c' 21.02.930. SECTION24. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.450 relating to PUD applications is amended to read as follows: 21.02.450 Appeal of Director's Determination. (a) Any party of record may appeal to the Administrative Hearin~ Examiner pursuam to Chapter 2.13 BMC, the determination of the Director that the Final PLrD Pian, including any minor amendments, is not in conformance with the Preliminary Plan that was approved by the City Council. Written notice of appeal must be filed w-Within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Director's determination, a ....;~ ..... ~; .... c ...... ~ ,,, ~,,~ (b) The hearing examiner shall uphold or reverse the Director's determination. The decision of the hearing examiner shall be final. The Director's determination of lack of substantial conformance, or subsequent ratification of that determination by the hearing examiner shall require the PUD applicant to bring the Final Plan into substantial conformance with the Preliminary Plan, or submit a new Preliminary Plan. SECTION 25. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.490(d) relating to open space development standards is amended to read as follows: (d) Open Space: 22 Administrative Hearing Examiner (1) A minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of the total area of a PUD shall be dedicated as common open space. Open space shall be provided for active as well as passive recreational activities, and for the preservation of existing natural site amenities whenever possible. Open space shall not include: i. Streets, alleys, and other rights-of-way. ii. Vehicular drives, parking, loading and storage areas. iii. Required buffering and landscaping for parking areas; nor iv. Perimeter setback areas of the PUD project. v. Interior setbacks that may be required to separate buildings or that apply to buildings on individual lots within the PUD. vi. Small remnants of land that are not physically, visually, or functionally related to the project's overall open space plan. (2) Open space and supporting facilities intended for recreational use shall be designed and located to not adversely impact surrounding land uses, especially existing residential uses. (3) Open space and its intended uses shall be clearly designated on the site plan. At least two-thirds of the open space area shall be suitable for active recreational purposes. The City will base its acceptance of these areas on their dimensions, useability, location, slope, and physical improvements. Tot lots, playgrounds, picnic areas, sports courts, and open grassy multi-purpose fields are examples of active open space areas, whereas a steep slope natural area traversed by a hiking trail might be considered partially active but mostly passive. (4) The locations of natural site amenities shall be considered when planning for open space, siting buildings and other structures, routing underground services, and determining finished grade levels and areas to be paved. Natural amenities might include rock out-croppings, ravines, groves of trees, ponds or streams. Up to one-third (1/3) of property intended to satisfy the open space requirement can be unsuitable for recreational purposes if consisting of existing natural site amenities. (5) When a PUD is constructed in phases, common open space shall not be less than fifteen percent (15%) of the total area developed in each phase and must be 23 On Administrative Hearing Examiner completed in accordance with approved specifications at the time of completion of each phase of the PUD. (6) Provisions shall be made for the perpetual maintenance of all common open space areas. (7) The total requirement for active open space may be reduced by no more than twenty-five percent (25%) through the provision of a recreation building, swimming pool, or similar major recreational facility that, in t~le opinion o' ' ~, · ' 'o~,~ will better provide for the needs of the residents without significantly detracting from the project's appearance or environmental quality. SECTION26. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.700(b) relating to landscaping of one or two-unit developments is amended to read as follows: (b) No landscaping provisions are required for any residential development consisting of one- or two-unit structures, except by PUD, special u. se permit or plans-in-lieu of the under ng zoning requirements ....... SECTION 27. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.830(b) relating to amortization of non-conforming uses is amended to read as follows: (b) Initiation of Amortization: (1) An amortization action may be initiated by the Director of Community Development ~'f ...... m .... ; .... r, ..... ~L-,,~ ...... .~,~ ,--:+., c,,~. .... a ~,,.~ , ~,~,.; ............ ~ ......................... ; .............. approved bv the Administrative Hearing Examiner. (2) The City Council shall approve a proposed amortization action prior to any notification or other action. SECTION 28. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.830(f) relating to appeals of the Directors decision regarding non-conforming uses is amended to read as follows: (f) Appeal of Director' s Determination: 24 8 ~ Administrative Hearing Examiner (1) An appeal to o.__f the Director's determination may be made to the [~l;~n~4/Vommissio~}ld_lBj_n_i.52[!g.j_}l_}ig.;_~1;j!!g_!":_iS..~!Bl:j_!)_e_r pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMCSm ..... ~ ......... :,h ,h ........ , ........ ~ ......... +~4 .... q ;~ r~xar~ o ~ rio a~t~ within fourteen (14) days of issuance of the Directors decision. (2) The -¢-[aan:h~g-l~mu~ssio.~:~Adminisu'ative }.~tearing Examiner shall sustain the decision of the Director ii following a public hearing, it dete~ines that one or both of the following conditions apply: (i) That the nature of thc use is such that it can be altered or te~inated so that the prope~y c~ be used in confo~ance with the uses pe~itted in the zone in which it is located; or (ii) That the nonconfo~ing use is dethmental to the public health or safe~, or is a public nuisance. SECTION29. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.840 relating to Type [ land use applications is amended to read as follows: (a) Actions: The following permits and approvals involve direct application of adopted codes and standards with many of the decisions made ¢umediat~yadministratively at the customer counter. Pursuant to RCW 36.70B 140, the City has determined that these permits and approvals present special circumstances that ~varrant a different review process, as described in subsection (b) herein and. therefore, am. excluded fi'om project permit review under Chapter 36.70B RCW. This different review process applies only when the following permits and approvals are either categorically exempt or where environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permit applications. The 'decisions are administra'~ive ........................... : ~ ............ s ......................... ~ ............. of this section. .......... s ...... ~lgn penmts. (deleted) (2) Home occupation.! (*deleted) (3) Land uses permitted outfight. Boundary line adjustment.*: {6-)(5) _Minor amendment to approved PUD. 25 Administrative Hearing Examiner (-7)(6) Minor amendments to other permits. rS) 7(!L_Temporary emergency wetland or stream permits.'-* (*deleted) f9-)(8) 8t~PA exempt:* --Clearing less than 2 acres. (9) Grading less than 100 cu. yds. (10) Landscape plan. (11) Site Plan Review. (12) Recreational vehicle 90-day permit. (b) Review Procedure: The above permits and approvals are not subject to the requirements for d.etem~ination of completeness, consolidated perngit processing, notice of decision, and 120 day processing requirements as set tbrth in BMC 21.02.870 relating to general processing procedm'es, BMC 21.02.895 relating to notice, and Chapter 36.70B RCW. * A botmdak'y lin:¢ adjustment is not a land use decision under this Chapter but is only reviewed in. conjunction xvith a related land use application. (c) ,,,~'~ --Final decision: The Director's decision shall be final. (d) ~'"w, Appeal: Type I decisions may be appealed to the Administrative Heating Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the decision. The hearing examiner will conduct an open record appeal heating. (See Figure 840). SECTION30. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.845(a) relating to Type II land use applications is amended to read as follows: (a) Actions: The following permits and approvals require limited public notice. Pre-decision comments are encouraged and the Director may approve with conditions, or deny the request. (1) Short Subdivision (short plat). (2) SEPA Determination. (3) Wetland or stream assessment. (4) Wetland or stream development permit. 26 Administrative Hearing Examiner (6) Administrative Special Use Permit. "7 '" . .' · ~ ,~..:~.~.; ,.~ I 'L; ~ ..... ' (.Z$) Desi~ Review. (exempt ~om 120 day processing requirement) (5.9) Plan or Code ~te~retmion. ~-[0) Minor alteration of approved plat. SECTIONS1. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.845(d) relating to Type II land use applications is amended to read as follows: (d) Appeal: Type II decisions may be appealed to the Administrative Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2. l 3 BMC within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of decision. The hearing examiner will conduct an open record appeal hearing. SECTION 32. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.850 is hereby repealed in its entirety and there is hereby created a new section 21.02.850 of the Bremerton Municipal Code relating to Type 1II land use applications, to read as follows: · · 21.02.850 Type H! Administrative Hearin~ Examiner Decisions. (a) Actions: The following actions may' be approved, approved with conditions, or denied, or remanded by the Administrative Hearing Examiner pm'suant to Chapter 2.[3 BMC following an open record public hearing, unless noted otherwise. ( 1 ) Final Subdivision Plat. (2) Variance. (3) Non-administrative Special Use Permit. (:e) Decision Format: Tvp_e III decisions shall be made in writing Supported bY findings or' fact zmd conclusions of law. (t) Final Decision: Type III decisions are made bv the Administrative Hearint~ Examiner :md are final when issued for purposes of appeal. (g) Appeal: T~>e [I1 decisions ma,v be appealed [o Super/or Court within the twenty-one (21) calendar days ~bllowina the date of issuance of the decision. 27 o~ Administrative Hearing Examiner /! SECTIONS3. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.855 is hereby repealed in its entirety and there is hereby created a new section 21.02.855 relating to Type IV land use applications, to read as follows: 21.02.855 Type IV City, Council Decisions. (a) Actions: The following actions maybe approved, approved with conditions, denied, or remanded by the City Council t'ollowing an open record pre-decision public hearing by the Administrative Hearin~ Exmniner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC~ unless noted otherwise. Public notice is required for T.ype IV actions. Recommendations will be provided by the Administrative HemSn~ Examiner to the City Council following a public hearing. Staff may conduct additional neighborhood meetings when required or when otherwise warranted bv the Director for public inlbrmation or data gathering purposes. An asterisk (*) denotes actions that are exempt from the 120-day permit processing requirement. (1) Preliminary Subdivision Plat. (2) Vacation of existin, g subdivision. (3) Planned Unit Development (PUT)): (4) Major amendment to a PUD. (5) Binding Site Plan. (6) Rezone for specific properties or small area. (7) Developm. ent Agreement. * (b) Decision Format: Type IV decisions shall be made by motion, resolution, ordinance, or other form.: appropriate to that particular decision and suitable fbr recording. (lc) Final Decision: Type IV decisions are made by the City Council ibllowing the Administrative Hearint Examiner's open pubic hearing and are final when issued for purposes of appeal. (d) Appeal: Type IV decisions may be appealed to Superior Court within the twenty-one (21) calendar day appeal period, or on the effective date of the ordinance, whichever is lomzer. 28 O~ Administrative Hearing Examiner SECTION34. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.860 relating to shoreline permits is hereby recodified as 21.04.100 BMC and is further amended to read as follows: Section 21.02.86004.100 Shoreline Decisions. (a) Actions: The following are subject to the requirements of Bremerton's Shoreline Master Program but shall be decided within 120 days. Recommendations and hearings shall be conducted as described in the "Permit Processing" table that follows. (1) Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (2) Shoreline Conditional Use Permit (3) Shoreline Variance (4) Shoreline Permit Revisions (5) Shoreline Master Program Amendments (b) Decision Format: Completion of a prepared form or statement of findings, conclusions and the decision of the approving body. Adoption of and amendments to the Shoreline Master Program shall be made by ordinance. (c) Final Decisions: (1) Substantial Development Permits and amendments to existing permits are decided administratively, in the same manner as other Type II permits. (2) Conditional Use Permits and Variances are decided by the Planning Commission and may be approved, rejected, or modified by the Department of Ecology. A neighborhood meeting or study session is optional. (3) All Shoreline Permit decisions must be submitted simultaneously to the applicant, the Department of Ecology (DOE), and to the attorney general. DOE may approve or disapprove the permit. (4) Shoreline Master Program Amendments are decided by the City Council and may be approved, rejected, or modified by the Department of Ecology. (d) Appeals: An appeal of the local shoreline permit decision may be filed with the Administrative Hearing Examiner ~rs~ pursum~t to Chapter 2.13 BMC as provided herein, with a second appeal to the Shoreline Hearings Board (SHB), or may be filed directly with the SHB. 29 D-~ Administrative Hearing Examiner 7D (1) Decisions on Substantial Development Permits may be appealed to the Administrative Hearing Examiner within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of the decision, and considered in an open record appeal hearing, or (2) Those decisions listed in (d)(1) above or the Administrative Hearing Examiner decisions on appeals of earlier decisions, may be appealed to the Shoreline Heatings Board by filing a Petition for Review within twenty-one (21) calendar days of the date of the Department of Ecology's review and decision. (3) The decision of the Department of Ecology pertaining to the adoption of, or amendment to, the Shoreline Master Program may be appealed to the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearing Board per RCW 36.70A.250 through 320. (4) Appeals to the heating examiner shall be decided within (30) thirty calendar days of the filing date. Appeals to the Shoreline Hearings Board will be decided within 180 calendar days. SECTION 35. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.870(h) relating to processing of land use applications is amended to read as follows: '~: (h) Notice of Application: This notice shall be issued for Type ~I_..-a~eMII anti IV project permit applications, within 14 days of the Determination of Completeness. It is not required for Type I or P,~ applications, nor for other exempt project permits. (See ~u SECTION 36. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.870(i) relating to processing of land use applications is amended to read as follows: (i) Public Meeting: If not specifically required for a particular permit, the Director may initiate a public meeting to be conducted by City staff, the G~m~m:~ssk~.~``~-[[~.~i-~Lr~4~i-¥~_.~jX`a-!~i~LL~`..[~.*~!~j.B.~.~ neighborhood organization, or other appropriate body. SECTION 37. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.870(i)(c) relating to processing of land use applications is amended to read as follows: (c) Notice: Shall be posted in accordance with ?i~ure 895(a)Sectkm 2 ! .',)2.905ib){ 33. 30 Od Administrative Hearing Examiner SECTION 3& Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.870(k) relating to processing of land use applications is amended to read as follows: (k) Notice of Public Hearing: Notice for all applications that require a public hearing and all appeals that will be heard in an open record heating shall be given public notice at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing, as provided in Figure 895(a)Sectio~ SECTION 39. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.880 relating to public heatings is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION 40. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.890(a) relating to decisions on land use applications is amended to read as follows: (a) Final Decision on all Type t;-, II, and III, mid iV decisions shall be made within 120 days of the City's acceptance of a complete application, m~less otherwise exemp/ed [!2o_...n_!2b.~__L~.[.!...~_l[1k:_r~sJs_(rgfi!~fi!~: (Issuance of a Determination of Completeness is not necessary for Type I applications.) SECTION 41. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.890(b)(1) relating to decisions on land use application is amended to read as follow: (1) A period during which the applicant has been requested to correct plans, perform required studies, or provide additional information. The clock stops at the time the applicant is notified of the requests and resumes when the request has been satisfied,-pe~ SECTION 42. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.900(e)(2) relating to development agreements is amended to read as follows: (2) A development agreement shall be approved as a Type .!XI..[.t: decision by the City Council following an open record public hearing, by the Adrui~fisrl:a~ivc [-.-tearin~ Examiner. 31 ~,.~ Administrative Hearing Examiner /.~ SECTION 43. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.905(c) relating to special use permits is amended to read as follows: (c) Procedure: ^ ,. o} ...................... ~ ..........In ................ ,.Mt e Administrative SLIP does not require a public hearing and is processed as a Type II application. A SUP that may have significant impacts beyond the immediate site, that is of neighborhood or community-wide interest, or that may be of a sensitive or controversial nature, may be classified a Non-administrative SUP by the Director and processed as a Type 1II application. The Director may convert a Type II SUP application to a Type III SUP application at any time prior to a decision on the application. SECTION 44. Bremerton Mmticipal Code Section 21.02.910(c) relating to variance is amended to read as follows: (c) Procedure: A Variance is processed as a Typ.~ I[I decision~ XECTION 45. Breme~on Municipal Code Section 21.02.9~ 5 relating to special exception from development regulations is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION 46. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.920(b) relating to rezones is amended to read as follows: (b) Applicant: The following may initiate a Rezone: (1) Private party: The owners, or their designated agents, representing at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the assessed valuation of the area proposed for rezoning. (2) City: The Bremerton Planning Commission or ..... ~ ......... t may initiate an area-wide P~rezone b'pon } ...... s., of a ....................... SECTION 47. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.920(c) relating to rezones is amended to read as follows: 32 Administrative Hearing Examiner (c) Procedure: (-D-----A single-parcel or small area rezone is a quasi-judicial action that is processed a_~..._a__Ts'p.~J_'sZ.3Le.c_i_aj.gA:~ pursuant to Section 21,02.855. in accordmme with the SECTION 48. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.925(a) relating to development regulation amendments is amended to read as follows: (a) Authority: The City Council may approve by passage of an ordinance, a change to the text of any City of Bremerton development regulation, including the Zoning Ordinance, large area amendments to the Zoning Map, Shoreline Master Program, Sensitive Areas Ordinance, and others. These are ~ legislative decisions and exempt from the processing, timing, and other requirements for quasi-judicial permits. SECTION 49. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.925(b) relating to development regulation amendments is amended to read as follows: (b) Applicant: ~.~.~ r~;,., r, .... ;~ ~ ....... ;_,, r~ ...... ;,.,.; .... .~ ........ City ,1 ....... + ..... ,,, agency, o ........... . ,~,~ ........... ~ ~ ~,~,=.a,,v interested party may initiate an amendment to a development regulation: SECTION $0. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.930(f')(3) relating to site plan reviews is amended to read as follows: (3) An administrative decision on a Site Plan may be appealed to the -Pqe~f4t~-tm~.iemAdmimstrative Nearin~ Examiner pursum~t to Chapter 2.13 BMC. Administrative Hearing Examiner SECTION 51. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.935(a) relating to appeals is amended to read as follows: (a) Finality of Decision: (t) Those land use and development decisions that are subject to a-dministrati;'z appeal shall become final unless an appeal is filed within the es_~ate met0 e e..vv ........... .,.,, ~.-~/ ....j ............ . .......... , ...... , SECTION 52. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.935(b) relating to appeals is amended to read as follows: · wv ......... Appeal of Decisions: C Unless othemvise provided, appeals to the Administrative Hearing Examiner must be filed within fomxeen (14) calendar days of the administrative decision and appeals to Supehor Com~ must be filed within ~'enty-one (21) calendar days of the decision oE the Administrative Heahng Examiner or the City Council as applicable. SECTION 53. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.935(c) relating to appeals is amended to read as follows: (c) r~ ; ..... co ....... ~. · I .................... Standing ,to Appeal: 34 ~,~ Administrative Hearing Examiner _(1) Except for T.vpe I decisions, oOnly parties of record mayhave standing to initiate an appeal to **'~ ~,,,,4 .... ~z .... :,~ l~r .......... ~ m ........... s ........... ~. ~jwo !~,~ .~. P~ies of record shall include: ~(i) The applic~t. ~.(ii)._~yone who p~icipated in a public meeting on the application. ~~yone who submitted ~tten co~ents conce~ng the application (excluding persons who have only si~ed petitions or mechmcally produced fo~ le~ers). (2) Only applic~ts of l~d use applications have standing to appeal T~e I decisions on such applications. SECTION 54. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.935(d) relating to appeals is amended to read as follows: (d) ~r~.~ ,~ ~n~ Filin~ an Am~eal: An ........~ *~ ~'~ ~ '~';-~; ..... ~;'~ ~'~;'~ ~must be delivered to and received by the D~mment of Co--unity Development (DCD) by mail, personal delivew, or by F~ before 5:00 PM on ~e l~t business day of the appeal period. (see: Computation of Time, section (0 below). SECTION 55. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.945(c)(2) relating to violations of the Zoning Code is amended to read as follows: (2) An order shall be obeyed immediately, notwithstanding the filing of an appeal to hearing examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC must be filed within tbm~een calendm' days following posting of the cease and desist order or as otherwise stated :in the order. SECTION 56. Bremerton Municipal Code Sections 21.02.945(d) relating to violations of the Zoning Code is amended to read as follows: 35 c2o Administrative Hearing Examiner i/ (d) Revocation: (1) A revocation action may be initiated by the Director of Community Development_ P, provided, final action shall not be taken by the Director of Community Development until after a public hearing is held. (2) The Administrative Hearing Examiner may revoke a variance, administrative variance, special use permit or administrative special use permit. SECTION 57. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.12.200(e) relating to SEPA substantive authority is amended to read as follows: (e) Applications not requiring a final decision by the City_Council that are conditioned or denied on the basis of SEPA by a nonelected official, shall be appealable to the Administrative Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC. Such appeal may be perfected by the appellant by giving notice to the responsible official within ten (10) days of the decision being appealed. The hearing before the Hearing Examiner shall be an open record appeal. However the decision of the SEPA Official shall be presumed correct. SECTION 58. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.22.140(a)(2)(ii)(3)(B)(ii) relating to wetlands is amended as follows: (ii) The P lann/%~m~i pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC issues a decision (permit) specifying conditions of approval, and SECTION 59. Bremerton Municipal Code Sections 2.12.090 through 2.12.140 relating to comprehensive plans are hereby recodified as Chapter 21.06 of the Bremerton Municipal Code and amended as follows: Chapter 21.06 COMPREHENSIVE PLANS 2-A-24)9021.06.010 Powe."~ And Duties Comprehensive Plans - Generally. The planning commission may recommend to the council the adoption or preparation of coordinated comprehensive plans for the physical development of the municipality. For this purpose, the council in such measure as is deemed reasonably necessary or required in the interest of health, safety, morals and general welfare, upon recommendation by the planning 36 ~/0D Administrative Hearing Examiner commission, by general ordinance or resolution, may regulate and restrict the location and use of buildings, structures, and land for residences, trade, industrial, and other purposes; height, number of stories, size, construction and design of buildings and other structures; the size of yards, courts and other open spaces on the lot or tract; the density of population; the setback of buildings along highways, parks, or public water frontages; and the subdivision and development of land; and may encourage and protect access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The planning commission may recommend to the council the adoption of coordinated comprehensive planning objectives and regulations which implement these objectives to protect environmental resources, sensitive environmental areas, and the shorelines of the city. The planning commission may also propose to the council the adoption of a plan for the disposal of hazardous waste. 2.12.10021.06.020 Comprehensive Plan - Objectives. All regulations shall be worked out as parts of a comprehensive plan or plans which provide for the physical and other generally advantageous development of the community. Coordinated comprehensive planning objectives shall include encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality, lessening traffic congestion and accidents, securing safety from fire, providing adequate light and air, preventing overcrowding of land, avoiding undue concentration of population, promoting a coordinated development of the unbuilt areas in the city, encouraging the formation of neighborhood or community units within the community, securing an appropriate allotment of land area in new developments for all the requirements of community life, conserving and restoring natural beauty and other natural resources, encouraging and protecting access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems, and facilitating the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, and other public uses and requirements, including protection of the quantity and quality of groundwater used for public water supplies. 2.12.11021.06.030 Comprehensive Plan - Recommendations Of Commission. The commission may recommend to the city council the adoption of the comprehensive plan as a whole or may recommend parts of the plan by successive recommendations; the parts corresponding with the geographic or political sections, divisions, or subdivisions of the municipality or with functional subdivisions of the subject matter of the plan. It may also prepare and recommend any amendment or extension or addition to the plan. Before the recommendation of the initial comprehensive plan to the municipality, the planning commission shall hold at least 37 /0 ] Administrative Hearing Examiner two public hearings, giving notice of the time and place by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality. A copy of the ordinance or resolution adopting the plan or any amendment, duly certified as a true copy by the clerk of the municipality, shall be filed with the county auditor. A certified copy of any map or plat referred to or adopted by the ordinance or resolution shall also be filed with the county auditor. 2.12.12021.06.040 Restrictive Districts. The planning commission may recommend to the city council that the municipality be divided into districts in order to further any of the articulated public welfare zoning objectives set out in this chapter. The planning commission may also establish official maps or development plans for the whole or any portion of the municipality as may be deemed best suited to carry out the purposes of this chapter. Within such districts, the commission may regulate and restrict the erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair or use of buildings, structures, or land. ...... o,,21.06.050 Comprehensive Plan - Amendments, Supplementations Or Modifications. (a) The planning commission may propose amendments, supplementations or modifications of the comprehensive plan or planning regulations to the council. The planning commission should first conduct a heating pertaining to the proposal. (b) The planning commission may consider proposed amendments, supplementations or modifications of the comprehensive plan or planning regulations. The planning commission should conduct a hearing about such proposals and report its recommendation regarding the proposal to the council within ninety days of the time that the proposed amendments, supplementations or modifications were entertained before the planning commission. The council, pursuant to a public hearing, may affirm, modify, or disaffirm any such recommendation of the planning commission. 24gA4021.06.060 Ratification By Council - Appeal. The planning commission may recommend to the Council the adoption of comprehensive plans and regulations for the physical development of the City. Such reconunendations must be ratified by the Council before the plan or regulation becomes effective. 38 Administrative Hearing Examiner /05 SECTION 60. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02 Appendix Figure 840 is hereby repealed and there is hereby created a new Appendix Figure 840 as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein. SECTION 61. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02 Appendix Figure 895(a) is hereby repealed and there is hereby created a new Appendix Figure 895(a) as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein. SECTION 62. The provisions of this Ordinance shall apply to all applications for which a required hearing has not yet been held as of this Ordinance's effective date. SECTION 63. Severabili~_. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 64. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force ten (10) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. APPROVED by the City Council the day of ,2002 PASSED by the City Council the day of ,2002 CAROL ARENDS, Council President Approved this day of ,2002 CARY BOZEMAN, Mayor 39 /0,.~ Administrative Hearing Examiner ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: KATHLEEN MCCLUSKEY, City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney PUBLISHED the day of ., 2002 EFFECTIVE the day of _, 2002 ORDINANCE NO. R:\LEGAL\OrdinancesXHearing Examiner Ordinance-new.doc 40 / ~'0't Administrative Hearing Examiner EXHIBIT A PERMIT PROCESSING SUMMARY Figure 840 Administrative Hearing Examiner Hearing Examiner City Council DECISIONS Decision Open Hearing and Pre-Decision Closed Record Decision Open Hearing Decision Recommendation Type I Decisions (without notice) -- BMC 21.02.840 · Sign permits * * (on appeal) · Home occupation * * (on appeal) · Land uses permitted outright * * (on appeal) · Boundary line adjustment * * (on appeal) · Minor amendment to approved * * (on appeal) PUD · Minor amendments to other permits * * (on appeal) · Temporary emergency wetland or * * (on appeal) stream permits · Clearing less than 2 acres * * (on appeal) · Grading less than 100 cu. yds. * *(on appeal) · Landscape plan * * (on appeal) · Site Plan review * * (on appeal) · Recreational vehicle 90-day permit * * (on appeal) · Building permits * * (on appeal) Type II Decisions (notice required) BMC 21.02.845 · Short Subdivison * *(on appeal) · SEPA Determination * *(on appeal) · Wetland or stream assessment * *(on appeal) · Wetland or stream development * *(on appeal) permit · Env. Area Determination * *(on appeal) · Administrative Special Use Permit * *(on appeal) · Design Review * *(on appeal) · *(on appeal) · Plan or Code Interpretation * *(on appeal) · Minor alteration of approved plat Type III Decisions BMC 21.02.850 · Final Subdivision Plat * · Variance * · Zoning Special Exemption * · Non-administrative Special Use * Permit Type IV Decisions BMC 21.02.855 · Preliminary Subdivision Plat * * · Vacation of existing subdivision * * · Planned Unit Development * * · Major amendment to a PUD * * · Binding Site Plan · Rezone for specific properties or small area · Development Agreement Title 21 Appendix =NOTICE REQUIREMENTS Z_m. Determination Notice of O DECISIONS of Notice of Open Record Notice of Notice of Notice of --I Completeness Application Public Hearing Decision Appeal Decision Type I Decisions No None No No No No appeals to Type II Decisions Hearing Examiner I'rl © Short Subdivision Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed © Admin. SUP Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed IT! © Minor Plat Amend. Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed Z © Wetland assessment/ Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed --I permit Yes No No Some cases Yes If appealed © SEPA Determination © Env. Area Determin. No No No Yes Yes If appealed ITl Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed © Design Review No No No Yes Yes If appealed © Interpretation Type III Decisions appeals to 03 court © Final Subdiv. Plat Yes Yes Yes Yes No N/A © Variance Yes Yes Yes Yes No N/A © Z.O. Spec. Exception Yes Yes Yes Yes No N/A © Non-admin. SUP Yes Yes Yes Yes No N/A Determination Notice of DECISIONS of Notice of Open Record Notice of Notice of Notice of Z Completeness Application Public Hearing Decision Appeal Decision Type IV Decisions ITl © Rezone Yes Yes Yes No N/A Yes © Develop. Agreement Yes No Yes No N/A Yes © Prelim. Subdiv. Plat Yes Yes Yes No N/A Yes © Binding Site Plan Yes Yes Yes No N/A Yes _l © Vacation of Subdiv. Yes Yes Yes No N/A Yes --- © Planned Unit Dev. Yes Yes Yes No N/A Yes --,....¢ ~" © PUD Major Amend. Yes Yes Yes No N/A Yes :> Z ~ '~ Shoreline Decisions Cf) ~' © Sub. Dev. Permit Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed © Cond. Use Permit Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes If appealed © Variance Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes If appealed © Permit Revision Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed