HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/01/01 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
AUGUST 1, 2001
1. PRE-COUNCIL STUDY SESSION: 5:00 - 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. Change in Staffing Authorization for Parks & Recreation Department; and Budget
Adjustment No. 2001-13 (#AB01-173)
4. CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS
5. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
6. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
7. MAYOR'S REPORT
8. LEGISLATIVE REPORT
9. PUBLIC RECOGNITION - (Comments limited to 3-minutes)
10. NEW BUSINESS
A. Professional Services Contract with McCGAVICK GRAVES Legal Services (#AB01-174) '~'
B. Change Order No. 1 to Glacier Environmental Services, Inc. for Evergreen Park Phase I'T
Park Construction (#AB01-175)
C. Renewal of Parking Services Contact with Diamond Parking, Inc. (#AB01-176)
11. PUBLIC HEARINGS - RESOLUTIONS
A. Resolution No. 2829, Ratifying the Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies (#AB01-177)
. Resolution No. 2830, D~e):lying' ,~ppeal cjf SEPA Determination of Non-significance (DNS)
issued at the request of~p jC~s,.~i~ & Building Department, to amend the
Development Standards~b~-,1~0dlfyi~-g"Open Space Requirements [PL01-0035] (#AB01-
169)
Resolution No. 2831, Denyi,r~Appea~ of~a SF___~A I~termination of Non-significance (DNS)
issued at the request of AIb~t/s~n~, I~c> [,o.,a'l(ll'en~'~ Development Standards by
reducing the Parking Ratio f(~r F~.~r~s a~d'~p~rmarkets [PLO 1-0028] (#AB01-171 )
AGENDA CONTINUED ON BACK ....
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS - ORDINANCES & APPEALS
A. Ordinance No. 4771 (Second Reading), Amending the Comprehensive Plan to include a
new Land Use Policy allowing Front Yard Setbacks of new residential development to
reflect the established setbacks of existing structures along the same street frontage
[PL01-0016] (#AB01-167)
B. Ordinance No. 4772 (Second Reading), Amending the Comprehensive Plan, to include a
new policy to promote the adaptive reuse of public and semi-public buildings [PL01-0010]
(#AB01-168) ¢
/
¢~ ---7 C/Ordinance No. ~~ea~ling), Amending the Zoning Code Text by modifying
'.~)'~ ,-,_,% / Open Space req~ff're~P~n~s~)f,~n~('~evelopment having a total gross area greater than one-
'~ 0.,¥-~' \'~ . ~ acre [PL01-0017]\(#A'I~b1~1¥O'T'~''''
. . .
~,-4~'-~ ~ ~ . Ordinance First Rea , A din t Zonin Code Text b relaxin the arkin ratio
c~'~ / requirements for Fo(~v'Sfor~sl I~l!~liie,~,/and Supermarkets [T#bled for one-week at July
~-~¢¢'-~' 25, 2001 Council Me~tin~#~E~O -~
COUNCIL WILL CONTINUE THE MEETING IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM TO HOLD
INTERVIEWS WITH CANDIDA TEa FOR THE DISTRICT 8 SEA T;
FOLLOWED BY A 20-MINUTE EXECUTIVE SESSION TO "EVALUATE APPLICATIONS FOR
APPOINTMENT" PER RCW CHAPTER 42.30.1 ?O(l)(h).
COUNCIL WILL THEN RETURN TO THE CHAMBERS FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING.
10. NEW BUSINESS (Continued...)
D. Appointment of District 8 Council Member (#AB01-178)
13. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING
OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY
239 4th Street · Bremerton, Washington 98337 · (360) 478-2345 · FAX (360) 478-5161 · E-mail: legal@ci.bremerton.wa.us
August 1, 2001
Mrs. Helen R. Miller
P.O. Box 788
Bremerton, WA 98337
Dear Mrs. Miller:
The Mayor's Office has requested that I respond to your concerns set forth in your
written complaint dated July 27, 2001. You raised 3 issues regarding the July 25, 2001
council meeting; compliance with th6 Open Meetings Act, ability to review information
submitted in a quasi-judicial hearing, and finally the re-opening of the Public Testimony
portion of the hearing.
1. Open Meetin,qs Act. The Open Public Meetings Act was not violated. The Act
requires Council actions and deliberations to be done in a meeting open to the public.
All proceedings were open to the public and, in fact, the complainants were in the
audience.
2. Additional information only submitted to Council. The fact that the appellant
submitted exhibits to the Council is exactly what he was supposed to do since this was
a hearing. Think of the hearing like a trial, the evidence is submitted to the judge, which
in this case, was the Council. If someone in the audience wanted to look at the
submittal and comment, the burden was on the audience member to request it, but no
request was made.
3. AiIowin.q Additional Public Testimony. This was unusual, but legal, so long as
the Appellant was given the opportunity to respond if he chose to do so. No citizens
that had testified left the room in the interim, including you, thus there was no prejudice
to anyone involved.
Your complaint raises interesting issues and I want to thank you for bringing them to
the City's attention. However, it is my legal opinion that the Council's actions were
legal.
Intedm City Attorney
CC: Mayor Lynn Horton
Chris Hugo, Director of Planning and Building
Equal Opportunity Employer
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT: Staffing Authorization Change FOR AGENDA OF: August 1, 2001
Parks & Recreation Department ~ ORIGINATING DEPT: Parks & Recreation
~Vt:~' ~iO~'~l~C~ ORIGINATOR: JoAnne Wroblewski, acting Director
DATE SUBMITTED: July 25, 2001
2. CLEARANCES: 3. EXHIBITS:
(Comment on back if necessary)/,-~ ,,'9 /'J
Human Resources Manager: k----(.2~-~--~--n/ * Memorandum: Classification Study- Office Assistant II
Civil Service Officer: ~/,~ * Job description - Office Assistant II (Parks & Recreation)
City Treasurer:'q~t~.~ol~y~.,(~ * Budget Adjustment
Fiscal & Budget Committee: ~/j/~d>~ i
Operations Committee: ~ _~.~ ~ ~ ~
ENDORSEMENT )( INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDFJS'T FOR SUB~ilTYAL:
4. SUM1MARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR~2OUNCIL ACTION:
Due to reorganization within the Parks & Recreation Department in February 2001, administrative
job functions were reassigned in order to accomplish the day-to-day operations. Subsequently, the
Office Assistant I was doing more and more tasks outside of the OA I job description. We have been
working with the Human Resources Department and the Civil Services Officer, Annie Davis. Ms.
Davis has reviewed the current tasks in light of the Office Assistant II job functions and concurs that
this is a reasonable personnel move. We are proposing to delete the Office Assistant I position, which
recently became vacant, listed in the Parks & Recreation Department's budget, and to add one (1)
Office Assistant II position (for a total of two (2) OA II's).
The current Office Assistant I position is funded at a level that is comparable with the first step of the
Office Assistant II classification (grade 5 level 1 - $ 2067/month). If passed, this change would not
increase the Parks & Recreation budget.
8. RECOMMENDATION:
To approve the deletion of one (1) Office Assistant I position and add one (1) Office Assistant H
position to the Parks & Recreation Department's 2001 - 2002 Staffing Authorization.
fi d3bq4v ¢ - 2oot- ,
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: J. Wroblewski
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: J. Wroblewski
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION N~~---
PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED AME
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE:
11. AGENDA BILL #: 0 / '" / '7.-~
7/19/01,4:54 PM
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
Tasks and services would be re-assigned.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS~ FACILITIES~ EQUIPMENT OR OTHER
RESOURCES:
The current Office Assistant I position is funded at a level that is comparable with the f'n'st step of the
Office Assistant II classification (grade 5 level 1 - $ 2067/month). If passed, this change would not
increase the Parks & Recreation budget.
The employee holding the Office Assistant I position tendered her resignation effective July 31,2001,
for personal reasons. We would be hiring to fill the Office Assistant II position off of an existing
register.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
7/19/01.4:54 PM
CIVIL SERVICE OFFICE
239 Fourth Street * Bremerton, WA 9833'7 * (360) 478-7955 * FAX (360) 4']8-2333
JOB LINE (360)4'78-5241 * E-MAIL adavis~ci.bremerton.wa.us
July 19, 2001
TO: Jodi Wroblewski, Interim Director, Parks and Recreation Department
FROM: Annie Davis, Civil Service Officer/Human Resource Specialist ~
SUBJECT: Classification Study - Office Assistant II
Your timeliness in requesting a classification change for the Parks and Recreation Department
Office Assistant I (OA I) position to an Office Assistant II (OA II) position is appreciated. Civil
Service Rule 7.03 F states that when the duties of a position are materially changed, the Civil
Service Officer shall be notified immediately ....
The review of the Parks and Recreation Department Office Assistant I (OA I) position has been
completed. After meeting with you to discuss the changes, I have compared the duties,
responsibilities and qualification requirements that are required to best serve the Parks and
Recreation Department and the City to both the OA I and the OA II position specifications.
Due to the significant changes that the position has undergone since February 2001 to fulfill the
need of the Department and the City, I have determined that the position should be reclassified to
an Office Assistant II. A copy of the duties, responsibilities and qualification requirements
received from you is attached.
cc: Rich Hanna
Attachment
revised 7/18/01
Page 1 of 2
PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT
OFFICE ASSISTANT II
BASIC FUNCTION
Perform a variety of complex clerical assignments such as registering participants,
scheduling facilities, preparing reports, establishing record keeping/~ling systems or
database files, cashiering and monitoring financial records and responding to inquiries
regarding office/departmental policies, procedures, programs and services.
DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS
Under general supervision, independently perform a variety of complex clerical projects
and assignments such as registering participants, scheduling facilities, establishing and
revising filing systems and data base files, and composing correspondence such as
transmittals and responses to frequent requests for information. Resolve problems and
respond to inquiries requiring substantive knowledge of office/departmental policies,
procedures, programs and services.
EXAMPLE OF DUTIES:
· Answer telephones; register participants, schedule facilities; resolve problems and
respond to inquiries regarding departmental procedures and services; receive and
refer visitors;
Establish and maintain complex eleclxonic or manual file systems or database
files of general department documents and information as well as rosters, receipt
and program information;
· Devise, evaluate and revise forms for internal or external use;
· Assist in the preparation, compilation, and coordination of reports and records
such as financial, payroll, purchasing, invemory, personnel, scheduling, and
registration and testing; Compose office correspondence such as transmittals and
responses to frequent requests for information;
· Compile and keyboard/type material such as program and registration
information, rosters, financial statements, manuscripts, schedules, test materials,
and technical and statistical reports requiring specialized knowledge and
judgment in selection and treatment of data and format;
· Perform complex word processing tasks such as merging and sorting, integrating
text with graphics, spreadsheet and data base files, uploading/downloading and
creating footnotes and outlines; use spreadsheet and data base software to develop
and maintain records; use basic statistical sof~ware packages and simple computer
inquiry programming, use graphics software and recommend appropriate display
of information; use and maintain department registration sot'e~vare program;
revised 7/18/01
Page 2 of 2
· Proofread material, correcting for sentence structure, spelling, grammar and .. punctuation;
· Perform electronic mail tasks;
· Use basic arithmetic to perform computations such as determining costs and fees;
· Order, receive and maintain inventory;
· May serve as primary clerical support for a trait or department;
· May direct the work of others;
· Perform the duties of Office Assistant I;
· Perform related duties as required.
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS
High school graduation or equivalent AND two-years of progressively respons~Ie
clerical office experience. At least six (6) months of computer experience and at least six
(6) months of customer service experience OR equivalent education/experience.
Knowledge of: Software program~ (Microsoft WORD, Access and/or Excel), good
customer service, basic math/accounting, general knowledge of office procedures and
practices, business English, composition, spelling, and punctuation.
Ability_ to: Effectively operate a variety of office equipment, deal with the public in
courteous manner, identify the needs of the public and staffmembers and determine the
best way to serve them, handle and prioritize multiple tasks, communicate effectively
both orally and in writing with employees, other organizations and the general public,
and ability to work independently.
CITY OF BREMERTON
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REOUEST
200~_
Requesting Department: Adjustment Number:
IApproval Authority Required:
]--1Treasurer I-]Mayor r-Fiscal & Budget ~Council
SOURCE OF FUNDS: USE OF FUNDS:
Description Amount Description Amount
Delete one Office Assistant I position Add one Office Assistant II position
NARRATIVE:
This adjustment will update the authorized staffing of the Park & Recreation department pursuant to a position
review performed by the Civil Service Officer. No additional expenditure authority is necessary for FY 2001.
Department Head Signature Date Director Signature Date
Treasurer Comments:
~ Recommended ~ Not Recommended -"[ /
Treasurer's Signature ~ ~ Dale
Mayor Comments:
~ Recommended ~ Not Recommended
r-~ Approved ~ Denied
Mayor's Sil~nature Date
Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments:
r----i Approved ~ Denied
Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date
AGENDA BILL
B~RTON CITY COUNCIL
t. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: August 1, 2001
ORIGINATING DEPT: Executive
Professional Services Contract ORIGINATOR: Mayor Horton
McGavick Graves Legal Services DATE SUBMITTED: July 23, 2001
2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back 3. EXHIBITS:
if necessary)
Agreement
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
This contract provides for day-to-day legal counsel for the Mayor, City
Council and staff. The Contractor will have an attorney available at City
Hall every Wednesday from 9:00 a.m. through the conclusion of the
Wednesday night Council Meeting. Other meetings will be scheduled as
needed. The majority of staff contact will be by electronic means.
8. RECOMMENDATION:
Motion to approve~ contract with McGavick Graves in the amount of $8,000
per month for legal services.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Mayor Horton
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Mayor Horton
EXPIRATION DATE:t2/31/01
REVIEW DATE: N/A
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED__ TABLED __ APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMt0 A
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: Motion to approve professional services contrac'
McGavick Graves for legal services
Date:
ACENDA BILL NO: 0/-- /7¢
11.
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS (cont.):
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT (cont.):
5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE:
There would be no legal counsel available to the city for the day to day
corporate work.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES
$8,000 per month retainer available in the Legal Department Budget.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
McGavick Graves Legal Services
The City of Bremerton ("City") and McGavick Graves, ("Contractor"), referred to
collectively as the "Parties," enter into the following Agreement for professional services:
I. Scope: The Contractor will perform legal services for the city as directed by the Mayor.
The services shall include but not be limited to providing day-to-day legal counsel for the mayor,
city council and staffand attending city council meetings and other scheduled meetings as
necessary. The contractor shall have an attorney available at City Hall every Wednesday fi~om
9:00 a.m. until after the conclusion of the Wednesday night Council meeting. Provided,
however, the scope of work does not include litigation (other than in the municipal court for non-
traffic violations of City code not akeady handled by the prosecutor), labor issues, bond work,
and pending matters for which the City has already obtained the services of an attorney. Loren
D. Combs shall be the lead attorney and provide sufficient associates for back up. The Scope of
Work may be modified only pursuant to Section VI.D. of this Agreement.
II. Term: This Agreement commences on July 18, 2001 and terminates on December 31,
2001, unless another date is substituted pursuant to Sections VI.(D). or VIII.
III. Compensation: In consideration of the services provided pursuant to this Agreement, the
City shall pay Contractor Eight Thousand ($8,000.00) dollars per month. Contractor will be paid
on the Thursday following the 15th day of each month.
IV. Relationship of Parties: Contractor is skilled in the matters addressed in the Scope of
Work and is performing independent functions and responsibilities within its field of expertise.
Contractor and its personnel are independent contractors and not employees of the City.
Contractor and its personnel have no authority to bind the City or to control the City's employees
and other contractors.
As an independent contractor, Contractor is responsible for its own management. The
City's administration and enforcement of this Agreement shall not be deemed an exercise of
managerial control over Contractor or its personnel.
As an independent contractor, Contractor is responsible for payment of all taxes and
licensing fees necessary to perform its obligations under this Agreement. These taxes and fees
include but are not limited to State industrial insurance, B&O, State professional licensing, and
City business licensing. If any taxes or fees due the City have been declared delinquent, the City
may withhold the delinquent amount, plus any additional charges arising fi:om the delinquency,
fi:om any payments due Contractor.
V. Insurance and Hold Harmless: Prior to the commencement date of this Agreement,
Contractor shall provide Certificates of Insurance to the City's Risk Manager verifying the
following coverage: 1) a professional liability policy ("E&O") providing coverage of Two
Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) for errors and omissions committed by Contractor while
McGavick Graves
Professional Services Agreement
Page 1 of 3 ~
performing its obligations under this Agreement, and 2) a comprehensive general liability
("CGL") policy providing coverage of at least $500,000 per occurrence and including bodily
injury and property damage. The CGL shall name the City as an additional insured. Both policies
shall remain in full force and effect, and provide coverage for the full term of this Agreement.
Insurer shall provide the Risk Manager with 30 days' written notice of any cancellation or
change of coverage of either policy.
Contractor shall be solely responsible for the acts and failures to act of its personnel,
which arise in any way out of performance of this Agreement. Contractor agrees to defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials and employees from and against all
liability, loss, damages, and expenses, including costs and attorneys' fees, resulting from actions,
claims, and lawsuits arising or alleged to have arisen, in whole or in part, out of or in
consequence of the acts or failures to act of Contractor, its employees, its subcontractors, its
agents, or its assigns in the performance of this Agreement. The City and Contractor have
specifically negotiated Contractor's waiver of its immunity under Title 51 RCW, which is hereby
waived for purposes of Contractor's indemnification and hold harmless of the City, including the
duty to defend. This provision shall be inapplicable to the extem such action, claim, or lawsuit is
judicially found to arise solely from the acts or failures to act of the City.
VI. General Conditions:
A. Reports and Information: When requested by the City, Contractor shall furnish
periodic reports and documents on matters covered by this Agreement. The reports and
documents shall be furnished in the time and form requested. Contractor shall maintain
accounting records in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) to
substantiate all billed amounts.
B. Entire Agreement: This Agreement and its Exhibits constitutes the entire agreement
between the Parties, and the Parties acknowledge that there are no other agreements, written or
oral, that have not been set forth in the text of this Agreement.
C. Severability: Should any part of this Agreement be found void, the balance of the
Agreemem shall remain in full force and effect.
D. Modification: This Agreement may only be modified by written instrument signed by
both Parties.
E. Notices: Notices shall be in writing and delivered to the following addresses:
City Address Contractor Address
City of Bremerton McGavick Graves
239 Fourth Street 1102 Broadway, Suite 500
Bremerton, WA. 98337 Tacoma, WA. 98401-1317
McGavick Graves
Professional Services Agreement
Page 2 of 3
F. Waiver: Failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed a
waiver of that provision. Waiver of any right or power arising out of this Agreement shall not be
deemed waiver of any other right or power.
G. Compliance with Laws: Contractor shall comply with all applicable Federal, State,
and local laws in performing its obligations under this Agreement.
H. Choice of Law and Venue: This Agreement shall be interpreted according to the laws
of the State of Washington. Any judicial action to resolve disputes arising out of this Agreement
shall be brought in Kitsap County Superior Court.
I. Attorneys' Fees: The substantially prevailing Party in any litigation arising out of this
Agreement shall be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs.
VII. Nondiscrimination: Contractor shall not discriminate in employment or services to the
public on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, marital status, or disability,
except for employment actions based on bona fide occupational qualification.
VIH. Termination: This Agreement may be terminated, at will, by either Party upon 30 days'
notice to the other Party. This Agreement may be immediately terminated for cause by a Party if
the other Party substantially fails to perform through no fault of the terminating Party, and the
non-performing Party does not commence correction of the failure of performance within five
days of the terminating Party's sending notice to the non-performing Party. Upon termination the
City will be entitled to reports showing the status and/or all work products, independent of their
stage of completion or preparation format.
McGavick Graves
Loren D. Combs Date
CITY OF BREMERTON
Lynn S. Horton, Mayor date
Departmental Approval:
Kathleen L. McCluskey, Director
Administrative Services Department
Approved as to form: Received for filing:
McGavick Graves
Professional Services Agreement
Page 3 of 3
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT: Evergreen Park Phase II FOR AGENDA OF: August 1,2001
Park Construction - Glacier Environmental ORIGINATING DEPT: Parks & Recreation
Services, Inc. Change Order No. 01 ORIGINATOR: Becky Lorber, Rec. Coord. II
DATE SUBMI'UrED: July 25, 2001
2. CLEARANCES: 3. EXHIBITS:
(Comment on back if necessary) ~ /)
Parks & Recreation Director: /~,~. n~/-Z~,.),oJ~- . * Change Order No. 01 (Three (3) originals for
Director PW & Utilities: ,/~_~.~/~ ~~~ signatures)
Purchasing Supervisor: ~
Fiscal & Budget Committee: ~.(C~_~A_t~--~4 ~-~'
op t,on
ENDORSEMENT X INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDE~II} FOR SUBMITTAL:
and an additional eleven (I 1) calendar day contract extension:
a. Remove and properly dispose of two (2) un-regulated underground storage tanks (UST's) and fill
and compact vacant tank cavities with clean material to design elevation ($3,010.33 + 3-calendar
days);
b. De-water excavation and properly stabilize sub-grade soil conditions to properly install Puget
Sound Energy (PSE) utility vault ($1,063.24 + 1-calendar day); (Continued nextpage)
8. RECOMMENDATION:
That City Council authorizes and directs the Mayor to approve Change Order No. 01 and make payable to
Glacier Environmental Services, Inc., in the amount of $31,688.38 subject to City Administrative Policies
and Procedures ($29,286.02 + W.S.S.T.~ 8.2% =$31,688.38).
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: J. Wroblewski
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: J. Wroblewski
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMEN]
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE:
11. AGENDA BILL #:
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
(continued)
c. Re-grade approximately 600 cubic yards of fill material along the temporary shoreline silt fence
($1,952.46 + 2-calendar days);
d. Provide and install underground electrical service and service meter pedestal bases to four (4)
residential and one (1) commercial property that is affected by the PSE power service conversion
from overhead to underground electrical services along Sheldon Boulevard ($13,402.81 + 3-
calendar days); and
e. Provide and install electrical conduits and junction boxes for future luminaries along Sheldon
Boulevard ($9,858.02 + 2-calendar days).
The recommendation before City Council is the approval of this contract Change Order No.01 to
Glacier Environmental Services, Inc. in the additive amount of $31,688.38 (incl. WA State Sales
Tax.).
5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
No payment or time extension will be authorized to the Contractor for the additional items of work.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS~ FACILITIES~ EQUIPMENT OR OTHER
RESOURCES:
No significant impact on staffing is anticipated. Sufficient funding is available for these expenditures in
Fund 112.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
i3
PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES
3027 Olympus Drive · Bremerton, WA 98310-4799 · (360) 478-5318 · FAX (360) 478-5018
CHANGE ORDER
PROJECT: Evergreen Park Phase II- Park Construction
512 Sheldon Blvd. Bremerton Date: July 11,2001
Change Order No: 01
Project No.: 99252
CLIENT: Department of Parks & Recreation
680 Lebo Blvd. Bremerton
CONTRACTOR: Glacier Environmental Services, Inc. City of Bremerton
12521 Evergreen Drive, Suite A 239 Fourth Street
Mukilteo, WA 98275 Bremerton, WA 98337
Attn: Jay Kizer, Project Manager
This Change Order is issued pursuam to the General Provisions of the Contract relating to PAYMENT FOR EXTRA WORK and shall not be effective until approved by the
City of Bremer~on. The City intends to proceed with rite change aRer a cost therefore has been agreed to, and the contra~or is directed to proceed with the activities in such
manner as to preclude the necessity for later altering the work in order to accomplish this change. This document must be completed in every detail, signed, dated, and
returned in TRIPLICATE to the ABOVE OFFICE within TEN (10) calendar days from date of issue. Upon approval, a validated copy will be sent to the contractor as his
authority for proceeding with the change (or as confirmation of previously issued insa'uctions.)
Description: - Accomplish the following change(s) in contract work:
1. Remove and properly dispose of two (2) unregulated underground storage tanks (UST's) and fill and compact vacant tank cavity
to design elevation. The UST's, approximately 500 gallons each, were encountered during excavation and installation of Puget
Sound Energy (PSE) underground conduit and power vault #2 along southern edge of Sheldon Boulevard.
ADDITIVE sum of $ 3~010.33
2. De-water and stabilize unstable soils prior to the installation ora PSE utility vault.
ADDITIVE sum of $1~063.24
3. Re-grade approximately 600 cubic yards of import fill material along the temporary shoreline silt fencing.
ADDITIVE sum of $1~952.46
4. Provide and install underground electrical service and service meter pedestal bases to four (4) residential and one (1) commercial
property along Sheldon Boulevard that is affected by the deleted PSE overhead electrical power. This modification of power service
and service meter pedestals was inadvertently omitted from both the PSE work order drawings and the contract design drawings.
ADDITIVE sum ors 13,402.81
5. Provide and install conduit and junction boxes in preparation for future street luminaries along Sheldon Boulevard.
ADDITIVE sum ors 9~858.02
Total additive cost for Change Order No. Ol is $29~286 86.
Contract amount prior to this Change Order (not incl. W.S.S.T.): $1,325,335.66
Contract amount including this Change Order (not incl. W.S.S.T.): $1,354,622.52
ADDITIVE time of l l calendar days~
Contract completion date prior to this Change Order: September 18, 2001
Contract completion date including this Change Order: September 29, 2001
Page 1 of 2
Equal Opportunity Employer
Evergreen Park Phase H -Park Construction~Change Order No. 01
ACCEPTED BY: Glacier Environmental Services, Inc.
Title Date
Steve Miles
VERIFIED~of Bremerton Department of Public Works & Utilities
~-/Da~ieI J. Mi~r~ ~Title ~ Date
RECOMMENDED BY: City of Bremerton Department of Parks & Recreation
~,/ JoAnn (Jodi) Wroblewski Title Date
APPROVED BY: City of Bremerton
Lynn S. Horton, Mayor Date
Enclosure:
· :' Glacier Environmental Services
Page2 of 2
ENVIRONMENTAL ~
RECEIVED
JUN 2 5 2001
June 21, 2001 DEPT OF PUBLIC
WORKS AND UTILITIES
Mr. Dan Miller
Cibj of Bremerton
Department of Public Works
3027 Olympus Dr.
Bremerton, Washington 98310-4799
Fax: 360-478-5018
RE: Evergreen Park Phase II expansion
Dear Mr. Miller
Glacier Environmental Services Inc. is hereby requesting a change order number 1 be ,.
initiated for the following items.
1. Removal of underground storage tanks per letter to Peter Battuello from Steve
Miles dated June 13, 2001 in the amount of $3010.33 plus 3 additional contract
days.
2_ Dewate~ing and additional excavation for utility vault due to unsuitable soils, and
soil stabilization $1063.24 plus 1 additional contract day.
3. Regrade approximately 600 cubic yards of fill material as directed ~ existing silt
fencing $1952..46 plus 2 additional contract days.
4. Rework three existing electrical service panels. Cgnsisting of .,t~..~ ~esidenfial and c"-~,) '~
one co .mmercial service located across Sheldon Blvd. from project not covered
ur~der odginal contract as discussed dudng pre-con $13,402.81 plus 3 adc~itionai
contract days. . , ° ..,
5. In addition to the above items Glacier Environmental Services, linc. is hereby
· requesting that the future connection points of street lighting as detailed on detail 5
" Sheet DRD 2 (10) be considered as additional work. Dudng the pre construction
conference Glacier Environmental Services, Inc. received plans from Puget Sound
Energy. These plans identified future street li~lhfing, that was not included by
Glacier nor it's subcontractor Morse Elec. The contract plans on sheet DRD 2 detail
Glacier En~onmen~l Stances, Inc..
t2521E~g~e~nDnv~,SudeA Muiulte0, W'~m~an98275 Ptx3m:(425)35.5-Z82~ F~(425)290-g186
Page 2
5 refer you to sheet DR I (7) and street DR 2 (8) neither of these pages have a
detail referring you back to DRD 2 detail 5. At the time of the bid it was impossibte
for Glacier Environmental Services, Inc. or our subcontractor Morse Electric to
identify how many if any future street light connections would be needed. Therefore
Glacier Environmental Services, Inc. is requesting an additional amount of
$_!..~ius 2 additional contract days.
Total requested for Change Order # I is ~plus additional contract day's and
applicable sales tax.
Sincerely,
Glacier Environmental Services, Inc.
Project manager
Glacier Environmental Ser~icus, Inc.
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT: Renewal of Parking FOR AGENDA OF: Auqust 1, 2001
Services Contract with ORIGINATING DEPT: Admin. Services~
Diamond Parking Inc. ORIGINATOR: Paula Johnston~
DATE SUBMITTED: July 25, 2001
2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back 3. EXHIBITS:
if necessary)
Contract
Admin. Svcs. Revenue Charts
City Attorney
Police Chief
Fiscal/Budget
Operations
ENDORSEMENT~ INF~ ION COUNCIL PRESIDENT~~M/%j~AL:
COUNCIL PReSIdeNT
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
Staff recommends that the City renew its contract with Diamond Parking for an
additional two years to manage the City's parking enforcement program for city streets and
parking facilities.
Diamond's performance under the current one-year contract has resulted in:
· Increased parking revenue (see attached charts)
· More effective on-street enforcement
· Aggressive enforcement of abandoned vehicle tows
The contract provisions remain the same except the proposed compensation of $17,728 per
month includes a 3% CPI adjustment for the first year. The second year inflation adjustment
will be 2%.
8. RECOMMENDATION:
Move to renew the two year contract with Diamond Parking Inc. to
provide city parking enforcement services and authorize the Mayor to
execute same.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Admin. Services
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Admin. Services
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVE~~ ~DED
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE:
11. AGENDA BILL NO:
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS (cont.):
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT (cont.):
5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE:
Parking Enforcement would have to come in-house and re-staffed by the
Police Department.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES
Fully funded presently.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT between the City of Bremerton, a municipal corporation (hereinafter
referred to as "City", and Diamond Parking, Inc., a duly organized corporation, (hereinafter
referred to as "Diamond"),
WITNESSETH:
1. SCOPE: In exchange for compensation as provided below, Diamond shall
provide parking regulator services, enforcement of parking ordinances and management
and operation of City owned parking facilities in the City of Bremerton, as fully described in
Attachments I, II, and III which herewith are fully incorporated in this Agreement as though
fully set forth herein.
2. TERM: This agreement shall commence August 10, 2001 and end August 9, 2003.
This agreement shall be for a period of two (2) years.
This Agreement may be terminated for cause if Diamond fails substantially to perform
through no fault of the City and does not commence correction within five (5) business
days of written notice and diligently completes the correction thereof. In which event all
finished or unfinished documents, reports, or other material or work of Diamond pursuant
to this Agreement shall be submitted to City, and Diamond shall be entitled to just and
equitable compensation at the rate set forth in Paragraph 3 for any satisfactory work
completed prior to the date of termination. The City may terminate this agreement for
convenience with ninety (90) days notice to Diamond.
3. COMPENSATION: For services provided under this Agreement, City shall pay
Diamond, on a monthly basis, Seventeen Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty-eight and
No/100 Dollars ($17,728.00) for the first year. The City shall pay Diamond Eighteen
Thousand Eighty-three and No/100 Dollars ($18,083.00) per month the second year,
equating to a 2% inflation adjustment for year 2. City shall pay said monthly fee on or
before the 15th day of each month for services provided through the last day of the
preceding month.
4. DISCRIMINATION AND COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS:
a. Diamond agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for
employment on any other person in the performance of this Agreement because of
race, creed, color, national origin, marital status, sex, age, disability, or other
circumstance prohibited by federal, state, or local law or ordinance, except for a
bona fide occupational qualification.
b. Violation of this Paragraph 4. shall be a material breach of this Agreement
and grounds for cancellation, termination or suspension of the Agreement by the
~0
City, in whole or in part, and may result in ineligibility for further work for the City.
5. OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT: All data, materials, reports, memoranda, and
any other documents developed under this Agreement whether finished or not shall
become the property of the City, and shall be forwarded to the City at its request and may
be used by the City as it sees fit. The City agrees that if it uses products forwarded by
Diamond for purposes other than those intended in this Agreement, it does so at its sole
risk and agrees to hold Diamond harmless therefrom.
6. LICENSES AND TAXES: Diamond shall possess a current Bremerton City
Business License and any regulatory license(s) required to fulfill the obligations of this
Contract. Business and Occupation Taxes shall be paid when due and Diamond, by this
Agreement assigns any payments due under this Agreement to the City Clerk for payment
of such taxes which have been, or may in the future, be declared delinquent. City is
responsible for taxes on gross revenues on City parking locations.
7. INSURANCE AND HOLD HARMLESS: Prior to and during the performance of the
work covered by this Agreement, Diamond shall provide the Risk Manager for the City with
evidence that it has obtained and maintains in full force and effect during the term of this
Agreement comprehensive general liability insurance coverage of at least $1,000,000.00
per occurrence and automobile general liability insurance coverage of at least
$1,000,000.00 per occurrence and parking regulator vehicle liability insurance for City
owned vehicles to be approved by the Risk Manager. The City shall be named as
additional insured. The Risk Manager shall be provided thirty (30) days written notice of
any cancellation of said insurance.
Diamond shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall require
subcontractors to provide their own coverage. All coverages shall be subject to all of the
requirements herein stated.
Diamond also agrees to defend, indemnify and save harmless the City, its appointed and
elected officers and employees, from and against any and all liability, loss, costs, damage
and expense, including costs and attorney fees in defense thereof because of actions,
claims or lawsuits for damages resulting from personal or bodily injury, including death at
any time resulting therefrom, sustained or alleged to have been sustained by any person or
persons and on account of damage to property, arising or alleged to have risen directly or
indirectly out of or in consequence of or the performance of this Agreement, whether such
injuries to persons or damage to property is due to the negligence of Diamond, its
subcontractors, agents, volunteers, successors or assigns. This provision shall be
inapplicable to the extent the City is judicially found solely negligent for such damage or
injury.
2
8. GENERAL CONDITIONS
a. Assignability: Diamond shall not assign any interest in this Agreement and
shall not transfer any interest in same (either by assignment or novation) without the
prior written consent of the City thereto, which consent shall not be unreasonably
withheld; provided, however, that claims for payment under this Agreement may be
assigned.
b. Extent of Agreement: This Agreement, together with Attachments I, II, III
and Exhibit A, represents the entire and integrated Agreement between the
parties hereto and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or
agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended, modified or
added to only by written instrument properly signed by both parties hereto.
c. Notices: Any notices required to be given by the City to Diamond or by
Diamond to the City shall be in writing and delivered to the following parties at the
addresses listed.
Copy To:
City Clerk Jon Diamond City Manager
City of Bremerton Diamond Parking Diamond Parking
239 4th Street 3161 Elliot Avenue P.O. Box 809
Bremerton, WA 98337 Seattle, WA 98121 Bremerton, WA98337
d Waiver: Failure by the City to insist upon strict compliance with any terms,
covenants or conditions of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of such,
nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of such right or power at any time be taken
to be a waiver of any other breach.
e. Compliance with Federal, State and Local Laws: Diamond agrees to
comply with all applicable local, state, federal laws in performance of all services
under this Agreement.
f. Applicable Law; Venue: This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted
in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington and, in the event of dispute,
the venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in Kitsap County Superior Court.
The agreement is further subject to any applicable laws of this State. Any mandate
of a State law shall supersede all provisions herein.
9. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES: The parties understand and agree that Diamond is
a firm skilled in matters pertaining to enforcement of parking ordinances and parking facility
management and will perform independent functions and responsibilities in the areas of its
particular field of expertise. Diamond and its personnel shall act as independent
contractors and not employees of the City. As such, they have no authority to bind the City
or control City employees, contractors or other entities. In the performance of duties and
obligations of this Agreement, Diamond shall work under the direction of the Administrative
Services Director of the City or her designee.
IN WITNESS WHERE[OF the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
the day and year first above written.
CITY OF BREMERTON DIAMOND PARKING
DATE: DATE:
LYNN S. HORTON, Mayor JON DIAMOND, President
DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL:
KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY,
Administrative Services Director
A RQ ,D S RM:
LOREN D. COMBS,
Interim City Attorney
RECEIVED FOR FILING:
PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk
4
ATTACHMENT I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. Vehicles
Diamond is responsible for supplying it's transportation requirements including
regulatory vehicles used in performance of on-street enforcement duties.
1. All vehicles used by enforcement personnel shall be clearly identifiable as
performing parking enforcement.
2. Vehicles shall be operated at all times in compliance with all state and
local motor vehicle laws.
3. The rear of all patrol vehicles shall have a sign warning of frequent vehicle
stops.
4. The City agrees to maintain Diamond's regulatory vehicles under the
following conditions:
a. In consideration for the services provided, Diamond shall pay the City
the actual cost of parts, supplies and subcontracted repairs used in the
maintenance and repair of Diamond vehicles, together with shop time at the
rate of Fifty and No/100 Dollars ($50.00) per hour for the time spent in
performing the repairs and maintenance.
b. Preventative maintenance of Diamond's vehicles will be performed at
the same intervals and to the same standards as the City's non-emergency
vehicles. Other repairs will be performed on an as needed basis.
c. The City will provide Diamond with an invoice and supporting
documents on a monthly basis. Payments will become due thirty (30) days
after mailing by the City.
d. The City will provide Diamond ninety (90) days notice of
discontinuation of maintenance of any vehicle due to end of feasible service
life upon which the City will no longer maintain the vehicle under the above
terms.
e. The City will honor current rate/repair schedules and fees for the term
of the agreement.
5
5. Foot and bike enforcement may be used by personnel in lieu of vehicles, as
long as adequate patrol area coverage is maintained and compliance is met with all
State and Local pedestrian and bicycle laws.
B. Personnel and Staffing
1.Diamond will maintain staffed office hours as follows:
Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m. through 6:00 p.m.
2. Diamond will staff on/off street parking regulation and maintain
enforcement hours as directed by the City.
a. On Street Enforcement - patrolled with 505 hours monthly as follows:
1) Emphasis hours to be performed during peak parking and
collection demand times.
2) Minimum of two weekday early shifts beginning at 4 a.m. per
month.
3) Minimum of two weekday late shifts ending at 8 p.m. per month.
4) Minimum of three hours per weekend for collections and
patrols.
b. Off Street Enforcement - patrolled with 104 hours monthly as follows:
1) Enforcement of each off street parking location 365 days per
year (every day),
2) Enforcement at a minimum of three hours per each weekend
day.
3) Enforcement at a minimum of four hours per each weekday.
Adjustments to hours of enforcement and/or routes will be made as necessary
pursuant to Section I Special Provisions of this agreement,
3. Diamond will be responsible for all aspects of recruitment and selection of
parking enforcement personnel.
a. Individuals selected to enforce on street regulations must qualify for
a Limited Commission from the City of Bremerton Police Department.
b. Diamond shall employ only persons competent and skilled in the
performance of the work assigned to them and shall provide skilled and
6
responsible supervision of such persons.
c. Diamond's employees must be in reasonably good health and taking
no medication that would tend to effect work performance.
d. Diamond's employees shall not carry a firearm or any type of weapon
while on duty.
e. Diamond's personnel shall be polite and courteous to all citizens.
Confrontations are to be avoided if at all possible.
f. Diamond's employees shall be required to speak and write English so
that they may be easily understood.
g. Diamond's employees are not to imply that they are Police Officers.
h. Diamond's employees shall comply with all existing state and local
motor vehicle laws while operating in the City.
4. Limited Commission - Diamond shall provide City of Bremerton Police
Department with all personnel information required for issuing a Limited
Commission. The City shall review all background forms and information gathered
on prospective enforcement employees prior to authorizing issuance of a Limited
Commission. The following criteria are used in determining eligibility for a Limited
Commission:
a. Possession of a high-school diploma or G.E.D. Certificate.
b. Physical and mental capacity for performance of duties.
c. Ability to give and follow oral and written instructions in English.
d. Ability to effectively communicate with public and City officials.
e. Ability to remain calm and use good judgement and initiative in an
emergency.
f. Successful completion of a background check for outstanding warrants
or any felony convictions or misdemeanors involving theft.
g. Successful completion of reference check.
h. Possession of a current and valid Washington State Driver's License.
i. No record of driver's license suspension or revocation.
7
5. Revocation of Limited Commission - Diamond is responsible for discipline
and/or termination of employees with Limited Commissions. If commissioned,
Limited Commissions may be revoked by the City under the following
circumstances:
a. False information on application or provided during the interview
process, or discovery of information that, in the opinion of the Police
Department would otherwise disqualify the person from consideration.
b. Failure to maintain a current and valid Washington state Driver's
License.
c. Use of illegal drugs or alcohol in the workplace.
d. Conviction of a misdemeanor or felony or consistent non-professional
or any unlawful behavior during the course of employment.
6. Diamond shall not use discriminatory hiring practices in regard to ethnic
origin, race, religion, sex, and physical or mental disability.
7. As a condition of employment, all employees, including Diamonds's
managers and supervisors are subject to pre-employment drug and alcohol abuse
screening. Random drug and alcohol screening shall also be required throughout
the term of this contract.
C. Communications
1. All enforcement personnel shall have ready access to their supervisor
and to Bremerton Police Department,
2. Diamond shall maintain an office in Bremerton and shall maintain a twenty
four (24) hour telephone number accessible by the City. During patrol and parking
enforcement hours on, a supervisor will be on call with 30 minute response time.
After office hours the Diamond supervisor shall be accessible by pager.
3. On street enforcement personnel shall have the ability to communicate
with emergency services providers and the Department of Motor Vehicles
information system.
4. City contacts shall be as follows:
a. For Enforcement: Police Department
b. For Contract Administration/
Project Manager: City Clerk's Office
c. For violations/tickets: Municipal Court
8
5. Diamond contacts shall be as follows:
a. City Manager
b. Supervisor
D. Training
1. Diamond will be responsible for complete training of parking enforcement
personnel.
a. The City will provide initial training and all materials related to
City regulations concerning enforcement to Diamond. Following initial
training by City, Diamond will be responsible for training and materials.
b. Diamond will maintain complete training records for periods as
prescribed by law or policy as appropriate.
2. Training will include, but is not limited to:
a. Customer Service and expectations.
b. Dealing with difficult people.
c. Conflict management and/or dispute management and resolution.
d. Civil rights law and procedures.
e. Municipal code and ordinances relating to parking enforcement.
f. Giving testimony and courtroom procedures.
g. Job procedures and emergency protocol.
h. Job safety as required by OSHA/VVlSHA.
I. Public Safety.
9
E. Supervision
Diamond will be responsible for assuring employee compliance with all laws and
regulations, compliance for all employment related laws and regulations, responding to
inspections/audits by regulatory agencies and the City, and will pay any fines or
assessments levied by regulatory agencies.
1. Uniforms
a. Diamond shall provide all enforcement personnel with professional
appearing uniforms consisting of shirts, trousers, and jackets. Uniform jackets
and shirts shall have attached patches on the sleeves with an emblem
designating the wearer as official parking enforcement personnel. (Color and
design of uniforms must be approved by City.)
b. All enforcement personnel must carry photo identification and copy
of their commission while on duty.
c. All personnel are to be in complete uniforms at any time they
are engaged in enforcement activity, or appearing in court in matters relating
to parking enforcement and regulation.
2. Discipline and/or Termination
a. Diamond is responsible for discipline and/or termination of its
employees. Discipline and/or termination is required under, but not limited to
the following circumstances:
1) False information on application or during interview process,
or discovery of information that would otherwise disqualify the person
from consideration.
2). Failure to maintain a current and valid Washington State
Driver's License. (Restrictions will be imposed based upon number
and nature of allowable tickets incurred by employee.)
3). Use of illegal drugs or alcohol in the workplace. Termination
is required.
F. Operations Methodology
1. The City of Bremerton strongly believes in customer service, and expects the
enforcement personnel to treat the public in a polite, helpful, and fair manner.
10
2. Enforcement action is to be carried out in a uniform and fair manner with no
preference shown for any reason. Diamond will not directly or indirectly give any
preferential treatment to any person or entity in the performance of enforcement
duties.
3. Diamond shall operate in general compliance with existing Police Department
Parking Enforcement Policy.
G. Record Keeping and Reports
1. Record Keeping - All revenue collections, deposits and reporting
procedures shall be in accordance with City Treasurer requirements.
a. Diamond is responsible for all employment related record keeping,
and upon request by the City, provide personnel and training information for
each employee.
b. Each Diamond employee shall have their own personnel file
containing the following information, with a copy to the City's Project
Manager.
1) Completed application form
2) Completed background investigation and testing process
3) Training received (Diamond to furnish outline of training
program to City for approval prior to issuance of limited commission)
4) Complaints received against employee including disposition
c. Each Enforcement Officer shall maintain a daily log book of
conversations, complaints and unusual circumstances that occur while
performing work duties. The log book shall be kept current and up to date at
the end of each shift. In addition each Enforcement Officer shall include in
the daily activity log the following.
1 ) Number of citations issued
2) Number of warnings
3) Number of impounds
4) Number of Parking related service requests from citizens
5) Hours on duty
11
6) Location and hour of handicap parking enforcement
7) All reports shall be by day, date, hour and location
c. Inspection - Diamond shall keep all records as listed above for at
least three (3) years following expiration or termination of the Agreement, or
deliver the records to the City. Diamond shall keep all records in its regular
business office and shall keep the records in an orderly manner as may be
instructed by the City to assure easy access and reference to the records
and shall make all records available for inspection and copying by the City
during business hours.
2. Reports - City requires that the enforcement personnel follow pre-approved
patrol routes. Diamond will be responsible for proposing patrol routes and
schedules, and the method (reports) by which the City Project Manager will be
kept informed. The City needs assurance that coverage is adequate, fair, regular
and consistent. The City may make additions or deletions to the list of reports it
requests at its discretion. The following reports shall be prepared, transmitted, and
maintained at a minimum:
a. Monthly summary of activities showing total work hours, patrol and
non-patrol; customer service hours; and records of court time.
b. Monthly summary of ticket activity including the number of tickets by
infraction type, by street/area, and a listing of voided tickets with an
explanation.
c. Written reports on all complaint phone calls, or on-street complaints
to officers on duty. Reports shall include names of parties involved, phone
numbers, addresses (if known), the nature of complaint and action taken.
d. Monthly reports containing the above data are to be furnished to the
City no later than the 20th of the following month.
H. Court Appearance - Diamond will be responsible for it's employees appearing in
court, on time and prepared to testify on parking related cases. City will provide training,
legal representation at the City's discretion and pertinent materials.
I. Special Provisions - City Rights
During the life of the contract, the City retains the right to make minor changes having
negligible impact on contract cost, to parking zone restrictions without having to renegotiate
contract.
The City further retains the right to:
12
1. Establish, modify, add or delete enforcement areas or routes or off street
parking facilities in conjunction with Diamond.
2. Set all hours of enforcement operations.
3. Set all parking rates and times.
4. Modify, alter, add, delete procedures, instructions, and ordinances during
the contract term.
5. Modify, alter, add, delete or replace any City supplied forms and/or
equipment.
6 Add to, delete, or alter enforcement areas, beats, levels of enforcement,
placement of enforcement effort and type of enforcement.
7. Have, at all reasonable times, access to the Diamond's books, records,
and memorandum of every description pertaining to work under this contract for the
purpose of auditing and verifying costs of services provided.
13
ATTACHMENT II
ON-STREET PARKING ENFORCEMENT
A. Patrol Areas
1. Patrol Areas - Described services will be performed in the parking zones and
areas listed as Exhibit A.
B. Enforcement Duties
1. On-Street Parking. Enforcement as described below. There will be no
additional compensation for special events. Services to be provided include, but are
not limited to:
a. Patrol Central Zone every 2 hours. Other parking including
handicapped parking, will be covered at a reasonable level.
b. Issue Notices of Infractions for violations of parking ordinance
when and where appropriate.
c. Prepare affidavits and reports for parking infractions, violations
and incidents.
d. Perform Parking Surveys required for Residential Parking Permit
applications.
e. Post Zone status change notices.
f. Enforce all parking ordinances as contained in Bremerton Municipal
Code, Chapter 10 and State law, including, but not limited to:
1. All "time restricted" on-street and City owned off-street
parking facilities.
2. All "no parking anytime" areas.
3. Parking violations involving trucks and commercial vehicles.
4. Vehicles parked on sidewalks.
5. Residential parking permits.
6. Storage of vehicles in right of way.
7. Unlawful parking in City owned parking facilities.
14
8. Vehicles parked too close to fire hydrants, driveways, stop
signs, intersections, or crosswalks.
C. Citation Issuance
Diamond shall:
1. Submit Handheld Computers to the Municipal Court office at specified
times for upload/downloading of daily citation activities (Times depend on shift
assignments). Pick up hand-helds at court office.
2. Be responsible for Handhelds that are damaged due to negligent care or
loss. City retains ownership of Handhelds.
3. Have authority to recommend to void tickets up to the 15th day from
issuance. All recommended voids must be approved by the Diamond Supervisor.
The Court Manager must receive notification of each recommended void within one
(1) business day of issuance. After 15 days, recommended ticket voids must be
approved by the Court Manager.
4. Provide written requests for declaration of nuisance vehicles.
5. Notify court if not available for court appearances.
6. Provide Affidavits for Contested Hearings.
D. Junk & Abandoned Vehicles
1. Enforce abandoned vehicles procedures in accordance with State and Local
laws, including but not limited to:
a. Receiving complaints of an abandoned vehicles.
b. Checking registration to ascertain if vehicle has been
reported as stolen.
c. Determine whether vehicle is operable.
d. Attempt to contact registered owner
e. Notify registered owner of pending impoundment.
f. Impound vehicle.
2. Enforce junk vehicle procedures on private property in accordance with State
15
and Local laws. Including, but not limited to:
a. Receiving complaints regarding junk vehicles.
b. Visiting property and, based on statutory definition, determine if
vehicle is declarable as junk.
1) If declared junk, locate property owner and registered
owner of the vehicle.
2) Determine if property owner and vehicle owner are the same.
If they are the same, meet at the property and determine method of
disposal.
3) If property owner and vehicle owner are not the same,
complete a Junk Vehicle Affidavit and coordinate disposal with
property owner.
4) If property owner does not allow entry to the property,
secure a Search Warrant through the City Attorney before
proceeding with the investigation.
5) If property owner refuses to use Junk Vehicle Affidavit, all
paperwork regarding investigation findings shall be filed with the City
of Bremerton Hearing Examiner.
c. Proceed with vehicle impoundment.
16
ATTACHMENT III
PAID PARKING ENFORCEMENT
A. Scope of Services:
1. Duties - Paid Parking. Diamond shall manage, operate and promote City
owned parking facilities and on-street paybox parking. Parking facilities are located
in the downtown area of the City as follows:
a. 507 Park Avenue.
b. 4th & Washington Avenue.
c. 300 Park Avenue.
d. 301 Park Avenue.
e. Boardwalk Parking Lot
f. 2nd & Washington Ave.
g. Payboxes listed as Item 5 on Exhibit A
1 ) City shall retain ownership of currently installed on-street pay-
boxes.
2) Diamond shall retain ownership of Diamond installed/supplied
off street payboxes.
2. Responsibilities; Diamond shall:
a. Pay all direct operating costs including, but not limited to, labor,
supervision, bookkeeping, janitorial service, security services, equipment
maintenance and non-structural repairs and maintenance.
b. Provide meter boxes for customer self-parking at centralized
locations within each off street parking facility.
c. Post City approved parking rates and regulations on all off street
parking facilities.
d. Collect all on-street and off-street meter box revenues and deposit in
City designated accounts on a daily basis. City shall determine banking
arrangements at their discretion.
17
e. Turn in bank deposit receipts to the City of Bremerton Treasurer no
later than 3:00 p.m., of the next business day.
f. Keep parking facilities open and available for parking 24 hours per
day, seven (7) days per week unless otherwise excepted, directed and
approved by City.
g. Inspect all parking facilities on a prudent and as necessary basis to
ensure that all parking has been paid and all parking regulations are
followed. Inspections and collections will be conducted seven (7) days per
week. Checking schedules will be based on usage patterns and approved
by the City.
h. Market parking facilities to insure their maximum utilization.
i. Be responsible for maintenance and repair of non-structural
components of parking facilities, including, but not limited to:
1) Numbering stalls, painting stall lines and pedestrian lanes.
2) Maintaining traffic directional signage.
3) Maintaining and, as necessary, install or replace instructional
signage as may be directed by the City.
4) Cleanliness of City owned off-street parking facilities.
5) Janitorial services in the parking garage including, but not
limited to cleanliness of parking structure floor, stairwells, hand rails
and daily cleaning of elevator car.
6) Notifying City of any structural damage needing repair.
7) Notifying City of landscaping maintenance needed for any City
owned lots.
8) Paying all parking garage elevator maintenance contract
costs.
9) Advising City of any lighting failures or outages in parking
garage.
10) Keeping drains clear of obstructive debris.
18
11) Keeping pedestrian walks and ramps and vehicle driving
surfaces free from snow and ice to prevent personal injury and
property damage.
12) Providing periodic security monitoring at The Parking Garage
to ensure adequate security and protection of personal property with a
minimum coverage of 5 hours per day.(Diamond shall inform City of
security hours on site).
13) Reporting all acts of vandalism and all irregularities and
nuisances occurring in City parking facilities to City Police and City
Project Manager.
14) Shall, on a monthly basis, submit to the City Project Manager,
a summary report of reported acts of vandalism and all irregularities
and nuisances occurring in City parking facilities.
15.) Shall submit quarterly reports to City regarding marketing
strategies and results.
16) Assist City with special event parking.
19
EXHIBIT A
PATROLLED AREAS
1. BREMERTON CITY LIMITS on a complaint and/or referral basis.
2. CENTRALZONE
100-200 blk. 1st Street
100-200 blk. 2nd Street
200-600 blk. 4th Street
200-600 blk. 5th Street
100-800 blk. Pacific Avenue
200-500 blk. Burwell Street
400-600 blk. Park Avenue
3. WEST RESIDENTIAL ZONES
2600 &2800 blk. 1st 2900,3000,3200 blk. Farragut
1000-2100 blk. 4th 100-400 blk. S. Lafayette
1000-2100 blk. 5th 2900-3300 blk. Porter
1000-1700 blk. Burwell 300-700 blk. S. Summit
2100 blk. Burwell Place 3200 blk. Preble
200-1000 blk. Chester 200-500 blk. S. Hartford
1200-1900 blk. Gregory 300-500 blk. S. Yantic
100-300 blk. State 100, 300,600 blk N. Montgomery
100-300 blk. Anoka 400-500 blk. S. Charleston
200,500-600 blk. High 2600-2800 blk Rodgers
900-1200 blk High 3000, 3200 blk. Rodgers
200-1000 blk. Hewitt 100-300 blk. S. Cambrian
400-1200 blk. Veneta 100 blk. N. Cambrian
100 blk. Olympic 100 & 300 blk. S. Wycoff
300-800 blk. Olympic 100 & 300 blk. N. Wycoff
100 blk. Arvon 100 blk. Rainier
100 blk. Bloomington
2O
4. EAST RESIDENTIAL ZONES
600-1100 blk. Pleasant Ave 200,500-700 blk. 9th
600-900, 1100 blk. Highland Ave 1000-1200 blk. 9th
2000 & 2100 blk. E 11th 1500 blk. 9th
1100 blk. Pitt 1900-2000,2300 blk.9th
2000 blk. Harkins 500-800, 1000 blk. 8th
2300-2400 blk. Holman 1100-2000 blk. 8th
2500 blk. Cherry PI 2100 & 2300 blk. 8th
900, 1200 blk. Pacific 400-1200 blk. Veneta
800-1100 blk. Cogean 200-1000 blk. Chester
600 - 700 blk. 12th 600, 800 blk. Broadway
900 - 1000 blk. 12th 1200 & 1300 blk. Broadway
1400 blk. 12th 800,1200-2200 blk. 10th
700-1200 blk. McKenzie 1100, 1300 blk. Lincoln
600-900,1100-1200 Park 1100-1200 blk. Ohio
1500,1700 blk. Park 1500 & 1700 blk. Ohio
900-1000 blk. 15th 1100-1200 blk. Sidney
600-800, 1000 blk. Pennsylvania 1000-1200 blk. High
500,800 blk. 7th 600-700 blk. Roosevelt
1200-2100, 2300 7th 900-1000 blk Roosevelt
1100 blk. Elizabeth 100, 300-800 blk. Olympic
600-700, blk. Roosevelt 500,800 blk 7th
900, 1000 Roosevelt 1200-2100 blk. 7th
900 blk. Washington 2300 blk. 7th
5. ON STREET PAYBOX COLLECTION
300 blk. 1st St. 2 boxes 200 blk. 5th St 2 boxes
100 blk. 4th St 1 box 500 blk. 5th St 1 box
800 blk. 4th St (north) 1 box 800 blk. 5th St (north) 1 box
800 blk. 4th St (south) 1 box 800 blk. 5th St (south) 1 box
1600 blk. 4th St 2 boxes 800 blk. Burwell (south) 3 boxes
300 blk. Veneta 1 box 800 blk. Burwell (north) 2 boxes
100 blk. Chester 1 box 200 blk. Warren 1 box
100 blk. 2nd St 1 box
21
~O
PARKING REVENUES - SEPT 1998 - JUNE 2001
MONTH I YEAR 12 MO ROLLING TOTAL PARKING OFF-STREET/ PARKING CITATION # OF GARAGE ONLY
AVERAGE REVENUE PAYBOX REVENUE REVENUE CITATIONS REVENUE
Sep-98 $42,327.29 $31,473.29 $10,854.00 749 $14,023.52
Oct-98 $45,496.30 $30,903.30 $14,593.00 951 $11,917.79
Nov-98 $40,658.10 $28,601.10 $12,057.00 539 $10,709.76
Dec-98 $35,896.43 $27,888.43 $8,008.00 507 $10,384.12
Jan-99 $39,608.71 $26,680.71 $t 2,928.00 610 $9,468.12
Feb-99 $38,462.03 $28,615.03 $9,847.00 805 $9,595.20
Mar-99 $47,161.59 $33,716.59 $13,445.00 825 $10,532.77
Apr-99 $48,378.15 $31,963.15 $16,415.00 1224 $10,649.81
May-99 $47,419.90 $29,983.90 $17,436.00 1201 $10,938.43
Jun-99 $51,883.00 $32,024.00 $19,859.00 982 $11,211.83
Jul-99 $44,730.47 $33,902.47 $10,828.00 918 $12,975.11
Aug-99 $53,080.26 $34,929.26 $18,151.00 946 $13,296.14
Sep-99 $44,845.95 $45,376.51 $34,043.51 $11,333.00 896 $13,205.99
Oct-99 $44,730.34 $44,108.87 $30,887.87 $13,221.00 1368 $10,932.06
Nov-99 $45,287.62 $47,345.48 $31,579.48 $15,766.00 1314 $11,111.44
Dec-99 $45,738.77 $41,310.27 $30,483.27 $10,827.00 1014 $12,658.37
Jan-00 $46,371.05 $47,196.02 $35,661.02 $11,535.00 1355 $13,704.48
Feb-00 $47,846.40 56,166.31 36,273.31 19,893.00 1097 13,908.30
Mar-00 $48,990.47 60,890.38 40,164.38 20,726.00 1231 14, t24.95
Apr-00 $50,704.69 68,948.77 48,359.77 20,589.00 1444 25,397.45
May-00 $51,850.15 61,165.42 42,798.42 18,367.00 1195 17,027.42
J un-00 $52,576.15 60,595.06 45,774.06 14,821.00 1257 16,561.29
Jul-00 $54,226.11 64,529.97 51,591.97 12,938.00 1156 15,843.16
Aug-00 $56,336.01 78,399.05 62,363.05 16,036.00 1133 17,997.19
Sep-00 $58,775.62 74,651.80 55,230.80 19,421.00 1117 17,224.80
Oct-00 $61,248.17 73,779.53 55,051.53 18,728.00 1465 15,774.05
Nov-00 $63,239.81 71,245.08 51,838.08 19,407.00 1110 14,822.26
Dec-00 $64,967.26 62,039.70 47,528.70 14,511.00 1226 t4,719.55
PARKING REVENUES -SEPT 1998 -JUNE 2001
MONTH I YEAR 12 MO ROLLING TOTAL PARKING OFF-STREET/ PARKING CITATION # OF GARAGE ONLY
AVERAGE REVENUE PAYBOX REVENUE REVENUE CITATIONS REVENUE
Jan-01 $67,250.81 74,598.61 52,274.61 22,324.00 1211 14,922.78
Feb-01 $68,197.29 67,524.07 49,452.07 18,072.00 1178 15,489.87
Mar-01 $69,415.62 75,510.36 57,713.36 17,797.00 1167 15,240.47
Apr-01 $70,239.08 78,830.30 58,927.30 19,903.00 1262 15,474.62
May-01 $71,665.49 78,282.37 59,645.37 t 8,637.00 1425 15,276.20
Jun-01 $73,147.03 78,373.52 62,509.52 15,864.00 887 16,061.33
Jul-01
Aug-01
Sep-01
Oct-01
Nov-01
Dec-01
I SNOI/V/IO 'IV.I.O/-a-- :IOVbI:~AV E)NI'I'IObl OIN El. · I
~)NINblVd
x
XOG,AVd//3EIbI/S-..I-IO --~--
3nN3A3bl
9NIN~IVd
1,0-86 anNaAaa ~)NIN~IVcl 000'065
00~
000'~
000~
~ 000'0~
~ m
~ 00~ ~
0 ~
000'~
000~
000'0~
OOg~
000~ O00'gg
SNOI.LY.LIO ::10 #/--JI'IN~A~! NOI.LVJ. IO
00'0oo'~$
oo'ooo'ot$
- oo'ooo'~t$
e'"'e--~e~~ 00'000'~$
00'000'0~$
O0'O00'Og$
1,0-96 :~I3N~tA:~I ~I~)V~lV~)
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT: Resolution No. o~J.~ Ratifying FOR AGENDA: August 1, 2001
the Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies ORIGINATING DEPT: City Council
ORIGINATOR: John Law, Council President
DATE SUBMITTED: July 26, 2001
2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS:
Heard at Study Sessions 7/18/01 & 7/25/01 Resolution No.
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Draft Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies
H~.ard at Rt. dy ,qes,qinn~ 7/1R/Ol ~ 7/?q/01
OPERATIONS CO~ITTEE
C ng& Building Director ~PROVED FOR S~MITT~ BY
CO~(~ENT:
MAYOR: '~~ ~. -~
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
The Countywide planning policies have been under review for more than one year as required by the Growth
Management Act. A committee of staff members from all county jurisdictions made recommendations for
revisions which were then reviewed by a committee of Council members and Planning Commissioners from all
jurisdictions. The Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council Policy Board has recommended adoption of these
policies.
5. RECOMMENDATION:
Move to pass Resolution No. fie} ;~Lc~., Ratifying the Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies.
6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
7. NOTICE OF ACTION:
PULLED [-~ TABLED [--1 APPROVED [--1 DISAPPROVED [] AMEND
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE:
8. AGENDA BILL NO' 01 '" I q 7
9. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
10. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
11. RESEARCH SOURCES:
# ._2
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington,
ratifying the Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies.
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act (GMA), RCW 36.0A, requires that
each County planning under GMA must adopt countywide planning policies to be used
as a framework from which County and City comprehensive plans are developed and
adopted; and
WHEREAS, in May 1992, the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Planning Council,
made up of elected officials of the county, cities, and tribes of Kitsap County, adopted
the first countywide planning policies pursuant to GMA; and
WHEREAS, the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council (formerly Kitsap Regional
Planning Council) initiated revisions to the countywide planning policies through multi-
jurisdictional collaboration including planning staff, planning commissioners, and
council members; and
WHEREAS, there was a 25-day public comment period and an additional
45-day state agency and local jurisdictional comment period for the draft revisions to
the countywide planning policies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BREMERTON CITY
COUNCIL THAT:
The City Council does hereby recommend ratification of the Kitsap Countywide
Planning Policies incorporated herein as Exhibit A.
PASSED, by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this 1st day of August
2001.
JOHN LAW
Council President
ATTEST:
KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A"
INTRODUCTION
The Growth Management Act (GMA) of !99! (ReESF~B 1025) requires that each county planning under
RCW 36.70A.040 must adopt a Countywide Planning Policy to be used as a framework for the
development of county and city comprehensive plans. This countywide policy is required to be developed
in cooperation with Cities located within the county. The purpose of the countywide policy is to ensure
that city and county comprehensive plans and development regulations are consistent.
The benefits of consistent plans and implementation measures include: common understanding between
jurisdictions during the development review process, the consistent application of development standards
by adjacent jurisdictions thereby achieving more economical provision and maintenance of infrastructure,
fostering public understanding of the development review process, and the enhancement of inter-
jurisdictional cooperation.
The policies that follow are aimed at ensuring a cooperative and consistent planning program for Kitsap
County and the Cities therein. The policies were developed by a committee of planners representing
Kitsap County, Kitsap Regional Planning Council*, the City of Bremerton, the City of Port Orchard, the
City of Poulsbo, the City of Bainbridge Island, the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe and the Suquamish Tribe.
A joint planning committee was appointed by the County, Cities and tribal governments to review draft
policies and develop a recommendation to the Kitsap Regional Planning Council. * The Regional
Council* conducted a public hearing and prepared a recommendation for adoption by the Kitsap County
Board of Commissioners. Action by individual Cities and tribal governments is not required by ReE4t4t3
1025 the GMA. Board of Commissioner action is final and binding on the Cities unless overturned on
appeal.
COORDINATION AND COOPERATION
The Growth Management Act (GM_A) is founded on the principle that it is in the best interest of the
citizens of the State to foster coordination and cooperation among units of local and state government.
Cities and counties must engage in a collaborative planning process under the requirements of the Act.
Specifically, the Act states that, "THE LEGISLATURE FINDS THAT UNCOORDINATED AND UNPLANNED GROWTH ...
POSE A THREAT TO THE ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND THE HEALTH, SAFETE, AND
HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE ENJOYED BY RESIDENTS OF THE STATE. IT IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST THAT CITIZENS,
COMMUNITIES, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR COOPERATE AND COORDINATE WITH ONE
ANOTHER IN COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANNING."
* During 1997, the Kitsap Regional Planning Council changed its name
to Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council to reflect a broader
coordinative role among the Kitsap jurisdictions.
1
~ The GMA established "growthv~uu,,~ --~--:-- management heatings boards" to which the state,
a county, a city or a person with standing may request a review of whether a city or county has failed to
adopt a comprehensive plan, development regulation, or Countywide Planning Policy within the time lines
established by the Act or whether the comprehensive plan, development regulation or Countywide
Planning Policy are not in compliance with the Act. Therefore, state government involvement in the local
planning process will result if Cities and the County do not achieve consensus. In order to avoid state
involvement in the development of local land use plans, the following policy is declared:
1. That in the spirit of the Growth Management Act to promote coordinated planning in the state, Kitsap
County, the Cities and all other local jurisdictions do hereby agree to strive toward the principle that
all local planning differences should be negotiated and settled locally. Appeals or requests for review
shall be referred to the Central Puget Sound Growth m~,_;,~
...... ~ Management Heatings Board only
when the local resolution process has been exhausted.
Ideally, the planning process should flow smoothly and logically from the manner in which data is
collected to the way in which land use plans and development regulations are crafted. The County and
the Cities will establish a technical-coordinating committee to develop consistent methods of data
collection and land use plan formatting. Upon the successful achievement of consistent plan formats,
it will be possible to strive for consistent implementation measures including development regulations.
Common format and consistent definitions will enhance communication and understanding between
citizens and elected and appointed officials.
2. In order to enhance coordinated planning, Kitsap County and the Cities agree to develop a common
system for data collection, ~nd analysis, and consistent terms for comprehensive land use categories.
It should be recognized that the Countywide Planning Policy is a new process in Kitsap County. At
no other time has a similar document been prepared, adopted and implemented. Without a history to
evaluate the impact and utility of this document, the policy should be dynamic and regularly
monitored for applicability and effectiveness. Therefore, the following policy is adopted:
3. The Kitsap Regional P!a,~ng Coordinating Council shall amend the Countywide Planning Policy
process Memorandum of Understanding to establish the process and guidelines for reviewing and
amending Countywide Planning Policy. The amendments to the Memorandum of Understanding
shall address time frames, citizen participation, how amendments may be proposed and specific
adoption proceedings. Amendments to the Memorandum of Understanding shall be considered by the
Regional Council no later than 120 days after the initial adoption of the Countywide Planning Policy
by the Kitsap County Board of Commissioners and be enacted no later than 180 days after adoption.
February 27, 2001
Urban Growth Areas
Element A. POLICIES TO IMPLEMENT RCW 36.70A. 110 RELATING TO THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF URBAN GROWTH AREAS.
The basic premise for designating urban growth areas is to encourage the location of urban density
residential, commercial and industrial developments in areas where services can be most economically
provided. The benefits of directing growth to designated urban areas include:
* Higher density residential development within walking distance of jobs, transit, schools and
parks.
* Limiting urban expansion into rural and forested areas.
* Promotion of in-fill or redevelopment of existing urban areas.
* Preservation of open space, critical areas and lands designated for resource protection.
* Accommodation of employment growth in a concentrated pattern.
* More economical provision and maintenance of streets, sewer and water lines and other
public facilities.
* Promotion of attractive residential neighborhoods and commercial districts which provide a
sense of community.
* A harmonious relationship with regional planning as articulated by Vision 2020 adopted by
the Puget Sound Regional Council as the growth and transportation strategy for central
Puget Sound.
1. The Growth Management Act was amended in 1997 requiring Kitsap County and the Cities to
monitor countywide development activities in five- year intervals in order to test the population
growth assumptions incorporated in the Urban Growth Area capacity analyses. This Buildable
Land Supply Analysis compares growth and development assumptions, targets, and objectives with
actual growth and development, including residential, commercial, and industrial capacity. If
inconsistencies are found, the County and Cities must then identify reasonable measures, other
than adjusting Urban Growth Areas, that will be taken in order to comply with the GMA. The
following countywide planning policies relate to this regional program to monitor the buildable
land supply for future growth as forecasted by the State and allocated by the Kitsap Regional
Coordinating Council:
a. The County and the Cities shall establish a Regional Buildable Lands Program as
mandated by RCW 36. 70A. 215 that shall monitor land supply to determine the success of
implementation of their respective comprehensive plans.
b. The County and the Cities shall participate in the Buildable Lands analysis using a
consistent methodology for review and evaluation.
c. The County and the Cities shall develop strategies from Buildable Lands analysis to
increase the capacity of residential, commercial and industrial uses within Urban Growth
Areas reducing the need to expand the urban growth boundaries.
d. The County and Cities shall establish procedures for resolving inconsistencies in collection
and analysis of Buildable Lands data. In the event a resolution cannot be achieved, the
Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council shall be a forum to review and if possible resolve
any disputes between parties.
February 27, 2001
3
e. The Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council shall develop criteria for establishing and
expanding Urban Growth Areas consistent with the Growth Management Act.
f. The County and the Cities shall evaluate trends, through the Buildable Lands analysis, for
residential, commercial, and industrial development patterns to evaluate the regional
supply.
g. The Buildable Lands analysis shall be coordinated with the County's watershed planning
efforts.
2. The following countywide policies are related to the process and criteria for establishing and
amending Urban Growth Areas in Kitsap County:
D~;~I DI.-,~;~ t~ ..... .11 ~ '~T ..... 1.,~,. 1 '1 1
a. Sub-area=planning associated with all or part o fa designated Joint Planning Area~ shall be
completed by the County and the respective City prior to amending the Urban Growth Area
designation.
b. Shoreline development shall must meet the requirements of the applicable shoreline master
program.
c. Areas designated for urban growth should be determined by the existing development
pattern, residential densities, and the ability of the cc, n'..'nur2ty appropriate service provider
to provide a full range of urban services.
d. All Cities shall be within a designated Urban Growth Area. Urban Growth Areas may
include areas not contained within an incorporated city.
e. All Urban Growth Areas shall be reflected in County and respective City comprehensive
plans.
f. Urban growth shall be encouraged within Urban Growth Areas and not permitted outside of
an adopted Urban Growth Area except for new fully contained communities as authorized
by the Growth Management Act.
g. Urban Growth Areas may be the appropriate areas for receiving the transfer of development
rights (TDR's).
h. Annexations and incorporation shall not occur outside established Urban Growth Areas, but
may be anticipated within them, according to the provisions of adopted annexation
agreements.
February 27, 2001
4
59.
i. Sufficient area must be included in the Urban Growth Areas to accommodate a minimum
20-year population forecast.
j. The County, CiW, or interested citizens may ~tiate ~ mendment to ~ existing urb~
gro~h ~ea t~ough the no~al comprehensive plan mendment process; however in no
case shall men~ents be processed more th~ once per year.
k. The Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council shall review any proposed amendment to P~cr
*~;~;~* ..... ~ Ub G ~h~ fo ith gi l p li p
..................,,. an r ~ ro ea r consistency w re ona o cies rior
to appropriate ~ :~:~* ~:~'/~ .... *-'n bli h i ~.t ~k~, ~ ~.
1. Prior to mending ~ Urb~ Gro~h Area, the Co~ ~d respective Ci~ sh~l dete~ine
the capital improvement implications of the mendment to asce~ain that a ~11 r~ge of
urban se~ices will be present within the forecast period.
3. The following Coun~ide Planning Policy relates to the process for allocation of forecasted
population:
The Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council shall adopt a new process for allocating the
forecasted population for the period 2002-2022 and fo~ard by September 30, 2001,
consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Act. oh~n
~ ..... .............. ;1 ~ XT ..... ~. ~ ~, ~ na~ The allocation shall be
b~ed on the Build. hie ~ds Analysis and it shall promote a coun~ide development
pattern directing over five sixths of new population ~owth to the designated Urban Growth
Areas. The Coun~ and the Cities recognize that the success of this development pattern
requires not only the rigorous support of Kitsap Coun~ in the rural areas, but also Cities'
comprehensive plans being designed to attract substantial new population ~owth.
4. The following policies relate to the development of annexation plans and the role of the
Bounda~ Review Board:
a. The Co~ shall enter into ~ urb~ gro~h m~agement agreement ~G~) with each
ciW having a desi~ated Urb~ Gro~h Mea bo~d~ beyond its mmcipal bound~y
which will address the process for all ~e ~exation proposals. The ~b~ gro~h
Febmaw 27, 2001
5
management agreement shall include the procedures for the entire annexation process from
initial concept to final approval.
b. Residents of unincorporated areas within Urban Growth Areas being considered for
annexation should be consulted and actively involved in the development of the urban
growth management agreement and annexation process affecting them. Public hearings
shall be held prior to the adoption of such agreements.
c. All major land use considerations and the criteria for assessing an annexation proposal that
are currently used by the Boundary Review Board shall be incorporated into each city's
annexation process.
d. Annexation policies related to urban growth management agreements between the County
and individual cities shall be adopted within a timely fashion.
e. Following establishment of the Urban Growth Areas and adoption of the urban growth
management agreement, annexation proposals should be processed by the annexing City
and the County under the terms of the joint agreement.
f. Holders of a service franchise or approved service area are obligated to provide service in a
manner that is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plans, coordinated water service
plan, capital facility plans and urban growth management agreements.
g. Urban growth management agreements shall include a method for determining appropriate
compensation to the County, if any, by the annexing city for major capital construction
projects undertaken by the County in the annexation area. The agreement shall address the
time frame within which construction projects are undertaken to be eligible for
compensation and shall provide for a method for calculating depreciation.
h. Urban growth management agreements shall include a method for sharing net revenues, and
services and expenses, if appropriate, in annexations of significantly developed residential,
commercial and/or industrial areas through a phased program established for a set period of
time. Compensation formulae shall address revenue sources eligible for sharing and take
into account shifts in the costs of service obligations. If the cost of city services should
exceed the amount generated from annexed areas, the excess cost shall be deducted from
any on-going city payment obligations established pursuant to Policy A.3.g. above.
i. In the event an area proposed for annexation remains unincorporated and the City that
proposed the annexation can demonstrate that the area causes an impact or provides an
unfunded service to that area, the County will agree to work toward an agreeable revenue
sharing program. If the proposed annexation is approved and the County can demonstrate
that the area causes an impact or provides an unfunded service, the annexing City will agree
to work toward an agreeable revenue sharing program.
j. Prior to a Boundary Review Board or City public heating on a proposed annexation, written
public notice shall be mailed by the responsible agency to owners of each property within
the annexation area.
k. The Kitsap Regional P!a,m-:ing Coordinating Council shall work with the Boundary Review
Board to reach an agreement that the Boundary Review Board will waive jurisdiction on all
February 27, 2001
6
municipal annexation proposals that are in conformance with adopted urban growth
management agreements.
5. The following policies relate to the process and criteria for the review of fully contained
communities:
Under the Growth Management Act, fully contained communities are permitted, provided that
a portion of the twenty-year population forecast is reserved for this purpose. It ~.s the. ;~ntent of
portion of this projected growth may be held in reserve for future allocation to fully contained
communities.
a. The criteria, general standards and the process for approving fully contained communities
shall be incorporated in adopted comprehensive plans. Consistent with ~
RCW 36. 70A. 350, the criteria for fully contained communities shall include, but is not
limited to, the following:
i. New infrastructure is provided for and impact fees are established consistent with the
requirements of RCW 82.02.050.
ii. Transit-oriented site planning and traffic demand management programs are
implemented.
iii. Buffers are provided between fully contained communities and adjacent urban
development.
iv. A mix of uses is provided to offer jobs, housing and services to the residents of the new
community.
v. Affordable housing is provided within the new community for a broad range of income
levels.
vi. Environmental protection has been addressed and provided for, consistent with RCW
43.21C. 031.
vii. Development regulations are established to ensure urban growth will not occur in
adjacent non-urban areas.
viii. Provision is made to first avoid, second minimize, and third mitigate impacts on
designated agricultural, forest and mineral resource lands.
ix. The plan for the fully contained community is consistent with the development
regulations established for the protection of critical areas pursuant to RCW 36.70A. 170.
x. On-site and off-site infrastructure impacts shall be fully evaluated. Resort design,
development and operation shall first avoid, second minimize, and third mitigate
potential adverse impacts.
b. New fully contained communities shall be processed for approval as an amendment to the
Kitsap County Comprehensive plan. Fully contained communities shall be designated on
the County Comprehensive Plan if approved after formal public heatings are held to
consider the plan amendment.
February 27, 2001
7
c. Population reserved for new fully contained communities shall be considered as a portion
of the twenty-year population forecast to be allocated to urban areas. A population reserve
for new communities shall be established subsequent to adoption of the Kitsap Countywide
Planning Policy and revised not less than every five years as a part of the designation or
review of Urban Growth Areas.
d. New fully contained communities shall be sited adjacent to, or in reasonably close
proximity to, a major transportation corridor.
e. Master Plans for new fully contained communities shall include plans for public facilities
and places such as parks, recreation and open space areas, school sites and public safety
related facilities necessary to accommodate the development.
f. The approval of a new fully contained community constitutes the establishment of a new
Urban Growth Area. As such, proposed new fully contained communities shall be
reviewed by the Kitsap Regional P!avming Coordinating Council for consistency with
regional policies prior to public hearings for development permit approval.
6. The following policies relate to the process and criteria for the review of master planned
resorts:
~ RC~V $6. 70A.$60 allows thc approval of master planned resorts outside of urban
growth areas. Master planned resorts arc described as self-contained, fully integrated planned
developments in areas with significant natural amenities. Master planned resorts arc
distinguished ~rom fully contained communities in their orientation as destination resort
centers, residential uses for short term accommodation and a design that does not include a mix
of uses offering jobs, housing and services supporting a long term resident population.
a. Policies, design standards and review criteria for master planned resorts shall bc identified
in thc appropriate County or City comprehensive plan and implemented through
appropriate development regulations.
b. The comprehensive plan and development regulations shall include restrictions that
preclude new urban or suburban land uses in the vicinity of the master planned resort,
except in areas designated for urban growth under RCW 36.70A. 110.
c. Master planned resorts shall be designed with a primary focus on destination resort
facilities consisting of short-term visitor accommodations associated with a range of
developed on-site indoor or outdoor recreational facilities. Master planned resorts may
include other residential uses within the resort boundaries only if such uses are integrated
into and support the on-site recreational nature of the resort.
d. In the approval of a master planned resort it shall be determined that the land is better
suited, and has more long-term importance, for the master planned resort than for the
commercial harvesting of timber or agricultural production, if located on land that would
otherwise be designated as forest or agricultural land under RCW 36.70A. 170.
e. Resort plans shall be consistent with development regulations established for critical areas,
consistent with RCW 43.21 C. 031.
February 27, 2001
8
f. On-site and off-site infrastructure impacts shall be fully evaluated. Resort design,
development and operation shall first avoid, second minimize, and third mitigate potential
adverse impacts.
g. Proposed master planned resorts shall be reviewed by the Kitsap Regional Pla~n;.ng
Coordinating Council for consistency with regional policies prior to public hearings for
development permit approval.
February 27, 2001
9
57
Centers
Element B. COUNTYWIDE STRATEGIES TO DESIGNATE CENTERS.
Centers are intended to be compact and centralized working, shopping and/or activity areas linked to
other Centers by transit. Centers and their boundaries shall be locally determined by the County and the
Cities where a community-wide focalpoint can be provided significant population and/_or employment
growth can be located and the increased use of transit, walking and bicycling can be supported
Designated Centers shall define the pattern of future residential and commercial/industrial growth in
Kitsap County.
1. The following relates to designating Centers within Urban Growth Areas.
a. Metropolitan Center: Bremerton, as a central city, is designated by the Puget Sound Regional
Council as a Metropolitan Center.
b. a~, .... t:,,~ Urban Centers are areas within a region providing the widest range of
commercial, housing and cultural choices. While not all opportunities are within walking or
bicycling distance, all areas of the Metropolitan Center are serviced by transit throughout the
day. Significant in-fill opportunities exist with the highest residential, commercial, and
employment_densities expected consistent with the Puget Sound Regional Council's Multi-
County Planning Policies.
c. Town Centers are usually the existing downtown core of a larger Urban Growth Area. There
is an abundant mix of shopping, service, employment, and cultural opportunities. Multifamily
housing may be intermixed and single family housing may be within walking or bicycling
distance. Infill should include mixed use and higher densities surrounding the Town Center.
Transit serves the Town Center to connect with other local and regional Centers.
d Mixed-Use Centers have a planned mix of housing, commercial, and employment
opportunities. Most shopping and commercial uses are within a short walking or bicycling
distance of housing. There is a higher proportion of multi-family housing at relatively high
densities.
e. Pedestrian Pockets and Transportation Hubs may be located within existing Town Centers or Mixed
Use Centers. Walking, bicycling, and transit are the major forms of travel. Transportation Hubs are
locations of intermodal connection and in Kitsap County are usually ferry terminals. Future candidates
might be transit stations that have planned convenience services.
f. Activity and Employment Centers are areas of concentrated employment or shopping and are
a magnet for significant numbers of people usually during daytime hours because of business
and/or manufacturing activities. Industrial and business parks and shopping areas are in this
category. There typically is little or no significant housing associated with these Centers.
Activity and Employment Centers are serviced by transit at peak hours or more ofien.
(Industrial impacts are addressed elsewhere in these policies.)
2. The Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council shall develop a process and criteria for designation of
Centers. The County and the Cities will each be responsible for defining Centers and their
boundaries within their respective jurisdictions.
February 27, 2001
10
Rural Land Uses and Development Patterns
Element C. POLICIES FOR COUNTYWIDE STRATEGIES FOR RURAL AREAS.
Rural areas of Kitsap County are characterized as having a variety of parcel sizes, with a diversity of
land use activities. These areas also contain significant amounts of complex natural systems. It is a
high priority to preserve and enhance the rural character of these areas. Counties are responsible for
designating and regulating rural areas through the comprehensive planning process. However, rural
preservation is a regional issue and it is important to coordinate these planning objectives with the
Cities.
2. The following policies relate to preserving rural character and enhancing the natural
environment.
a. Preserve the character of identified rural areas by protecting and enhancing the natural
environment, open space and recreational opportunities, and scenic and historic areas;
supporting small-scale farming and forestry uses; and permitting low-density residential living
and cluster development maintained by rural levels of service. Support Rural Communities as
locations for a mix of housing types, rural levels of service, cultural activities, and employment
that serves the needs of rural areas.
b. This policy is not intended to preclude the future designation of Urban Growth Areas.
2. The following policies relate to preserving rural land use and development patterns:
a. Rural Communities are already-existing residential and commercial areas of more intensive
rural development designated in the Kitsap County Comprehensive Plan under RCW
36. 70A. 070. 5. In-fill is expected Rural Communities shouM be serviced by transportation
providers and other services consistent with the Level of Service adopted by Kitsap County
upon their designation as an area of more intensive rural development.
b. Pedestrian Pockets and Transportation Hubs may be located within existing areas of more
intensive development. Walking, bicycling, and transit are the major forms of travel.
Transportation Hubs are locations of intermodal connection and in Kitsap County are usually
ferry terminals. Future candidates might be transit stations that have planned convenience
services.
c. The County shall develop criteria consistent with the Growth Management Act for designating
future industrial and commercial development outside of Urban Growth Areas that protect
rural character while encouraging vehicle trip reduction. The criteria shouM allow for
industrial resource-based land use and recreation and for convenience commercial that is
scaled to serve the daily needs of rural residents.
February 27,2001
3. The following policies relate to establishing and maintaining rural levels of service:
a. Rural level-of-service standards shall address sewage disposal, water, transportation and other
appropriate services. The standards shall be developed based upon levels of service typically
delivered in rural areas consistent with RCW 36. 70A. 030 (16).
b. For purpose of trip reduction, develop a range of alternative modes of transportation
consistent with rural levels of service to connect Rural Communities with urban Centers.
c. When sewers need to be extended to solve isolated health, environmental, and sanitation
problems, they shall be designed for limited access so as not to increase the development
potential of the surrounding rural area.
4. The following policies relate to conserving small-scale natural resource use in rural areas:
a. Rural land use designations in the County's Comprehensive Plan should support rural uses such
as farming, forestry, mining, recreation, and other rural activities, and permit a variety of low-
density residential uses which preserve rural character, and can be sustained by rural service
levels.
b. The County's Comprehensive Plan policies shall promote clustering residential development and
other techniques to protect and enhance significant open spaces, natural resources, and critical
areas for more efficient use of the land Clustering should not increase residential housing units in
the overall area designated as rural, consistent with designated rural densities. Development
clusters shall be designed, scaled and sited in a manner consistent with rural character and the
provision of rural levels of service.
c. The County's Comprehensive Plan policies shall support Rural Communities as locations of
employment, a mix of housing types, and cultural activities for rural areas that primarily function
as locations for service needs such as grocery stores, shopping, and community services, and
small-scale cottage industries for the surrounding rural area.
February 27, 2001
12
&o
Open Space, Resource Protection, and Critical Areas
Element D. POLICIES FOR COUNTYWIDE STRATEGIES FOR OPEN SPACE
PRESERVATION, RESOURCE PROTECTION, AND CRITICAL AREAS.
Open space is defined as land area consisting of natural systems, resource lands and critical areas
that include building limitations for future development. These critical areas include wetlands,
wildlife conservation areas, steep slopes, frequently flooded areas and areas with a critical recharging
affect. These open space lands also include aesthetic functions such as view sheds of the water or
ridgelines. Many of these natural systems are inter-connected and cross multi-jurisdictional
boundaries within the County. The strategy is to conserve these areas and connect them to create a
regional open space network to protect critical areas, conserve natural resources, and preserve lands
and resources of countywide and local significance
1. The following policies relate to creating a regional network of open space:
a. The County and the Cities shall implement the Kitsap County Open Space Plan and the Kitsap
County Consolidated Greenway Plan which identify a countywide green space strategy that
incorporates planning efforts of the County, Cities, state agencies, non-profit interest groups
and land trusts in the County.
b. The County and the Cities shall preserve and enhance, through inter-jurisdictional planning,
significant networks and linkages of open space, regional parks and public/private recreation
areas, wildlife habitats, critical areas resource lands, water bodies and trails.
c. The County and the Cities shall frame and separate urban areas by creating and preserving a
permanent network of urban and rural open space, including parks, recreation areas, critical
areas and resource lands.
2. The foilowing policies relate to conserving and enhancing the County's natural resources,
critical areas and environmental amenities while planning for and accommodating sustainable
growth:
a. The County's and the Cities' Comprehensive Plans shah each address regional air and water
quality protection.
b. The County and the Cities shall protect critical areas (wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, fish
and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, steep slopes, and
geologically hazardous areas) and other environmental amenities such as view corridors,
canopy cover, and ridgelines.
c. The County and the Cities shall establish and implement best management practices to protect
the long-term integrity of the natural environment, adjacent land use, and the productivity of
resource lands.
d. The County and the Cities shall establish procedures to preserve significant historic, visual and
cultural resources including views, landmarks, archaeological sites, and areas of special
locational character.
February 27, 2001
13
e. The County and the Cities shall encourage the use of environmentally sensitive development
practices to minimize the impacts of growth on the County's natural resource systems.
f. The County and the Cities shall work together to identify, protect, and restore networks of
natural habitat areas and functions that cross-jurisdictional boundaries.
g. The County and Cities shall protect and enhance ecosystems that support Washington State's
Priority Habitat and Species as identified by the Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife.
h. All jurisdictions shall maintain or enhance water quality through control of runoff and use of
best management practices to protect aquatic resources.
3. The following policies relate to listed species recovery under the Endangered Species Act (ESA):
a. The County and the Cities shall preserve, protect, and where possible restore the functions of
natural habitat to support ESA-listed species, through the adoption of comprehensive plan
policies, critical area ordinances, shoreline master programs and other development
regulations that seek to protect, maintain or restore aquatic ecosystems associated habitats and
aquifer through the use of management zones, development regulations, incentives for
voluntary efforts of private landowners and developers, land use classifications or
designations, habitat acquisition programs or habitat restoration projects.
b. The County and the Cities shall provide incentive-based non-regulatory protection efforts such
as acquisition of priority habitats through fee-simple and conservation easements from willing
sellers.
c. The County and the Cities shall jointly establish and implement monitoring and evaluation
program to determine the effectiveness of restoration, enhancement, and recovery strategies for
salmonids including ESA-listed species. Each jurisdiction shall apply an adaptive management
strategy to determine how well the objectives of listed species recovery and critical habitat
preservation/restoration are being achieved.
4. The following polices relate to coordinate of watershed and land use planning:
a. The County and the Cities shall participate in a planning program that determines changes in
stream hydrology and water quality under different land use scenarios at full build-out of
designated land use classifications.
b. The County and the Cities shall coordinate land use planning using watersheds or natural
drainage basins to implement strategies for restoration of aquatic habitat and to reduce
impacts to other natural systems.
c. Kitsap County shall coordinate and maintain a regional database of best available science for
the purpose of modifying Critical Areas Ordinances, if funding is available.
d. Upon adoption ora state classification system, the Cities and the County shall establish a
single system for stream typing.
February, 27, 2001
14
Contiguous and Orderly Development
Element ~B E. POLICIES FOR PROMOTING CONTIGUOUS AND ORDERLY
DEVELOPMENT AND THE PROVISION OF URBAN GOVERNMENTAL
SERVICES TO SUCH DEVELOPMENT.
Upon designation of Urban Growth Areas the County and Cities will need to develop consistent
implementation measures to ensure that development occurs in an orderly and contiguous manner. The
intent of the following countywide planning policies is to minimize differences in urban development
regulations and standards between the County and the Cities and to facilitate the economical provision of
urban services to development.
1. The following policies relate to the encouragement of cooperative inter-jurisdictional
planning by federal, tribal, state, local, and special purpose government:
a. Inter-jurisdictional discussion, information exchange, and coordination of proposals shall be
initiated as early and expeditiously as possible by the responsible agencies.
b. Initial inventories and analyses of utilities and public services information are critical to the
planning process and shall be made available as early and expeditiously as possible by the
responsible agencies.
c. The Kitsap Regional ?!am~ng Coordinating Council shall establish or designate an on-going
technical committee comprised of representatives from utilities and service providers to
investigate long-range regional needs for various facilities and services, including but not
limited to those for transportation, sewer and storm drainage, availability and delivery of
potable water, solid waste, parks and recreation, and open space.
d. Pre-annexation agreement issues shall be considered in developing each urban growth
management agreement.
e. The Countywide Planning Policy will further the implementation of Vision 2020 and
Destination 2030 as adopted by the Puget Sound Regional Council.
2. The following policies relate to inter-regional coordination of land use and transportation
planning:
a. The County and the Cities shall participate in the Puget Sound Regional Council and the
Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization.
b. Locally-generated data shall be provided to the Puget Sound Regional Council and the
Peninsula Regional Transportation PlaIming Organization for use in their coordination of
population forecasts, land use, and transportation.
c. The planning proposals of these regional organizations shall be monitored and adjustments
recommended to ensure that they accurately reflect local needs and plans.
February 27, 2001
15
3. The following policies relate to suspected fiscal disparities:
a. It is recognized that fiscal disparities exist as a result of growth and changes in municipal
boundaries. The Kitsap Regional P1a~:,ng Coordinating Council shall seek ways to address
fiscal disparities and identify alternate methods of implementing tax revenue sharing programs
as they relate to promoting coordinated development and the implementation of the Growth
Management Act.
b. The County and the Cities shall work together to insure that all fees associated with
development approval are based upon the real cost of service and act to encourage development
within designated Urban Growth Areas.
c. The Kitsap Regional P!a~-Jng Coordinating_Council shall sponsor a on-going regional
discussion on revenue disparity issues d,aeie, g ~.
February 27, 2001
16
Public Capital Facilities
Element C F. POLICIES FOR SITING PUBLIC CAPITAL FACILITIES THAT ARE OF A
COUNTYWIDE OR STATE-WIDE NATURE.
The Growth Management Act requires local governments to inventory existing capital facilities owned
by public entities, to identify locations and to determine capacities to meet future demand for growth
without decreasing levels of service. The Washington State Office of Financial Management is
responsible for identifying and maintaining a list of essential state public facilities that are required or
likely to be built within the next six years as required by the Growth Management Act. Counties and
cities are also required to coordinate the siting of countywide and statewide capital facilities to mitigate
potential adverse impacts from the location and development of these facilities.
1. The following policies relate to the identification of needed capital facilities:
a. The County and the Cities shall each inventory their existing capital facilities and identify
needed facility expansion and construction and provide that data to the Kitsap Regional
Coordinating Council.
b. From local inventory and analysis the Kitsap Regional ?!c,.~ng Coordinating Council shall
develop and maintain a list of public capital facilities needed to serve Kitsap County as a
whole, based upon the County and Cities' Comprehensive Plans, the Countywide Coordinated
Water System Plan, and other appropriate system plans. These include, but are not limited to,
solid and hazardous waste handling £acilities and disposal sites, water and wastewater treatment
facilities, regional water supply intertie facilities, regional education institutions, airports, local
ti 1 fa iliti i ti fa iliti i 1 di h pit 1 ~--~+~'~*' ..... ~-~ .....r. ...... ~
correc ona c es, n-pa ent c es ncu ng os as .........
""""*~ ~"~*~' ..... ~' .... gi dg
.......... , ~.v~,v ........ and re onal park and recreation facilities, an overnment
buildings that serve Kitsap County as a whole, including those essential public facilities as
defined in RCW 36. 70A. 200.
2. The following policies relate to establishing a process and review criteria for the siting of
facilities that are of a countywide or statewide nature:
a. When an essential public facility as defined in RCW 36. 70A.200 Ar ...... . .... :~ .... ~ .... ;~
nature is proposed in Kitsap County, the Kitsap Regional P!arm~ng Coordinating Council shall
appoint a Facility Analysis and Site Evaluation Advisory Committee composed of citizen
members selected by the member jurisdictions to represent a broad range of interest groups to
evaluate proposed public facility siting. At a minimum this evaluation shall consider:
i. the impacts created by existing facilities:
ii. the potential for reshaping the economy, the environment and community character;
iii. the development of specific siting criteria for the proposed project, giving priority
consideration to siting within Designated Centers;
iv. the identification, analysis and ranking of potential project sites;
February 27, 2001
17
v. measures to first minimize and second mitigate potential physical impacts including, but
not limited to, those relating to land use, transportation, utilities, noise, odor and public
safety;
vi. measures to first minimize and second mitigate potential fiscal impacts.
b. Certain Mdj~ public capital facilities such as schools and libraries that generate substantial
travel demand should be located first in Designated Centers or, if not feasible to do so, along or
near major transportation corridors and public transportation routes. ~ a_Ep!;.ca~!e.
c. Some public capital facilities, such as those for waste handling, may be more appropriately
located outside of Urban Growth Areas due to exceptional bulk or potentially dangerous or
objectionable characteristics. Public facilities located beyond Urban Growth Areas should be
self-contained or be served by urban governmental services in a manner that will not promote
sprawl. Utility and service considerations must be incorporated into site planning and
development.
d. Uses shall adhere to local health district or state agency rules regarding commercial and
industrial use of on-site sewage systems.
e. The multiple use of corridors for major utilities, trails and transportation rights-of-way is
encouraged.
f. County and City comprehensive plans and development regulations shall not preclude the siting
of essential public facilities.
g. Public facilities shall not be located in designated resource lands, critical areas, or other areas
where the siting of such facilities would be incompatible.
3. The following policies relate to air transportation facilities in Kitsap County:
a. The Counties and the Cities shall recognize the importance of airports as essential public
facilities and the preservation of access to the air transportation system.
b. The County and the Cities shall ensure the safety of the community and airport users through
compatible land use planning adjacent to airports and coordination of the airport with ground
access.
February 27, 2001
18
Transportation
Element ~.G. POLICIES FOR COUNTYWIDE STRATEGIES FOR TRANSPORTATION
FACILITIES AND SERVICES.
The Growth Management Act requires that transportation planning be coordinated among local and
state jurisdictions. The Growth Management Act further requires that transportation planning be
coordinated with the land use elements of local comprehensive plans. Coordination of land use and
transportation plans will allow Kitsap County and the Kitsap Cities to meet three inter-related
transportation goals:
o ~ Serve Designated Centers to Rreduce sprawl, conserve land and make more
efficient use of infrastructure,
o Preserve the natural environment, including water and air quality,
o Provide a balancedsystem/or ~ the efficient, safe movement of people,
goods and services among Designated Centers within Kitsap County and the larger
Pug gi ~+; .... lc-el ~c~c~, ............ ~ ........rr,~; .....
et Sound re on.~,~* ~" ,~e ................. · 2 ....... ~ oJ .......... J
The intent of the following policies is to eeaeomaage define appropriate methods and strategies to
achieve these goals through inter-regional and intra-regional coordination among transportation and
land use planning agencies.
T ~! ...... h~o~.~ I~A , .... 1 .... 1~11 nAA ....... 1+~ ~.-1~1 +~,,.~,~.q-,~*~.~ ;o,.. ..... A
~ ~ v;,~ ~;~ P!~ C ty t
1. The following policies relate to strategies to optimize and manage the use of transportation
facilities and se~ices:
a. The Coun~ and the Cities shall each emphasize the maintenance and prese~ation o/their
existing ~ansportation ne~ork.
b~ Through an annual review of the Transportation Element o/their Comprehensive Plan, the
Coun~ and the Cities shall each ident~ and prioritize operational and sa~ deficits.
c. The Coun~ and the Cities shall utilize Transportation System Management s~ategies such as
right turn channelization, par~'ng restrictions, ~a~c signal coordination, and non-motorized
transportation facilities.
February 27, 2001
19
d. The County and the Cities should consider access management regulations that provide
standards for driveway spacing and delineation and encourage the joint use of access points
where practical.
e. The County and the Cities shall actively seek opportunities to share facilities, expertise, and
transportation resources, such as multiple use park & ride/parking lots or shared traffic signal
maintenance responsibility.
Z Since 1980, the total number of vehicle miles traveled in the Puget Sound Region has grown
twice as fast as employment and four times as fast as population, gr'hile it has been fueled by a
number of factors, trying to meet this escalating demand for vehicle travel would require
financial resources far beyond existing funding sources, with substantial negative
environmental impacts. The shift of travel trips from single occupant (SOI/) to high occupant
vehicles (HOV) and from vehicles to non-motorized modes will benefit air quality and the level
of traffic congestion. The following policies relate to reducing the rate of growth in auto traffic,
including the number of vehicle trips, the number of miles traveled, and the length of vehicle
trips taken, for both commute and non-commute trips:
a. The County and the Cities shall provide both infrastructure and policy incentives to increase
the use of non-SOV modes of travel.
b. The range of infrastructure incentives to encourage the use of non-SOV modes of travel could
include the following:
i. Provide public transit, including preferential treatments for transit, such as queue by-
pass lanes, traffic signal modifications (Opticom), and safe, properly designed transit
stops.
ii. Provide integrated transfer points to facilitate seamless trips between transit and other
modes of travel, particularly at ferry terminals, including park & ride lots,
carpool/vanpool facilities, and transit advantages in ease of ingress~egress and
proximity to actual connection points, and innovative transit-oriented retail service
clusters.
iii. Provide non-recreational bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
iv. During the development of all state, county, and city highway capacity improvement
projects, consider the market for non-SOV travel, and the addition of High Occupancy
Vehicle (HOV) lanes, park & ride lots, appropriate infrastructure for both bicycling
and walking, and telecommunications infrastructure.
c. The range of policy incentives to encourage the use of non-SOV modes of travel could include
the following:
i. Increased emphasis on the Commute Trip Reduction Program already in place
(including ridesharing incentives), with Kitsap Transit designated as the lead agency,
including program promotion and monitoring.
February 27, 2001
20
ii. Managed parking demand at ferry terminals, employment, and retail centers to
discourage SOP' use through privileged parking for HOP' users, fee structure and
parking space allocations.
iii. Encouraging telecommuting as a viable work alternative.
iv. Encouraging the shift of work and non-work trips to off-peak travel hours.
v. Congestion pricing.
vi. Auto-restricted zones.
vii. Promotion of driver awareness through educational efforts.
d. The County and the Cities shall develop standards that address appropriate bicycle and
pedestrian facilities for development of new streets and reconstruction of existing streets in
Designated Centers and Rural Communities.
e. In Designated Centers, the jurisdictions should complete missing vehicular and non-motorized
links between key arterials to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle facilities, without
compromising safety standards.
f. The County and the Cities shall develop coordinated bicycle and pedestrian systems or plans,
which should be consistent across jurisdictional boundaries.
g. In cases of substantial residential or commercial development, Kitsap Transit shall review and
comment on development proposals to facilitate convenient use and operation of appropriate
transit services.
3. The following policies relate to the environmental impacts of transportation policies:
a. Transportation improvements shall be located and constructed so as to discourage/minimize
adverse impacts on water quality and other environmental features.
b. The County, the Cities, and Kitsap Transit shall consider programming capital improvements
and transportation facilities that alleviate and mitigate impacts of land use on air quality and
energy consumption, such as: high-occupancy vehicle lanes; public transit; vanpool/ carpool
facilities; electric and other Iow emission vehicles including buses; bicycle and pedestrian
facilities that are designed for functional transportation.
c. The County and the Cities shall ensure environmental protection, water quality, and
conformance with ESA requirements through best management practices throughout the life of
the transportation facilities, including:
i. Facility design, and in particular collection and treatment of storm water and surface
run-oil,
ii. Avoiding construction during the rainy season.
February. 27,2001
21
iii. Regular and routine maintenance of systems.
d. The County, the Cities, and Kitsap Transit shall provide public education about anti-pollution
measures, such as turning off car engines while waiting at ferry terminals and parking lots;
voluntary emission checks.
4. Recognizing that the County and the Cities each encompass a range of development and density
patterns, each jurisdiction shall designate its Centers, consistent with the criteria set forth in
Element B of the Countywide Planning Policies. The following policies relate to design
standards to support transit and pedestrian travel appropriate to each type of urban and rural
development or re-development:
a. The County and the Cities shall each develop design standards for their Designated Centers
that will include specific strategies to encourage neighborhood connectivity such as residential
clustering, encouraging or requiring mixed use development; use of through streets or multiple
entrances; bike and pedestrian connections between neighborhoods.
b. In Urban Growth Areas, design standards shall require pedestrian- and transit-oriented design
that includes convenient access and safety amenities, such as lighting, landscaping, sidewalks,
and ease of access for physically challenged individuals.
c. Rural Communities outside Urban Growth Areas shall accommodate appropriate
pedestrian/bicycle connections and transit service and facilities consistent with rural levels of
service in order to minimize vehicle trips.
5. The following policies relate to transportation linkages between designated local and regional
Centers:
a. Regional corridors shall be designated for vehicle, transit, HOIZ facilities, rail, bicycle, and
pedestrian travel between centers as part of the countywide transportation plan.
b. The transportation system linking Designated Centers within urban areas and Rural
Communities=within the county shall be transit-oriented and pedestrian and bicycle friendly.
6. The following policies relate to freight transportation:
a. Preferred routes for the movement of freight shall be identified as part of the countywide
transportation plan.
b. The County and the Cities shall work to ensure that compatible land uses are applied along
designated freight corridors.
c. The County and the Cities shall use appropriate roadway standards for designated freight
corridors.
February 27, 2001
22
70
7. The following policies relate to transportation relationships with the Puget Sound Regional
Council and the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization:
a. The Countywide Planning Policy w;.ll shall further the implementation of Vision 2020 and
Destination 2030 as adopted by the Puget Sound Regional Council.
b. The County and the Cities shall actively participate in the Puget Sound Regional Council and
the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO) to assure that
transportation planning in the two regions is consistent and accurately reflects local needs
related to identified regional system components.
c. The Kitsap Regional P!amn~ng Coordinating Council shall serve as the point of coordination to
assure Puget Sound Regional Council and Peninsula RTPO planning programs are consistent
and mutually beneficial to jurisdictions within Kitsap County.
d. The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for Kitsap County shall continue to be a part of
the regional TIP adopted by the Puget Sound Regional Council. Local review, comment and
recommendations shall be coordinated through the Kitsap Regional P!ap~Zng Coordinating
Council.
8. The following policies relate to the identification of needed transportation related facilities
and services within Kitsap County:
a. The Puget Sound Regional Council and the Peninsula RTPO shall identify regional system
components and related improvements within Kitsap County with the concurrence of the Kitsap
Regional P!ar,~2ng Coordinating Council.
b. A countywide transportation plan developed by the Kitsap Regional P!am~Jng Coordinating
Council shall be prepared pursuant to the Growth Management Act to identify countywide
transportation facility and service needs. A technical committee including transit and local,
regional, and state transportation providers shall be used in this process.
9. The following policies relate to the coordination of intra-¢ounty transportation planning
efforts:
a. As a part of the local comprehensive planning process, the Kitsap Regional P!arming
Coordinating Council shall be responsible for reviewing consistency of land usc and
transportation plans and elements.
b. The County and the Cities shall address compatibility between land use and transportation
facilities by:
i. Not using new road improvements to justify land use intensification.
ii. Managing access on new transportation facilities outside Urban Growth Areas;
February 27, 2001
23
iii. Allowing phased development of improvements including acquiring right of way;
iv. Using comprehensive plans and development regulations to ensure that development
does not create demands exceeding the capacity of the transportation system, such as:
density limits in areas outside of Urban Growth Areas; concurrency management and
adequate public facility regulation; integrated multi-modal and non-motorized
networks;
c. The County and the Cities shall work together in a coordinated, iterative process to
periodically reassess whether regional land use and transportation goals can realistically be
met. If transportation adequacy and concurrency cannot be met, the following actions should
be considered:
i. Adjust land use and/or level of service (LOS) standards;
ii. Make full use of all feasible local option transportation revenues authorized but not yet
implemented; and
iii. Work with Washington State Department of Transportation (including Washington
State Ferries), Kitsap Transit, and the private sector to seek additional State
transportation revenues, state and federal grants for infrastructure improvements, and
local options to make system improvements necessary to accommodate projected
population growth.
d. Acc, w~-ne, n Adjacent jurisdictions in Kitsap County shall develop consistent street classification
system and street standards. ~1~11
..... j .......... v ......... plan Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council shall establish a
process for evaluating development impacts including those that may affect neighboring
jurisdictions within the county.
f. The Kitsap Regional
....... g Coordinating Council shall function to ensure that transportation
planning, system management and improvements at local, regional, and state levels are
coordinated, complementary, and consistent with adopted comprehensive land use plans.
10. The following policies relate to
................. s coordinated and consistent level of
service (LOS) standards:
a. The County and thc Cities og-'
O~; .... 1. DTD/'~ ~- .... ! ..... ;o*~.t- ld de lop bl
................................... shou ye compara e level of service standards
t~veem among the County, Cities and the State of Washington for identified regional system
components.
b. The County and the Cities shall adopt roadway LOS standards. Urban growth management
agreements shall designate level of service standards.
c. The County and the Cities shall adopt transit LOS in the form of"Service Standards" adopted
by the Kitsap Transit Board of Commissioners. The standards shall consider both frequency of
service and bus capacity.
February 27, 2001
24
7
d. The County and the Cities shall coordinate with the WSDOT through the Puget Sound Regional
Council and the Peninsula RTPO in setting LOS standards for highways and facilities of
statewide significance, including the Washington State Ferries routes designated as such.
e. For highways and facilities of regional significance, including the Southworth ferry route, the
County and the Cities shall jointly set LOS with WSDOT through the Puget Sound Regional
Council and the Peninsula RTPO.
f. The County and the Cities shall each identify capacity deficiencies and either address them in
terms of identified funding or adjust the LOS standard on a temporary basis.
g. New development should not cause LOS to degrade to a level lower than the adopted standard,
consistent with state law.
February 27,200l
25
Affordable Housing
Element g-H. POLICIES THAT CONSIDER THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
AND PARAMETERS FOR ITS DISTRIBUTION.
The Growth Management Act requires cities and counties to encourage the availability of affordable
housing that is affordable for all income levels at a variety of housing densities. Local jurisdictions are
also encouraged to preserve existing housing resources in their communities.
1. The following definitions,,."; ....,,.~'~"-'~"~,...~,.,, ..,,,.~.-~, ~' .... ;-- relates to the Countywide Planning Policy:
The te..'~". "affe,~'~b~ ~' .... :" ~'' ~'~ .~c~., ..... :~e range of ~ous':ng types
a. Below Market Rate HousJn~ shall mean housing intended for ]ow ~ -to-middle
income households. These income levels are further de~ned as follows (WAC 365.
i. ~xtremely low-income shall mean those households that have incomes that are at or
below 30% of the coun~ide median.
ii_=. l/er~ low-income shall mean those households that have incomes that are withi, the
range of 31 - 50% of the countywide median._
iii. Low-income shall mean those households that have incomes that are within the range
of 51 - 80% pete-em of the countywide median.
iv. Moderate-income shall mean those households that have incomes that are within the
range of °,,O 115 peru-em 81-95% of the countywide median.
v. Middle-income shall mean those households that have incomes that are within the
range of 96-120% of the countywide median.
b. Market Rate Housing shall mean housing intended for households with incomes that are
greater than I 15% 120% of the countywide median.
2. The following policies relate to the process for determining and fulfilling housing needs, and
the fa:.r skate equitable distribution of affordable below market rate housing in Kitsap County:
a. The County and the Cities shall inventory the existing housing stock consistent with the
Growth Management Act following each decennial census review, and correlate with current
population and economic conditions, past trends, and ~ ten year population and
employment forecasts, to determine short and long range af:fomkal~ housing needs, including
rental and home ownership.
b. [based-em Recognizing the percentage share of the existing and forecasted countywide
population and the distribution of existing below market rate housing, The County and the
Cities shall develop strategies to equitably disperse projected countywide below market rate
housing needs throughout Kitsap County in the Urban Growth Areas and, where they are
specifically found to be appropriate in consideration of existing development patterns and
February 27, 2001
26
nsities, in s hate ura ommunities
............ ~ ~.~ .............. ~ Council.
c. Local housin~ inventories, and projections, and equitable distribution strategies shall be
compiled and updated under ~e coordination of the Kitsap Ke~ional P!mm~n~ Coordinatin~
Council to identi~ coun~wide conditions ~d projected needs.
d. The Coun~ and the Cities~..~ ~;--~*~..o~.~.~..~ shall eac~ identi~ specific policies ~d
implementation strategies in their Comprehensive Plus and shall enact i~ple~entin~
regulations to provide a mix ofhousin~ ~es ~d costs to ac~eve identified ~-~
~oals for both market rate and below market rate ho~sin~.
3. Reco~i~i~ that the ~r~et pl~ce ~e$ adequate pro~iMo~ for tkose i~ t~e ~pper
~r~c~et$, so~e co~i~tio~ of ~ppropri~tel~ zoned l~d, re~M~to~ i~ce~tive$,
$~$idies, ~nd i~o~ti~e pl~n~i~ teck~iq~e$ ~ill ~e ~ecess~ to ~e ~deq~te
t~e ~eed$ of middle ~d lower i~come per$o~$. ~AC 365.1~5-~7~. 6) The following policies
th ~io of b k te h ing ~ .... ~ ..... * -*~-~--~ ~-~ · ....
relate to e prov n elow mar et ra ous : ...... ~
a. Local comprehensive pl~ policies ~d development regulations sh~l enco~age ~d not
exclude below m~ket rate housing.
b. Affor~ab!e Below market rate housing s~ategies ~ should include:
i. prese~ation, rehabilitation ~d redevelopment of existing neighborhoods
appropdate, including pro~ams to rehabilitate substandard housing;
ii. provide provision for a r~ge of housing types such as multi-fmily, single family,
accessory ~elling units, cooperative housing, ~d m~ufac~ed housing on individual
lots ~d in m~ufac~ed housing p~ks;
iii. promote housing design ~d siting compatible with s~o~ding neighborhoods;
iv~ mech~isms to help people p~ch~e their o~ housing, such as meck~2:ms may
~ low interest lo~ progrms, ~ "self-help" housing, and consumer education.
c. Each jurisdiction shall promote ~nd fac[l[t~e the development of below market rate ho~ing in
a dispersed pa~em so as not to concen~ate or geograp~cally isolate low ~come housing in a
specific ~ea or co~ity.
d Below market rate housing should be located throughout Kitsap Coun~ in a manner to provide
easy access to transportation, employment, and other se~ices. Designated Centers should
include below market rate housing. Rural se~- help housing pro~ams should be encouraged
either in or outside of designated Rural Communities.
e. Housing policies ~d progrms shall address the provision of diverse housing oppo~ities to
acco~odate the homeless, the elderly, physically or mentally challenged, ~,.~u,,
~d o~er segments of the population that have special needs.
February 27, 2001
27
75'
,~*~;+,,`4 .... ,-1 T.,~I., n,,;
.... .~ .... OTE: SECTION MOVED TO lc
g. Innovative regulatory strategies shall be developed and implemented to provide incentives for
the development of ~ below market rate housing within Designated Centers.
Jurisdictions shall develop strategies which provide a wide range of opportunities for
promoting the production of affordab!e below market rate housing through means such as:
towe~ reducing housing cost by subsidizing utility hook-up fees and rates, impact fees, and
permit processing fees; density incentives; smaller lot sizes; zero lot line designs; inclusionary
zoning techniques, such as requiring below-market rate housing in new residential
developments; transfers of development rights and/or a priority permit review and approval
process.
h. Policies and regulations shall encourage the production of affordable below market rate
housing. The County and the Cities shall incorporate a regular review of hausing codea public
health and safety regulations pertaining to into {ff-for-da~ housing implementation strategies to
assure that protection of the public health and safety remains the primary purpose for housing
standards.
j. The County and the Cities shall participate iTi with housing authorities established to facilitate
the production of below market rate ~ housing. The County and the Cities shah also
recognize and support other public and private not-for-profit housing agencies.
Supportingv~"~"~----~ housing agencies is encouraged through public land donations, guarantees,
suitable design standards, tax incentives, fee waivers, providing access to funding sources and
support for funding applications, or other provisions as appropriate.
February 27, 2001
28
Coordination of Planning
Element t~.I. POLICIES FOR COORDINATION OF PLANNING BY AFFECTED
JURISDICTIONS IN URBAN GROWTH AREAS.
Consistent with a goal of the Growth Management Act to ensure coordination between communities
and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts, the Countywide Planning Policy must address coordination of
planning efforts within urban growth areas. It is recognized that in many instances, land use activities
may be affected by the plans and regulations of several jurisdictions including Kitsap County, a City
and special purpose districts. Coordinated planning is not only a requirement of local government; it
will facilitate implementation o£ plans, lead to more efficient delivery o£ urban governmental services
and will promote a sense of community through common, agreed upon development standards.
1. The following policies relate to coordinated planning for land use, capital facilities, parks and
infrastructure within urban growth areas:
a. The County and affected cities, special districts and other agencies as appropriate shall
establish a process for mutual consultation on proposed comprehensive land use plan policies
for lands within expanded urban growth areas.
b. The use of intergovernmental coordination agreements is encouraged as a means to formalize
cooperative efforts to plan for and provide urban governmental services.
c. Joint financing ventures should be identified to provide services and facilities that will serve the
population within the urban growth area as well as those that are of a countywide nature.
2. The following policy relates to the process for comprehensive plan amendments, zone
changes and development review and approval within urban growth areas:
While it is recognized that nothing in the county-wide planning policy shall be construed as
altering the land use planning authority of the County or the Cities, adopted urban growth
management agreements shall specify the process by which affected jurisdictions may review and
comment on comprehensive plan amendments, zone changes and development applications
processed by another jurisdiction within urban growth areas.
3. The following policies relate to the establishment of common and consistent development and
construction standards:
a. Each urban growth management agreement shall identify common and consistent development
and construction standards to be applied throughout that expanded urban growth area. These
may include, but are not limited to standards for streets and roads, utilities and other
infrastructure components.
b. Urban growth management agreements shall identify services to be provided in an urban
growth area, the responsible service purveyors and the terms under which the services are to be
provided.
February 27, 2001
29
7?
Economic Development
Element G.J. POLICIES FOR COUNTYWIDE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
Growth Management Act requires that general economic development policies be identified in the
Countywide Planning Policy process. Consistent with the goals of the Act, economic development
planning must be coordinated with local comprehensive plans. The intent of the following policies is
to encourage coordinated economic growth among all jurisdictions in Kitsap County and to add
predictability and certainty to the private investment decision.
1. The following policies relate to a general strategy for enhancing economic development and
employment:
a. The County and the Cities recognize that a healthy economy that provides opportunities for
diverse segments of the community is important to the quality of life in the county. Economic
development ~s,e, should be balanced with environmental concerns to and protect the quality of
life.
b. The County and the Cities recognize that the economy in Kitsap County is ovegy very
dependent on the U.S. Navy and diversification is necessary. The County and the Cities shall
collaborate with ports, tribes, and other special districts to encourage economic growth and
diversification that is consistent with comprehensive plans and policies for land use,
transportation, public transit, regional water supply, capital facilities, urban governmental
services and environmental quality.
c. The Kitsap Regional m~:~
........ g Coordinating_Council may designate the Economic
Development Council to prepare specific strategies for economic growth in concert with local
plans and policies.
d. Local governments are encouraged to utilize the Economic Development Council as a resource
to provide advice on economic development needs, ~nd the potential for retaining and
expanding existing industries, including the U.S. Dept. of Defense, and attracting new
industries, especially those that would improve wage and salary levels, increase the variety of
job oppommities and utilize the resident labor force.
e. Local governments are encouraged to collaborate with the Economic Development Council to
promote the expansion of telecommunications in Kitsap County and to coordinate
telecommunications policy with regional and federal agencies, including public utility districts,
Bonneville Power Administration, regional transportation planning organizations, and
neighboring counties.
f. Efforts of educational institutions to improve and expand vocational and post-secondary
education programs should be supported to assure a highly skilled, technically trained resident
work force.
2. The following policies relate to the role of government agencies in assuring coordinated,
consistent efforts to promote economic vitality and equity throughout Kitsap County:
February 27, 200l
30
73'
a. The County and the Cities shall promote Urban Growth Areas and existing industrial sites as
centers for employment.
b. The County and the Cities shall encourage the full utilization/development of designated
industrially and commercially zoned areas. The County and the Cities shall promote
revitalization within existing developed industrial and commercial areas to take advantage of
the significant investments in existing buildings and infrastructure.
c. The County and the Cities an'~ spec;~a! '~;~*~;~
......... ts shall cooperate with tribes, ports, other special
districts, and all economic development interests to identify the capital facility needs of
designated industrial and commercial sites and investments to support economic development.
d. The County and the Cities shall collaborate with tribes, ports, and other special districts to
identify innovative development methods such as public and private partnerships and
community development assistance financing ~"~-~ ~-~ :~*~ ~-~ ...... -~-~
......................... vv ..... to increase
economic vitality.
e. The County and the Cities shall collaborate with the EDC and the Ports gkall to establish a
common method to monitor the supply of ~ designated commercial and industrial
sites and to ensure adequate land supply~vw.'~'~:':~o.~....~.~o for the expansion of existing-faeitit4es
enterprises and the establishment of new economic enterprises. The monitoring method shall
indicate environmental constraints, infrastructure availability and capacity, and shall use the
Kitsap County Geographic Information System sha144~s~ and Buildable Lands Analysis as a
regional database for this information.
f The County and the Cities shall establish common infrastructure policy and standards,
including telecommunications infrastructure.
g. The Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council shall coordinate the development of land supply
monitoring methods, common infrastructure policy and standards, and other strategies among
the County, the Cities, Tribes, Ports, and other special districts to encourage economic
development in Kitsap County.
h. The County and the Cities shall each establish and monitor a development review process that
is timely, predictable, efficient, fair, and consistent.
i. Where more than one jurisdiction is involved in planning and permitting a business
development, the jurisdictions shall work collaboratively to provide consistent development
regulations and permitting.
j. The County and the Cities shall encourage small business enterprises and cottage industries,
and allow appropriate and traditional home occupations as permitted by local regulations.
February 27, 2001
31
Fiscal Impact
Element t4.K. AN ANALYSIS OF THE FISCAL IMPACT.
Communities must be able to fully evaluate the implications of policies and actions to determine the
impact on physical and public finance resources. The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 created
a process for analyzing human and physical environmental impacts. Fiscal impacts, however, have not
been as universally identified and considered. This policy element required by ~ the
GMA is vague, allowing local governments to determine the scope of the fiscal impact analysis. The
focus of the policies in this section is directed toward the implementation of the Countywide Planning
Policy and actions that may occur as a result of these guidelines.
1. The Kitsap Regional Plm~2ng Coordinating Council shall work to develop a process for use by
local governments to facilitate the identification, analysis and disclosure of the fiscal impacts of
major development proposals and governmental actions. The process shall establish formulae to
address fiscal impacts, including tax revenue and service cost implications, of the following:
a. Proposed changes in municipal boundaries, including annexations, partial disincorporation
and incorporation;
b. Proposed changes in an urban growth area boundary;
c. Proposed new fully contained communities;
d. Proposed master planned resorts;
e. Proposed public facilities and services.
Other proposals as determined by the local govemment having lead agency status under the provisions
of the State Environmental Policy Act.
February 27, 2001
32
Coordination with Tribal Governments
Element t.L. POLICIES PERTAINING TO COORDINATION WITH TRIBAL
GOVERNMENTS AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
The Suquamish Tribe and the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe within their usual and accustomed areas,
and the federal government are distinct entities that have unique authorities, responsibilities, interests
and/or treaty rights affecting land use and other activities. Since the impacts of future growth and
development in Kitsap County will affect all governmental units, all agencies must be well informed
and continuously involved in regional and local planning.
1. Adequate opportunities for tribal and federal government participation shall be incorporated into
regional and local planning activities.
2. It is recognized that constitutional and statutory provisions may constrain tribal governments and
federal government agencies from entering into local agreements and processes. However, when
possible, the County, the Cities, tribal and federal governments should establish intergovernmental
cooperative agreements formalizing coordination and involvement in activities that are of mutual
interest.
3. Tribal governments, federal agencies, and county and local governments shall be encouraged to
coordinate plans among and between governments and agencies to make plans as consistent and
compatible as possible for properties over which they have authority or activities they authorize
and the adjacent areas affected.
4. Tribal governments and federal government agencies shall be encouraged to participate in
comprehensive planning and development activities that may affect them, including the
establishment and revision or urban growth areas encompassing, adjacent to or within federally
established reservation boundaries or federally-owned lands; allocation of forecasted population;
regional transportation, capital facility, housing and utility plans; and policies that may affect
natural and/or cultural resources of interest.
5. All County, City, Tribal and federal governmental agencies shall be included in the normal public
notice and comment procedures of other agencies and kept informed of matters of interest to them.
6. The County, the Cities, tribal and federal governmental agencies shall implement agreements to
keep informed of matters of local and regional interest through the Kitsap Regional P!a,~2ng
Coordinating Council, an exchange of newsletters, intergovernmental liaisons, periodic
informational meetings, a regional "round table", or other means as appropriate and suitable to
addressing issues of mutual concern.
February 27, 2001
33
Roles and Responsibilities
Element J.M. THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND LAND USE PLANNING ROLE AND
RESPONSIBILITY OF EACH MEMBER AGENCY OF THE KITSAP
REGIONAL PLANNING COORDINATING COUNCIL AND SPECIAL
DISTRICTS INCLUDING SEWER AND WATER DISTRICTS, PORT
DISTRICTS AND FIRE DISTRICTS.
The Cities, tribal governments, the Regional Council and special districts are all involved in planning
activities related to their statutory authority and responsibility. In addition to the responsibilities defined
in previous countywide planning policies, this section further clarifies the role and land use planning
authority of each type of governmental entity.
1. The KITSAP REGIONAL PLANNING COORDINATING COUNCIL was established by
interlocal agreement to assure coordination, consensus, consistency, and compliance in the
implementation of the Growth Management Act and comprehensive planning by County, city and
tribal governments within Kitsap County. The Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council also
provides a voice for all jurisdictions in the development of comprehensive planning policies to be
applied countywide. The interlocal agreement adopted by the County, the Cities and the tribal
governments declared that the Kitsap Regional P!an,~2ng Coordinating Council is necessary to
maintain a regular intergovernmental communication network for all local and tribal governments
within the county, facilitate compliance with the coordination and consistency requirements of the
Growth Management Act, provide an effective vehicle to resolve conflict among and/or between
jurisdictions with respect to urban growth boundaries or comprehensive plan consistency, and to
build consensus on planning solutions for countywide growth management issues. The Kitsap
Regional P!a~:'ng Coordinating Council shall:
a. represent the consensus of views on growth management and planning issues among
member agencies. The Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council shall make
recommendations on behalf of member jurisdictions to multi-county regional agencies and
State government on proposed changes to multi-county regional plans, State plans and
laws;
b. promote coordination in the development of local comprehensive plans, the Countywide
Planning Policy and environmental concerns. It will provide a forum, as necessary, for
achieving coordination in the development of local plans and resolving planning and plan
implementation issues common to local jurisdiction;
c. assure consistency among local plans and between local plans and the Countywide Planning
Policy and the Growth Management Act to the extent necessary to achieve regional policies
and objectives. The Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council shall establish a process to
monitor and review local comprehensive plans to determine consistency with the Countywide
Planning Policy. Further, issues related to consistency may be brought to the attention of the
Regional Council by one or more members;
d. review transportation plans for consistency with land use plans;
February 27, 2001
34
e. represent the views or positions of jurisdictions within the county on issues of consistency
or the resolution of conflicts related to multi-county regional growth strategies and
transportation plans;
f. develop a defined process for resolving disputes locally. The process shall not preclude
appeals to the Central Puget Sound Growth Planning Heatings Board if the local process
has been exhausted without resolution of the dispute. The process shall incorporate the
provisions of the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council interlocal agreement regarding
resolution of objections on the establishment of urban growth area boundaries;
g. assume primary responsibility for the coordination of educational programs and the
dissemination of planning-related information of regional interest;
h. perform responsibilities identified in the most recent region-wide growth management
strategy approved by the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council;
i. coordinate the review, revision and implementation of the Countywide Planning Policy;
j. develop a model urban growth management agreement incorporating the elements
identified in the Countywide Planning Policy for use by the County and the Cities.
k. apply for grants and administer contracts relative to regional tasks and plans;
1. coordinate local comprehensive planning work programs and the region wide growth
management strategy among all participating jurisdictions;
m. initiate and coordinate the development of other regional planning policies and
design/development standards or guidelines that may facilitate or expedite the
comprehensive planning process.
n. define and implement procedures that assure opportunities for early and continuous public
involvement throughout short and long range planning projects.
2. KITSAP COUNTY is the regional government within the county boundaries providing various
services within unincorporated and incorporated areas as required and specified by law and by
legal agreements. Kitsap County shall:
a. be responsible for the development, adoption and implementation of comprehensive plans
and development regulations and the processing of land use permits within the
unincorporated portions oft he county;
b. be responsible for coordinating water quality planning in multi-jurisdictional watersheds
and for other environmental planning activities as agreed to by all affected and interested
jurisdictions;
c. be responsible for coordinating the response on the listing for the federal Endangered
Species Act in multi-jurisdictional watersheds as agreed by all affected and interested
jurisdictions;
February 27, 2001
35
d. be responsible for being a regional sewer provider to the unincorporated and incorporated
areas of Kitsap County as needed to improve water quality consistent with levels of service
outlined in the Comprehensive Plan;
e. maintain a geographic information system to serve as a regional planning data base;
f. perform responsibilities as identified in the most recent region-wide growth management
strategy adopted by the Kitsap Regional Planning Coordinating Council;
g. enter into separate urban growth management agreements with each city to address joint
issues identified in the Countywide Planning Policy and other matters agreed to be of
mutual interest.
h. define and implement procedures that assure opportunities for early and continuous public
involvement throughout short and long range planning projects.
3. CITIES within Kitsap County provide a variety of services primarily to residents within their
respective municipal boundaries. Cities shall:
a. provide urban governmental services as identified in the Growth Management Act (Chapter
36.70A RCW) and adopted urban growth management agreements;
b. be responsible for the development, adoption and implementation of comprehensive plans
and development regulations and the processing of land use permits within the incorporated
portion of the respective city;
c. perform responsibilities identified in the most recent region-wide growth management
strategy adopted by the Kitsap Regional P!ann~ng Coordinating Council;
d. coordinate with other agencies as appropriate in multi-jurisdictional planning activities;
e. enter into a separate urban growth management agreement with Kitsap County to address
joint issues identified in the Countywide Planning Policy and other matters agreed to be of
mutual interest.
f. define and implement procedures that assure opportunities for early and continuous public
involvement throughout short and long range planning projects.
4. TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS are sovereign governmental entities within Kitsap County. The Port
Gamble S'Klallam Tribe and the Suquamish Tribe shall:
a. be responsible for any development, adoption and implementation of comprehensive plans
and regulations and the processing of permits consistent with jurisdictional responsibilities;
b. perform responsibilities identified in the most recent region-wide growth management
strategy adopted by the Kitsap Regional P!am~2ng Coordinating Council;
February 27, 2001
36
c. be encouraged and provided opportunities to participate in discussions and decisions on
issues of regional significance and on local matters affecting natural and cultural resources
of interest;
d. coordinate with other agencies as appropriate in multi-jurisdictional planning activities;
e. be encouraged to enter into cooperative agreements when possible to formalize
participation in local and regional processes.
f. define and implement procedures that assure opportunities for early and continuous public
involvement throughout short and long range planning projects.
5. SPECIAL DISTRICTS are governmental subdivisions of the county that are usually established
to provide a de£med scope of services. Special districts shall:
a. be responsible for service provision, capital facility planning and other activities as
authorized by law and legal agreements.
b. coordinate capital planning and implementation strategies with local governments to assure
consistency with comprehensive plan policies;
c. participate in service provision identification required in each urban growth management
agreement;
d. coordinate with other agencies as appropriate in multi-jurisdictional planning activities;
e. provide technical assistance as appropriate to assist local governments in comprehensive
plan development, adoption and implementation;
f. be encouraged to enter into cooperative agreements and consolidate when possible to
formalize participation in local and regional processes.
g. define and implement procedures that assure oppommities for early and continuous public
involvement throughout short and long range planning projects.
February 27, 200l
37
~,~' AGENDA BILL
,, , NIff' S R E M E RT--'~-~-~ ~O U N C I L
I. SUBJECT: Publi,oS:learinq to c~er an appeal ora FOR AGENDA OF:
i
SEPA Determination~of Non-significance (DNS) issued at the DEPT. OF ORIGIN: P&B - Land Use
request of the City's Building & Planning Department. to amend ORIGINATOR: Chris Hu.qo, Director
the Development Standards by modifying open space requirements. DATE SUBMITTED: July, 18 2001
2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS:
P&B Director: ~,~/r) o DNS
City Attorne ..~...,~~/'- // , o Appeal
City Clerk: ~,~ .~.J.-~g~ ..~//// o Staff Report
Fiscal & Bucket Counci[,co~n~.: J ~ ~-/./,~.~'~ o Written Record
Operations Comm.:
ENDORSEMENT__ INFORMATION ~ APPROVED BY COUNC. IL'~I~ESlDENT FOR SUBMITTAL:
An Official Zoning Code Text amendment in the form of a Rezofi"~ application was received from the City's Building &
Planning Department. The applicant's request is for an Official Zoning Code Text amendment in the form of a Rezone
application. The proposed end result will be to amend the text of Bremerton Municipal Code Title 21, Land Use, Chapter
21.02, Zoning Code, by modifying Section 21.02.750, Open Space, to allow inclusion of required buffers and yard
setback areas in the minimum 15 percent open space of the total gross area of any development having a total gross area
greater than one acre; and to delete reference to active and passive areas; and to delete the requirement for recreational
open space. This zoning code text amendment proposal, if approved, would be implemented on a citywide basis. Zoning
Text Amendment application requests are considered non-project actions, which do not propose specific development
projects.
An Appeal of the non-proj oct SEPA Determination of Non-significance (DNS) issued has been received contending that
there was an error in issuing the non-project DNS and that a full environmental review (EIS) should have been .
accomplished. A+
5. RECOMMENDATION:
Move to pass Resolution No. 2830, outlining Findings & Conclusion denying the
appeal of the DNS, issued April 23, 2001 for project PL01-0035.
6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Christopher R. Hugo
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
7. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED__ TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED__ AM;I~DEI.~
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE:
8. AGENDA BILL NO.' 01- IF¥
9. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
10. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
11. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCER:
The subject appeal will create no operational changes for the city.
12. RESEARCH SOURCES:
Comprehensive Plan
Zoning Ordinance
File
Site Visits
SEPA regulations
CITY OF BREMERTON
BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Environmental Application No: PL01-0017 Parcel No's: City-wide
Date issued: April 26, 2001
Date published: April 27, 2001
ACTION: OFFICIAL ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT
PROPOSAL: The applicant's request is for Official Zoning Code Text amendment in the form of a
Rezone application. This zoning code text amendment proposal, if approved, would be
implemented on a city-wide basis. The proposed end result will be to amend the text of
Bremerton Municipal Code Title 21, Land Use, Chapter 21.02, Zoning Code, by
modifying Section 21.02.750, Open Space, to allow inclusion of required buffers and
yard setback areas in the minimum 15 percent open space of the total gross area of any
development having a total gross area greater than one acre; and to delete reference to
active and passive areas; and to delete the requirement for recreational open space.
LOCATION: This Zoning Code Text amendment proposal applies to all development of sites within
the city with a gross area greater than one acre.
PROPONENT: City of Bremerton, Building & Planning Department
286 4t~ Street
Bremerton, Wash. 98337
The Responsible Official of the City of Bremerton hereby makes the following Findings and Conclusions
based upon a review of the environmental checklist and attachments, other information on file with the
City of Bremerton, and the policies, plans, and regulations designated by the City of Bremerton as a basis
for the exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
pursuant to RCW 43.21C.060.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The City has received an application for a Zoning Code Text amendment. This zoning code text
amendment proposal, if approved, would be implemented on a city-wide basis. The proposed
end result will be to amend the text of Bremerton Municipal Code Title 21, Land Use, Chapter
21.02, Zoning Code, by modifying Section 21.02.750, Open Space, to allow inclusion of required
buffers and yard setback areas in the minimum 15 percent open space of the total gross area of
any development having a total gross area greater than one acre; and to delete reference to active
and passive areas; and to delete the requirement for recreational open space.
2. Zoning Text Amendment application requests are considered non project actions which do not
propose specific development projects. Throughout the year, applications for zoning text
amendments can be submitted. Those zoning text amendments recommended for approval as a
result of the Public Hearing process conducted by the Bremerton Planning Commission are
adopted by City Council Ordinance.
3. A SEPA review check list has been reviewed for this non-project zoning text amendment
proposal. Further development of property effected by this specific zoning text amendment that
is not categorically exempt pursuant to WAC Chapter 197-11-800, and, which will require
issuance of a City license or permit, will be subject to future review under SEPA.
4. An Environmental Impact Statement, for the Bremerton Municipal Code Title 21, Land Use,
Chapter 21.02, Zoning Code was adopted by City of Bremerton Ordinance #3934, February 13,
1997, in which Open space requirements were addressed.
CONCLUSIONS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
The Responsible Official concludes, based on a review of application materials and a review of City
regulations governing the proposal, that this non-development project action proposal does not have a
probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not
required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental
checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on
request.
This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under 19%11-340(2). The lead agency will not
act on this proposal for 15 days from the date of issue. Comments must be submitted by closing of the
comment deadline. The Responsible Official will reconsider the DNS based on timely comments and
may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the DNS. If the DNS is
retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline. No permits may be issued, and the
applicant shall not begin work, until the comment deadline has expired and any other necessary permits
are issued.
Responsible Official: Christopher R. Hugo, Director, Building and Planning Department
Lead Agency: City of Bremerton, Building and Planning Department
City of Bremerton, Permit Center
286 4th Street
Bremerton, Washington 98337 (360) 478-5275
Date of Issue: April 26, 200 Comment Deadline: May 10, 2001
Date of Publication: April 27, 200 . Appea, J. Deadline: May 23, 2001
C~topher~ tugo, Respon~iblTfficial
NOTE: Pursuant to RCW 43.21C.075 and City of Brefnerton Environmental Regulations, Bremerton
Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 21.12. Decisions of the Responsible Official may be appealed. Appeals
are filed with appropriate fees at the Building and Planning Department, located at the Bremerton Permit
Center. Appeals must be filed within 14 days of the expiration of the comment deadline.
You may APPEAL this determination to: Bremerton City Council NO LATER THAN: May 23, 2001.
You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact: Lee A. Wyatt to read or ask about
the procedures for SEPA appeals. Phone:(360) 478-5275
NOTE: The issuance of this Determination of Nonsignificance does not constitute project approval. The
applicant must comply with all other applicable requirements of City of Bremerton Departments prior to
receiving construction permits.
Z .... Mentor Law Group
08 200!
TEL 206 676.7008 F^X 206.676.7001
BREI~r~ERTOI~
BUILDING D?AET;/:Ei!'7 Peter H. Dykstra
direct 206,676.7095
dykstra~mentodaw.com
June 6, 2001
Mr. Chris Hugo
Department of Community Development
City of Bremerton
286 - 4th St.
Bremerton, WA 98337
Re: Amended Appeal of Determinations of Non-Significance for Albertsons
Stores Text Amendment Request To Amend Parking Ratio for Food Stores
and Supermarkets and City of Bremerton Text Amendment Request to
Mo&fy Open-Space Requirements
Dear Mr. Hugo:
As you requested, attached please find amended appeal forms from
Eldorado Hills, Inc. The amended forms concern the appeal of the
Determinations of Non-Significance for Albensons Stores Text Amendment
Request To Amend Parking Ratio for Food Stores and Supermarkets and City of
Bremerton Text Amendment Request to Modify Open-Space Requirements
apparently issued by the City on April 23, 2001, and April 26, 2001, respectively,
previously filed by Eldorado Hills, Inc.
As we understand your position, the City believes that two separate
appeals are required for a party to appeal the City's action on these
Determinations of Non-Significance. We do not believe the Bremerton Municipal
Code requires separate filings. Bremerton Municipal Code 21.02.395(g) simply
requires that an appeal identify the subject of the appeal. Eldorado Hills, Inc.'s
original appeal fulfilled those requirements by clearly identifying the subject of
the appeal. Nowhere does the Code require separate appeals or appeal fees for
more than one subject being appealed. We believe the Code to be quite clear,
and our client's original appeal was in full compliance with its requirements.
Furthermore, substantial compliance with the appeal procedures is sufficient to
maintain our objections to the City's DeterminatiOns of Non-Significance.
Nevertheless, we are abiding by the City's request for two separate appeal
forms and appeal fees. As we discussed, the City will relate these amended
Mr. Chris Hugo
June 6, 2001
Page 2
appeal forms back to the original date of Eldorado Hills, Inc.'s appeal, May 16,
2001. Enclosed is the additional $124 appeal fee that the City requested.
Please contact me directly if you have any further questions regard~g
these matters. Please set these matters fo~ hearing before the City Council in
accordance with Bremerton Municipal Code 21.02.845.
Sincerely,
MENTOR LAW GROUP, P~.C
Enclosures
Amended Appeal of'Determination of Non-significance J:or Cit~d of Bre~nerton
Text Amendlnent Request To A~nend Modijfid Open-Space Require~nents
(1) Appellant's Name, Address and Phone Number.
Eldorado Hills, Inc.
9481 Silverdale Way, No. 201
Silverdale, WA 98383
(360) 692-3079
Appellant's Counsel.
Peter H. Dykstra
Mentor Law Group
1505 Westlake Avenue North
Suite 300
Seattle, WA 98109
(206) 676-7095
(2) Standing.
We participated, through counsel, in the Planning Commission hearings
on May 1, 2001, and May 15, 2001, regarding the proposed text
amendments. We submitted comments, through counsel, on the
Determination of Non-Significance on May 15, 2001. We appealed the
Determination of Non-Significance on Mav 16, 2001.
(3) Subject of the Appeal
Determination of Non-Significance for Citv of Bremerton Text
Amendment Request to Modffv Open-Space Requirements apparently
issued by the Ci~ on April 26, 2001.
(4) Grounds for Appeal and Facts Upon rA/hich Appeal is Based.
We understand that the DNS for the open space text amendment was
issued on April 26, 2001. We first learned of the DNS at the May 1, 2001
Planning Commission meeting. As acknowledged at both the lVlay 1,
2001, and May 15, 2001, Plarming Commission meetings, the Albertsons'
project requires the text amendment. Despite a specific request dated
April 12, 2001, from Mr. Mike Zoretic of Stanislaw Ashbaugh, our counsel
at the time, that he be provided "with copies of anv and all submittals,
approvals or other documents or communication relating to the
Albertsons' project", we never received notice of the DNS now being
appealed.
The Ci.ty's derision to separate this text amendment from the
environmental review of the Albertsons' project violates SEPA's clear
prohibition on phased review or segmentation of review. See WAC 197-
11-060(3). Phased review or segmentation is not appropriate for two
proposals "related to each other closely enough to be, in effect, a single
course of action." WAC 197-11-060(3)(b). Where they are closely related,
the actions must be reviewed in the same environmental analysis. Id.
SEPA prohibits a governmental agency, from moving forward with a
particular course of action until a threshold determination and subsequent
environmental impact analysis, if any, is completed. WAC 197-11-
055(2)(c). Where a rezone, text amendment or other zoning change is
connected to a project proposal that has the potential to more than
moderately affect the environment, an ELS must be done at the rezone
stage. See Indian Trails Property Owner's Association v. Spokane, 76 Wn.
App. 430, 440 (1994).
The CiW's attempt to cast the changes in the text amendment as "ci~-
wide" is an attempt to avoid considering the environmental impacts of the
text amendment cumulatively with the environmental impacts of
Albertsons' project. The Citv's Planning Director has admitted on the
record at that the text amendments arose in the process of reviewing
Albertsons' proposal. Significantly, but for these text amendments,
Albertsons' supermarket proposal cannot go forward.
The environmental impact of these amendments must be considered as an
inte~al part of the proposal. A DNS that does not consider the
cumulative impacts of the entire project is insufficient to comply with
SEPA.
The Ci~'s failure to provide notice, in accordance with Bremerton
Municipal Code 21.12.210(b) and WAC 197-11-680(5), despite our clear
request for notification means that the time period for appealing the DNS
has not begun to run. See e.g., Den Beste v. ?ollution Control Hearings
Board, 81 Wn. App. 330, 339 (1996) ("An aggrieved party, who has
participated m an administrative hearing is not denied the right to appeal
simply because [an agency] failed to mail a notice of decision to it.").
(5) Relief Requested.
Full environmental review of the text amendment and the proposed
Albertsons' development, together as a single action.
q3
(6) Attestation.
I have read this appeal and believe, to the best of my knowledge, that the
contents are true.
J~ Eagle~on, S~}etary
ltldorado Hills, Inc.
"),,~' ~)'[ AGENDA BILL
I. SUBJECT: Publi.c..He~rinq to co....n~r an appem or a FOR AGENDA OF: j,,.:,ty 25, 20C1
SEPA Determination"~of Non-significance (DNS)issued at the DEPT. OF ORIGIN: P&B - Land Use
Request of Albertsons, Inc. to amend the Development Standards ORIGINATOR: Chris Hugo, Director
by reducing the Parking Ratio for Food Stores and Supermarkets. DATE SUBMITTED: July, 18 2001
2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS:
.~,~P&B Director: ~_ ~__,~,¢.,~/") o DNS
ity Attorney:~~ o Appeal
City Clerk: ~-,~.~c,~;~:~,~Y~ .... ? // o Staff Report
Fiscal & Bu'~gTe'{ Council C'omr~.: ~-~,..~_~,~.'.~/= o Written Record
Operations domm.:
ENDORSEMENT __ INFORMATION APPROVED BY COU....NGIL~PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL:
?.
· MARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMEN'D.~OR COUNCIL ACTION:
An Official Zoning Code Text amendment in thc form of a Rezone applicatio~ was received fi.om Albe~tsons, Inc., to
amend thc text of Breme~ton Municipal Code Title 2 l, Land Use, Chapter 21.02, Zoning Code, ~iSu~c 670(b), Of£-Strcet
Parking Requirements for Non-Residential Uses, to reduce the parking requirements for the Food Store (retail), Markets,
and Supermarkets land use category, fi.om one parking space for each 200 square feet of building gross floor area, to one
parking space for every 250 square feet of building gross floor area. This zoning code text amendment proposal, if
approved, would be implemented on a citywide basis. Zoning Text Amendment application requests are considered non-
project actions, which do not propose specific development projects.
An Appeal of the non~proj ect SEPA Determination of Non-significance (DNS) issued has been received contending that
there was an error in issuing the non-project DNS and that a full environmental review (EIS) for the development project
should have been accomplished.
5. RECOMMENDATION:
MOVE TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 2831, outlining Findings & Conclusion denying the
appeal of the DNS, issued April 23, 2001 for project PL01-0028.
6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Christopher R. Hugo
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
7. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED__ TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED AME~I'I~;I~ L
//
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE' DATE:
8. AGENDA BILLNO.: C01- 1'7 I
9. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
10. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
11. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
The subject appeal will create no operational changes for the city.
12. RESEARCH SOURCES:
Comprehensive Plan
Zoning Ordinance
File
Site Visits
SEPA regulations
CITY OF BREMERTON
BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Environmental Application No: PL01-0008 Parcel No's: City-wide
Date issued: April 23, 2001
Date published: April 25,2001
ACTION: OFFICIAL ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT
PROPOSAL: The applicant's request is for Official Zoning Code Text amendment in the form of a
Rezone application. The proposed end result will be to amend the text of Bremerton
Municipal Code Title 21, Land Use, Chapter 21.02, Zoning Code, Figure 670(b), Off-
Street Parking Requirements for Non-Residential Uses, to reduce the parking
requirements for the Food Store (retail), Markets, and Supermarkets land use category,
from one parking space for each 200 square feet of building gross floor area, to one
parking space for every 250 square feet of building gross floor area. This zoning code
text amendment proposal, if approved, would be implemented on a citywide basis.
LOCATION: This Zoning Code Text amendment proposal involves all areas within the city designated
with zoning classifications, which allow development of Food Stores (retail), Markets,
and Supermarkets.
PROPONENT: Albertsons, Inc.
c/o Pacific Land Design
9709 Third Avenue NE, suite//203
Seattle, Washington. 98115
The Responsible Official of the City of Bremerton hereby makes the following Findings and Conclusions
based upon a review of the environmental checklist and attachments, other information on file with the
City of Bremerton, and the policies, plans, and regulations designated by the City of Bremerton as a basis
for the exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
pursuant to RCW 43.21 C.060.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The City has received an application for a Zoning Code Text amendment. The proposed
amendment is to amend the text of Bremerton Municipal Code Title 21, Land Use, Chapter
21.02, Zoning Code, Figure 670(b), Off-Street Parking Requirements for Non-Residential Uses,
to reduce the parking requirements for the Food Store (retail), Markets, and Supermarkets land
use category, from one parking space for each 200 square feet of building gross floor area, to one
parking space for every 250 square feet of building gross floor area. This zoning code text
amendment proposal, if approved, would be implemented on a citywide basis.
2. Zoning Text Amendment application requests are considered non-project actions, which do not
propose specific development projects. Throughout the year, applications for zoning text
amendments can be submitted. City Council Ordinance adopts those zoning text amendments
recommended for approval as a result of the Public Hearing process conducted by the Bremerton
Planning Commission.
3. A SEPA review check list has been reviewed for this non-project zoning text amendment
proposal. Further development of property effected by this specific zoning text amendment that
is not categorically exempt pursuant to WAC Chapter 197-11-800, and, which will require
issuance of a City license or permit, will be subject to future review under SEPA.
4. An Environmental Impact Statement, for the Bremerton Municipal Code Title 21, Land Use,
Chapter 21.02, Zoning Code was adopted by City of Bremerton Ordinance #3934, February 13,
1997, in which Off street parking requirements were addressed.
CONCLUSIONS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
The Responsible Official concludes, based on a review of application materials and a review of City
regulations governing the proposal, that this non-development project action proposal does not have a
probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (ELS) is not
required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental
checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on
request.
This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under 197-11-340(2). The lead agency will not
act on this proposal for 15 days from the date of issue. Comments must be submitted by closing of the
comment deadline. The Responsible Official will reconsider the DNS based on timely comments and
may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the DNS. If the DNS is
retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline. No permits may be issued, and the
applicant shall not begin work, until the comment deadline has expired and any other necessary permits
are issued.
Responsible Official: Christopher R. Hugo, Director, Building and Planning Department
Lead Agency: City of Bremerton, Building and Planning Department
City of Bremerton, Permit Center
286 4th Street
Bremerton, Washington 98337 (360) 478-5275
Date of Issue: April 23, 2001 Comment Deadline: May 7, 2001
Date of Publication: April 25, 2001 Appeal Deadline: May 21, 2001
Christopher ~. Hugo, Re~ponsi/b'fe Official
NOTE: Pursuant to RCW 43.21C.075 and City of Bremerton Environmental Regulations, Bremerton
Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 21.12. Decisions of the Responsible Official may be appealed. Appeals
are filed with appropriate fees at the Building and Planning Department, located at the Bremerton Permit
Center. Appeals must be filed within 14 days of the expiration of the comment deadline.
You may APPEAL this determination to: Bremerton City Council NO LATER THAN: March 19, 2001.
You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact: Lee A. Wyatt to read or ask about
the procedures for SEPA appeals. Phone:(360) 478-5275
NOTE: The issuance of this Determination of Nonsignificance does not constitute project approval. The
applicant must comply with all other applicable requirements of City of Bremerton Departments prior to
receiving construction permits.
_ {s4 .o c., p
0~*, ~' TEL 206.676.7008 FAX 206.676.7001
BREMERTOh.
BUILDINg ~?' RT.:'~ ~ ~eter H. Dyk~tra
direct 206.676.7095
dykstra~mentozla~,com
June 6, 2001
Mr. Chris Hugo
Department of Communit3, Development
City of Bremerton
286 - 4th St.
Bremerton, WA 98337
Re: Amended Appeal of Determinations of Non-Significance for Albertsons
Stores Text Amendment Request To Amend Parking Ratw for Food Stores
and Supemmr~ts and City of Bremerton Text Amendment Request to
Moda'fy Open-Space Requirements
Dear Mr. Hugo:
As you requested, attached please find amended appeal forms from
Eldorado Hills, Inc. The amended forms concern the appeal of the
Determinations of Non-Significance for Albertsons Stores Text Amendment
Request To Amend Parking Ratio for Food Stores and Supm:~mrkets and City of
Bremerton Text Amendment Request to Modify Open-Space Requirements
apparently ir, sued by the City on April 23, 2001, and April 26, 2001, respectively,
previously filed by Eldorado Hills, Inc.
As we understand your position, the City believes tahat two separate
appeals are required for a party to appeal the City's action on these
Determinations of Non-Sil~aificance. We do not believe the Bremerton Municipal
Code requires separate flings. Brernerton Municipal Code 21.02.395(g) simply
requires that an appeal identify the subject of the appeal. Eldorado I-Klls, Inc.'s
original appeal fulfilled those requirements by clearly identifying the subject of
the appeal. Nowhere does the Code require separate appeals or appeal fees for
more than one subject being appealed. We believe the Code to be quite clear,
and our client's original appeal was in full compliance with its requirements.
Furthermore, substantial compliance with the appeal procedures is sufficient to
maintain our objections to the City's DeterminatiOns of Non-Significance.
Nevertheless, we are abiding by the City's request for two separate appeal
forms and appeal fees. As we discussed, the City will relate these amended
·
Mr. Chris Hugo
June 6, 2001
Page 2
appeal forms back to the original date of Eldorado Hills, Inc.'s appeal, May 16,
2001. Enclosed is the additional $124 appeal fee that the City requested.
Please contact me directly ff you have any further questions regarding
these matters. Please set these matters for hearing before the City Council in
accordance with Bremerton Municipal Code 21.02.845.
Sincerely,
MENTOR LAW GROL~, PLLC
Enclosures
/00 ,
A mended Appeal of Detennination of Non-significance j'b r A lbertsons Stores
Text Amendtnent Request To Amend Parking Ratio for Food Stores and
Supermarkets
(1) Appellant's Name, Address and Phone Number.
Eldorado Hills, Inc.
9481 SLlverdale Way, No. 201
Silverdale, WA 98383
(360) 692-3079
Appellan t's Counsel.
Peter H. Dykstra
Mentor Law Group
1505 Westlake Avenue North
Suite 300
Seattle, WA 98109
(206) 676-7095
(2) Standing.
We participated, through counsel, Ln the Planning Commission hearings
on Mav 1, 2001, regarding the proposed text amendments. We submitted
comments, through counsel, on the Determination of Non-Significance on
Mav 15, 2001. We appealed the Determination of Non-Significance on
May 16, 2001.
(3) Subject of the Appeal
Determination of Non-Significance for Albertsons Stores' Text
Amendment Request To Amend Parking Ratio for Food Stores and
Supermarkets apparently issued bv the City on April 23, 2001.
(4) Grounds.flor Appeal and Facts Upon ~Vhich Appeal is Based.
We understand that the DNS for the text amendment to the parking
requirements was issued on April 23, 2001. We first learned of the DNSs
at the Mav 1, 2001 Planning Commission meeting. As acknowledged the
May 1, 2001, Planning Commission meeting, the Albertsons' project was
the source of the each text amendment. Despite a specLfic request dated
April 12, 2001, from Mr. Mike Zoretic of Starfislaw Ashbaugh, our counsel
at the time, that he be provided "with copies of anv and all submittals,
approvals or other documents or communication relating to the
,adbertsons' project," we never received notice of the DNS now being
appealed.
l'he Ci~,'s decision to separate this text amendment from the
environmental review of the Albertsons' project violates SEPA's clear
jOI
prohibition on phased review or segmentation of review. See WAC 197-
11-060(3). Phased review or segmentation is not appropriate for two
proposals "related to each other closely enough to be, in effect, a single
course of action." WAC 197-11-060(3)(b). Where they are closely related,
the actions must be reviewed in the same emAronmental analvsis. Id.
SEPA prohibits a governmental agency, from moving forward with a
particular course of action until a threshold determination and subsequent
environmental impact analysis, if any, is completed. WAC 197-11-
055(2)(c). Where a rezone, text amendment or other zoning change is
connected to a project proposal that has the potential to more than
moderately affect the environment, an EIS must be done at the rezone
stage. See Indian Trails ProperS~ Owner's Association v. Spokane, 76 Wn.
App. 430, '440 (1994).
The attempts by Albertsons and the City to cast the changes in this text
amendment as "ci,ty-wide' is an attempt to avoid considering the
environmental impacts of the text amendment cumulatively with the
environmental impacts of >dbertsons' project. Significantly, but for this
text amendment, Albertsons' supermarket proposal cannot go forward.
t~ne environmental impact of these amendments must be considered as an
integral part of the proposal. A DNS that does not consider the
cumulative impacts of the entire project is insufficient to comply with
SEPA.
The Ci~'s failure to provide notice., in accordance w,4th Bremerton
Municipal Code 21.12.210(b) and WAC 197-11-680(5), despite our clear
request for notification means that the time period for appealing these
DNSs has not begun to run. See e.g., Den Beste v. tVol!ution Control Hearings
Board, 81 Wn. App. 330, 339 (1996) ("An aggrieved par.ty who has
participated in an administrative hearing is not denied the right to appeal
simply because [an agency.] failed to mail a notice of decision to tr.').
(5) Reli£fi Requested.
Full environmental review of the text amendment and the proposed
Albertsons; development, together as a single action.
(6) Attestation.
I have read this appeal and believe, to the best of mv knowledge, that the
contents are true.
( l k! (7_.~ ",'"'/-7f
: .i,, 'u.xc? / t~:L.,~:.~.~.-,. ~
J~ ..d~,~ Eagle,son, ~aetary
Eldorado lqfll.~, Inc.
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
I. SUBJECT: Public Hearinq~&Ordinanbe to amend FOR AGENDA OF:
the Comprehensive Plan to include a new Land Use policy DEPT. OF ORIGIN: P&B- Land Use
allowing front yard setbacks of new residential development to ORIGINATOR: Chris Huqo, Director
reflect the established setbacks of existing structures along the DATE SUBMITTED: July, 18 2001
same street frontage.
2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS:
P&B Director: /1l~/_.t .. o PC Findings & Conclusions
~J'City Attorney; ~¢v~.~ . o PC Minutes July 17, 2001
City Clerk: ~,,,-~~'~..~_.~ / ~/'/' o Staff Report
Fiscal & Budget Council Comm.: /~,¢%----'"~~~ o Ordinance to amend Comp Plan
Operations Comm.: ~c~ ~-~.~,~j~-r No, 971 I
ENDORSEMENT ~' INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL:
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
The City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application PL01-0016, proposes to amend the
Comprehensive Plan to include a new policy to: Promote In-character, urban infill development and efficient use of
land by allowing the front yard setback of new residential development to reflect the established setbacks of
existing structures along the same street frontage.
The Planning Commission has reviewed this proposal, conducted a public hearing and adopted Findings &
Conclusions at their July 17, 2001 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 at?ched Ordinance # 477 1 onsecondreadin,q.~.w~u~.4
v ~ 6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Christopher R. Hugo
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
7. NOTICE OF ACTION
TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED ~ AME~ED~~
PULLED
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE:
8. AGENDA BILL NO.:
Io3
9. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
10. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
If the proposed ordinance is not approved, the city will lose the capability .............
1'1. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETST FACILITIEST 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
/o,-/
ORDINANCE NO. '/--/77i
AN ORDINANCE of the Bremerton City Council amending the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan, with the
inclusion of a new Policy to promote in-character, urban infill development and efficient use of
land by allowing the front yard setback of new residential development to reflect the established
setbacks of existing structures along the same street frontage.
The City Council of Bremerton makes the following findings:
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton has adopted its revised Comprehensive Plan by Ordinance
4545 in February 1996; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton amended it's revised Comprehensive Plan and Map by
Ordinance No. 4606 in September 1997 and by Resolution No. 2702 in August 1999; and
WHEREAS, Comprehensive Plan amendments must be adopted by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, Goals and Policies of the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan promote infill
development and redevelopment within the established fabric of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan lacks policy guidance to insure that existing community
character is maintained as new infill development and redevelopment occurs in established
neighborhoods and districts; and
WHEREAS, many neighborhoods and districts in Bremerton were developed prior to the
enactment of current development standards, and many structures and properties within these areas are
non-conforming to these standards; and
WHEREAS, new infill development should maintain front yard setback patterns in established
residential neighborhoods to compliment existing styles and patterns of development, rather than be
forced to comply with current setback requirements; and
WHEREAS, the proposed policy to promote the continuation of established front yard setback
patterns is relevant to Goals 1. - 6. of the Growth Management Act and satisfies the decision criterion
that requires that the Comprehensive Plan be in compliance with the Growth Management Act; and
WHEREAS, the proposed policy for compatible infill development and the maintenance of
traditional front yards is a necessary addition to the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed policy provides an adequate policy foundation for implementing
regulations that will allow infill development that is compatible with the existing character of the
neighborhood
WHEREAS, any changes in development or use potential effected by the amendment will not
create significant adverse impacts on existing sensitive land uses, businesses or residences; and
WHEREAS, the amendment can be accommodated by all applicable public services and
facilities, including transportation; and
WHEREAS, the amendment will have no substantive impacts beyond the City limits, nor will it
have cumulative adverse impact; and
WHEREAS; the Bremerton Planning Commission, following a public hearing on July 17, 2001,
determined that this request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and has submitted its Findings
and Conclusions in support of its recommendation to approve this Comprehensive P~an Policy Addition
Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Bremerton City Council conducted a public hearing on August 1, 2001 to accept
public comments pertaining to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Policy Addition Amendment to
consider the Planning Commission's recommendation; now therefore:
THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES ORDAIN THE FOLLOWING
Section 1: That the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan is amended to include the following
new Plan Element Policy entitled:
Community Character, Compatible Development:
Promote In-character, urban infill development and efficient use of land by allowing the front
yard setback of new residential development to reflect the established setbacks of existing structures
along the same street frontage.
Section 2: This effective date of this Ordinance shall be ten (10) days from the date of
passage and publication by the Mayor and City Council.
APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this ~ day of 2001.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ day of ,2001.
JOHN LAW
City Council President
APPROVED this day of 2001.
ATTEST: LYNN S. HOP, TON
Mayor
KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY
City Clerk
BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
PL01-0016: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to include a new
policy to promote in-character, urban infill development and efficient use of
land by allowing the front yard setback of new residential development to
reflect the established setbacks of existing structures along the same street
frontage.
FINDINGS:
1. Goals and policies of the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan promote infill
development and redevelopment within the established fabric of the
City.
2. The Comprehensive Plan lacks policy guidance to insure that existing
community character is maintained as new infill development and
redevelopment occurs in established neighborhoods and districts.
3. Many neighborhoods and districts in Bremerton were developed prior to
the enactment of current development standards, and many structures
and properties within these areas are non-conforming to these
standards.
4. New infill development should maintain front yard setback patterns in
established residential neighborhoods to compliment existing styles and
patterns of development, rather than be forced to comply with current
setback requirements.
5. The proposed policy to promote the continuation of established front
yard setback patterns is relevant to Goals 1. - 6. of the Growth
Management Act and satisfies the decision criterion that requires that
the Comprehensive Plan be in compliance with the Growth Management
Act.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The proposed policy for compatible infill development and the
maintenance of traditional front yards is a necessary addition to the
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed policy furthers the goals and intents of the
Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act.
3. The proposed policy provides an adequate policy foundation for
implementing regulations that will allow infill development that is
compatible with the existing character of the neighborhood.
Approved by the Bremerton Planning Commission on
Attest:
~'~a~ir K~/~sk~""-"- Chris Hugo
Secretary
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
2000 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
STAFF REPORT
Infill Development (Maintenance of Traditional Front
Yards)
REPORT DATE: Apdl 23, 2001
APPUCANT OR PROPONENT (FILE NUMBER): City of Bremerton (PLO 1-0016)
CONTACT: Chds Hugo, Director- Planning and Building Department; Phone: 360/478-5243
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: This proposal will apply to the entire city.
BACKGROUND: A substantial number of structures and buildings in Bremerton were
constructed pdor to the adoption and enforcement of current laws and
regulations pertaining to setback standards and now exist as non-
conforming structures. In many cases, setback standards were not an
issue as available land was developed and neighborhoods began to take
on identities as a result of plans and regulations (or a lack thereof) in
place pdor to the current development standards. These long-standing
conditions are part of the City's character.
The Growth Management Act goals and the Bremerton Comprehensive
Plan encourage the efficient use of land for urban development. For
residential use, this suggests that smaller lots, higher percentage of lot
coverage, and decreased setbacks are appropriate in some
neighborhood settings. These site characteristics are prevalent in the
Shore Drive, Madrona Point and other established neighborhoods.
The 1995 Comprehensive Plan provides no guidance as to how new infill
residential developments should relate to this traditional development
pattern. As the community continues to grow and strives to attract new
residents to these older neighborhoods, development policies are
needed to guide compatible infill development of residential properties.
This is particularly cdtical for the front yard setback that is the most
visible site characteristic from public streets. Until a more comprehensive
assessment of appropriate development standards for infill residential
development is conducted, a policy to maintain traditional front yards will
help insure that new infill development fits the character of the area.
PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT: The following new policy is proposed to ~
include in a new Plan element, Community Character, and section,
Compatible Development.
Promote/n-character, urban infill development and efficient use of
/and by allowing the front yard setback of new residential
development to reflect the established setbacks of existing structures along
the same street frontage.
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 new residential projects on parcels
that would otherwise be passed over for more easily develoPed sites on the urban
pedphery.
Goal 3. Transportation: Measures to promote infill development and land use efficiency
also help promote efficient transportation systems.
Goal 4. Housing: The availability and cost of housing are both related to efficient
utilization of urban land, which are both promoted by this policy.
Goal 5. Economic Development: Increasing the city's residential base by attracting infill
development adds market opportunity for new economic enterprise.
Goal 6. Property Rights: This policy will promote equal regulatory treatment of property
that has similar development opportunities as existing developed properties in the
vicinity.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION (SEPA): A Determination of Non-Significance was issued
for this non-project action in accordance with WAC 197-11.
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 cdteda are listed on page 2.
of Element K. -).
The criteda as presented are pdmadly 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 cdteria
are the only ones adopted to apply to decisions of this type.
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
I. SUBJECT: Public Hearinq &O~linance to amend FOR AGENDA OF:
the Comprehensive Plan, to include a new policy to promote the DEPT. OF ORIGIN: P&B- Land Use
adaptive reuse of public and semi-public buildings. ORIGINATOR: Chris Hu.qo, Director
DATE SUBMITTED: July, 18 2001
2. CLEA~NCES: (Comment on back if necessa~) 3. EXHIBITS:
P&BDirector:
City A~orne~~~ / o PC Findings & Conclusions
o PC Minutes July 17, 2001
City Clerk: v ~ ~ ~ .~ /~ o Staff Repo~
Fiscal & Budget Council¢~Comm.: ~¢ ~~~ o Ordinancg,to a~end Comp Plan
Operations Comm.:
.o.
The City of Bremedon School District Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application PL01-0010, proposes to
amend Element E. Land Use, to include a new policy to: Promote the reuse of public and semi-public buildings
that are no longer needed to se~e their original primaw purpose, provided that a new use is consistent with the
surrounding planned environment. (Note: The regulatow measures for implementation of PL01-0010, New
Comprehensive Plan Policy addressing Adaptive Reuse of Public and Semi-public Buildings are addressed in
PL01-0011, Zoning Text Amendment proposal),
The Planning Commission has reviewed this proposal, conducted a public hearing and adopted Findings
Conclusions at their July 17, 2001 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 #"--"~L'7 '7--~ on second reading. ~vVt.f. lA~·l~.c~
~ .0} 16. R~PONSlBLE OFFICIAL: Christopher R. Hugo
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
7. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED__ TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED
,,1
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 .............
11. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS~ FAClLITIES~ 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. 47'7,2-
AN ORDINANCE of the Bremerton City Council amending the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan, Element
E. Land Use, Section 3.A., to add a new policy 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 consistent with the surrounding planned environment.
The City Council of Bremerton makes the following findings:
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton has adopted its revised Comprehensive Plan by Ordinance
4545 in February 1996; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton amended it's revised Comprehensive Plan and Map by
Ordinance No. 4606 in September 1997 and by Resolution No. 2702 in August 1999; and
WHEREAS, Comprehensive Plan amendments must be adopted by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, over Bremerton's 100-plus year history, many schools, fire stations,
churches and other public and semi-public community buildings have been constructed in
locations that serve residential; and
WHEREAS, as the community's needs have changed over time, due to changes in
demographics, development patterns, or lifestyle preferences, some of these buildings have
lost functionality for their original purpose; and
WHEREAS, public and semi-public buildings that have lost functionality for their original
purpose can often retain economic value if give the opportunity for other uses; and
WHEREAS, adding economic life to existing development conserves resources that
would otherwise be consumed for new development; and
WHEREAS, the opportunity to re-use public and semi-public buildings to extend their
economic life needs to be balanced with the potential impact of new occupancy on the
surrounding neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan does not include policies that provide a foundation
for regulating the conversion of public and semi-public buildings to new uses; and
WHEREAS, the proposed new policy for adaptive re-use of public and semi-public
buildings expresses the community's interest in extending the economic life of these buildings;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed new policy expresses an appropriate balance among the
community's interests in economic activity, resource conservation, and neighborhood
preservation, and
WHEREAS, the proposed policy is a necessary addition to the Comprehensive Plan to
provide guidance for the regulation of public and semi-public buildings that are proposed for
adaptive re-use in neighborhood settings; and
WHEREAS, any changes in development or use potentially effected by the amendment will not
create significant adverse impacts on existing sensitive land uses, businesses or residences; and
WHEREAS, the amendment can be accommodated by all applicable public services and facilities,
including transportation; and
WHEREAS, the amendment will have no substantive impacts beyond the City limits, nor will it
have cumulative adverse impact; and
WHEREAS; the Bremerton Planning Commission, following a public hearing on July 17, 2001,
determined that this request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and has submitted its Findings
and Conclusions in support of its recommendation to approve this Comprehensive Plan Policy Addition
Amendment; and
THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES ORDAIN THE FOLLOWING
Section 1: That the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan is amended to include the following new
policy to Element E. Land Use, Section 3.A:
SupportinR Policies:
(6) Promote the reuse of public and semi-public buildings that are no longer needed to serve
their original primary purpose, provided that any new use is consistent with the
surrounding planned environment.
Section 2: This effective date of this Ordinance shall be ten (10) days from the date of
passage and publication by the Mayor and City Council.
APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ day of ,2001.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ day of ,2001.
JOHN LAW
City Council President
APPROVED this ~ day of ,2001.
ATTEST: LYNN S. HORTON
Mayor
KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY
City Clerk
BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
PL01-0010: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Element E. Land
Use, Section 3.A., to add a new policy 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 consistent with the surrounding
planned environment.
FINDINGS:
1. Over Bremerton's lO0-plus year history, many schools, fire stations,
churches and other public and semi-public community buildings have been
constructed in locations that serve residential neighborhoods.
2. As the community's needs have changed over time, due to changes in
demographics, development patterns, or lifestyle preferences, some of
these buildings have lost functionality for their original purpose.
3. Public and semi-public buildings that have lost functionality for their original
purpose can often retain economic value if give the opportunity for other
uses.
4. Adding economic life to existing development conserves resources that
would otherwise be consumed for new development.
5. The opportunity to re-use public and semi-public buildings to extend their
economic life needs to be balanced with the potential impact of new
occupancy on the surrounding neighborhood.
6. The Comprehensive Plan does not include policies that provide a
foundation for regulating the conversion of public and semi-public buildings
to new uses.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The proposed new 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 proposed new policy expresses an appropriate balance among the
community's interests in economic activity, resource conservation, and
neighborhood preservation.
3. The proposed policy is a necessary addition to the Comprehensive Plan to
provide guidance for the regulation of public and semi-public buildings that
are proposed for adaptive re-use in neighborhood settings.
Approved by the Bremerton Planning Commission on'""~-' '~ L..,J ~ if?,,. ~f .
Attest:
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
2000 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT
S, TAFF 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 Scho<31 District (PL01-0010;
PL01-0011)
CONTAC'r: 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 recogni~ as an inherent part of the
neighborhood fabdc, 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 pdvate.
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 pub~lc and semi-pub~lc bui/ding$ that are no
longer needed to serve their orfgina/ prfmary purpose, Provided that
any new use is consistent with the surrounding p/anned environment.
PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT:
Proposed new section, BMC 2'/.Q2.315- 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 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, 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 sucf~ use for a minimum of five
years.
COMPLZANCE WITH GMA GOALS: The proposed policy has relevance to the fallowing
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 odginal 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 infiil
development through adaptive reuse adds market opportunity for new economic .
enterprise.
Goal 13. Histodc Preservation: Adaptive reuse is a cost-effective mechanism to
preserve histodc buildings by providing new economic opportunities for the structures.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION (SEPA): A Determination of Non-Significance was issued
for this non-pmiect 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 cdteda are listed on page 2.
of Element K. -).
The criteda as presented are pdmadly 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 criteria
are the only ones adopted to apply to decisions of this type.
ZONING CONSISTENCY.' The approval criteria for amenc~ments to the Zoning Code text.
relate to internal consistency. The proposed zoning text amendment is intended to
implement the proposed adaptive reuse policy and maintain regulator,/consistency with
the Cornl3rehen,sive Plan. The amendment must also be found to be consistent with ail
other provisions of the Zoning Code.
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
,,u ~s-& I,
I. SUBJECT: Public Hearinq &.Ordinance to amend FOR AGENDA OF: ~¥' 25, 2_001
the Zoning Code Text by relaxing the parking ratio requirements DEPT. OF ORIGIN' P&B- Land Use
for Food Store, Markets, and Supermarkets. ORIGINATOR: Chris Hu.qo, Director
DATE SUBMITTED: July, 18 2001
2. CLEARANCES:. (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS:
--/
P&B Director: ~--"'~L.5"6 / o PC Findings & Conclusions
:;~--~City Attorney: ~,.--~~~._~-,.-----~' .. /' o PC Minutes July 17, 2001
City Clerk: ~ ~, ~ ~ ... ~ ~/ o Staff Repo~
Fiscal & Budget C~n~i~ Comm.: ~_.~/ o Ordinance to amend Zoning Text
Operations Comm.: ~
ENDORSEMENTS__ INFORMATION ~ APPROVED BY COUN~PRESlDENT FOR SUBMITTAL:
.
............4. ~' .......... SUMMARY'~' ............... STATEMENT~ .......... ~"'"~'~""~-~"~"'~'"~'~'"~"'~"~AND REQUIREME~N~f"~'C~6~''~'''~''~'''F~ COUNCIL .... ~"~-CTION: ..... ............. '" ~ "~ .... '~ ~
The Albedsons Text Amendment Application PL01-0008~poses a Zoning Code text amendment to change the
parking ratio for Food Store, Markets, and Supermarkets per BMC 21.02.670(b) and Figure 670(b).
The Planning Commission has reviewed this proposal, conducted a public hearing and adopted Findings &
Conclusions at their July 17, 2001 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 approve the attached Ordinance # on first reading.
Move to pass the attached Ordinance # on second reading.
6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Christopher R. Hugo
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
7. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED__ A~f~I~D,~ L ~
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE:
8. AGENDA BILL NO.: Ri'" I 7 '~l
9. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
10. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
If the proposed ordinance is not approved, the city will lose the capability .............
11. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS~ FAClLITIES~ 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.
AN ORDINANCE of the Bremerton City Council amending the Zoning Code, Chapter 21.02, Zoning
Code Appendix, Figure 670 (b) of the Bremerton Municipal Code, to revise the parking ratio
regulations for Food Store, Markets, and Supermarkets.
The City Council of Bremerton makes the following findings:
WHEREAS, Zoning code provisions set minimum standards for parking that is required to support
primary land uses, including food stores, markets, and supermarkets. These requirements reflect the
minimum number of spaces that are estimated to serve the parking demand generated by the supported
use(s); and
WHEREAS, The proposed amendment reduces the minimum required number of parking spaces
by 25%; and
WHEREAS, In an informal survey of communities in the Puget Sound region, the range of
minimum required parking for supermarkets is broad, varying from one space for every 200 square feet of
gross floor area to one space for 450 feet of floor area; and
WHEREAS, The determination of the appropriate requirement for the minimum number of parking
spaces that any use shall provide as a part of the development is one of local discretion, founded in
community values such as efficient land use, promotion of alternative transportation, and reduction of
impervious surface area; and
WHEREAS, The consequence of setting the minimum requirement too high is to commit
excessive site area to unused parking spaces, removing land from other urban uses and contributing to
storm water management issues from the additional impervious surface area; and
WHEREAS, The consequence of setting the minimum requirement too Iow is potentially placing
the success of the planned urban environment in jeopardy by not insuring that motorists have a place to
park while patronizing the food store, market, or supermarket; and
WHEREAS, Although unmet parking demand may create off-site impacts to adjacent residential
areas, patronage of food stores, markets and supermarkets is dependent on safe, convenient access to
store entrances that is only afforded by adequate on-site parking; and
WHEREAS, Food Stores, Markets, and Supermarket corporations set minimum operational
parking standards that reflect the spaces considered necessary to support their stores; their determination
of need is a viable consideration in setting community requirements; and
WHEREAS, The goals of the state Growth Management Act and community values expressed in
policies of the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan promote more efficient use of land, use of alternative
modes of transportation, and protection of the environment; and
WHEREAS, Community development patterns and changing community expectations for the
urban environment support the proposed amendment l:or a new minimum-parking requirement l~or ¢ood
stores, markets, and supermarkets; and
WHEREAS, The proposed 25% reduction in the minimum number of parking spaces required for
food stores, markets, and supermarkets is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, The proposed amendment promotes the public interest and poses no adverse
impacts to the community
WHEREAS, The Bremerton Planning Commission, during their regularly scheduled meeting on
July 17, 2001, taking into consideration previous public hearing testimony, determined that this text
amendment request was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with the City's Development
Regulation Amendment criteria, contained in BMC 21.02.925, adopted Findings and Conclusions in
support of its recommendation to approve this Development Regulation Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Bremerton City Council conducted a public hearing on July 25, 2001 to accept
public comments pertaining to the proposed Development Regulation Amendment to consider the
Planning Commission's recommendation; now therefore:
THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES ORDAIN THE FOLLOWING:
2
3'7
Section 1: Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC), Chapter 21.02, Zoning Code Appendix,
Figure 670 (b) of the Bremerton Municipal Code, revising the parking ratio regulations for Food Store,
Markets, and Supermarkets, is amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A attached: Hereto and by
reference incorporated herein.
Land Use Min. parking requirements
Food Store (retail) 1 space per 250 sq. ft. of gross floor area.
Markets & Supermarkets A minimum of 6 spaces shall be provided.
Section 2: The effective date of this Ordinance shall be ten (10) days from the date of
passage and publication by the Mayor and City Council
APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ day of ,2001.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of ,2001.
JOHN LAW
City Council President
APPROVED this ~ day of ,2001.
LYNN S. HOP, TON
ATTEST: Mayor
KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY
City Clerk
Figure 670(b)
OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS
FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES
LAND USE MIN. PARKIng; R ENTS
Hotel t space per 2 guest rooms, plus
I space per 200 sq.tt, of gross floor area devoted to other common uses.
Motel space per 2 guest rooms, plus
space per 200 sq.fi., o~'gross floor arcs devoted to other common uses.
space for thc .manager.
Bed & Breakfast space per guest room, plus
Establishment space for the resident household.
Travel Trailer Park l space per travel trailer site, plus
Tourist Court I space per each 10 sites to be located in a security area such as a vehicle
storage area, plus
! space per five trailer sites [or guest parking, and
Additional spaces, as needed, for office or communiD' buildings.
Automobile Service I space per 200 sq.ft, ct'gross floor area, plus
I space per service bay (bay itsel['is not a space).
A minimum of 5 spaces shall be provided.
Barber Shop/Beauts.' Salon I space per 75 sq.ft, of gross floor area.
Bank I space per 350 sq.fl,, of gross floor area.
Bowling Alley 5 spaces per lane.
Medical/Dental Clinic I space per 150 sq.ft, of'gross floor area.
or Office
Clubs, lodges I space per 4 fixed seats, and
1 space per 50 sq.fl, of gross floor area of assembly areas without fixed
seating.
Convenience Market I space per 200 sq.ft of gross floor area.
A minimum of 6 spaces shall be provided.
Dance Hall I space per 100 sq.ft, of gross floor area.
Food Store (retail) I space per250 sq.ft, of'gross floor area.
Markets & Supermarkets A minimum of 6 spaces shall be provided.
Garden Nursery I space per 400 sq.fl, of gross floor area (retail).
I space per 500 sq.~t, of'building and outside display area (wholesale).
Health Club, Figure Salon, 10 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft, of gross floor area.
Physical Fitness Center
Hospitals & Medical I.IS spaces per bcd. Number orbcds to bc determined by license t,l' Ibp State
Centers (Portion with beds) of'Washington. (Hospital basinets are not considered beds)
EXHIBIT A
BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
PL01-0008: Proposed Zoning Code Text Amendment to change the parking
ratio for Food Store, Markets, and Supermarkets as provided in BMC
21.02.670(b) and Figure 670(b).
FINDINGS:
1. Zoning code provisions set minimum standards for parking that is
required to support primary land uses, including food stores, markets,
and supermarkets. These requirements reflect the minimum number of
spaces that are estimated to serve the parking demand generated by
the supported use(s).
2. The proposed amendment reduces the minimum required number of
parking spaces by 25%.
3. In an informal survey of communities in the Puget Sound region, the
range of minimum required parking for supermarkets is broad, varying
from one space for every 200 square feet of gross floor area to one
space for 450 feet of floor area.
4. The determination of the appropriate requirement for the minimum
number of parking spaces that any use shall provide as a part of the
development is one of local discretion, founded in community values
such as efficient land use, promotion of alternative transportation, and
reduction of impervious surface area.
5. The consequence of setting the minimum requirement too high is to
commit excessive site area to unused parking spaces, removing land
from other urban uses and contributing to storm water management
issues from the additional impervious surface area.
6. The consequence of setting the minimum requirement too Iow is
potentially placing the success of the planned urban environment in
jeopardy by not insuring that motorists have a place to park while
patronizing the supermarket.
7. Although unmet parking demand may create off-site impacts to adjacent
residential areas, patronage of supermarkets is dependent on safe,
convenient access to store entrances that is only afforded by adequate
on-site parking.
8. Supermarket corporations set minimum operational parking standards
that reflect the spaces considered necessary to support their stores;
their determination of need is a viable consideration in setting
community requirements.
9. The goals of the state Growth Management Act and community values
expressed in policies of the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan promote
more efficient use of land, use of alternative modes of transportation,
and protection of the environment.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Community development patterns and changing community
expectations for the urban environment support the proposed
amendment for a new minimum-parking requirement for food stores,
markets, and supermarkets.
2. The proposed 25% reduction in the minimum number of parking spaces
required for supermarkets is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The proposed amendment promotes the public interest and poses no
adverse impacts to the community.
Approved by the Bremerton Planning Commission on"-~ '¢ ,~ ]C~,, /"']~ ~.~_~0/
!
Attest:.
Ch'-ris I~L~g-o '
Secretary
Minutes for Approval DRAFT
Planning Commission Meeting
July 17, 2001
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kosusko at 5:37 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Those present were: Chairman Kosusko, Commissioner Cockburn, Commissioner Dingfield,
Commissioner Kennedy, and Commissioner Moshay. Quorum certified.
III. Approval of Agenda
A motion was made by Commissioner Dingfield and seconded by Commissioner Kennedy that the
agenda be approved as submitted. Called for a vote: Cockbum: yes; Dingfield: yes; Kennedy: yes;
Moshay: yes; and Kosusko: yes. Agenda approved.
IV. Approval of Minutes
The June 19, 2001, minutes were presented for approval. There were two changes: Page one, the
meeting was called to order at 5:40 p.m., not 6:40 p.m; and page six, the first sentence in the last
paragraph should read "Chairman Kosusko stated that he too, is in favor of the application, but was
disappointed in the Church because they tried to move this play area without going through the
Commission first."
A motion was made by Commissioner Kennedy to approve the minutes of the June 19, 2001,
meeting with the aforementioned changes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Dingfield.
Called for a vote: Cockburn: yes; Dingfield: yes; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes; and Kosusko: yes. The
minutes were approved.
V. Public Meeting
A. Call to the Public (public comments on any item not on tonight's agenda). None.
Since there was no public comment, Chairman Kosusko moved directly to the public heating.
B. Public Heating
Continued Item- Testimony Open:
Chairman Kosusko stated that the first item is a continued item, where testimony was left open.
PL01-0024: City of Bremerton, Downtown Development Policies.
Planning Commission Meeting July 17, 2001 Page 1 of 7
Mr. Hugo stated that the only addition is the promised report from the consultant that has been
working with The City on the downtown development strategies, Calthrop & Associates. You
have the report before you that was provided to The City this last spring. It is a discussion of the
overall downtown strategies related to plan that was presented a couple of hearing dates ago. He
drew the commission's attention to page three, the Implementation Plan section which talks
about the Illustrative Plan and Regulating Map. Mr. Hugo reminded the commission that this
report is just a narrative, not policy, and that it can be edited to help its clarity. He further
expressed that he doesn't think that the public here is familiar with the terminology of the
Regulating Map. The concept does have a good idea behind it. The map provides a way of
noting where the high buildings should go; these are the important streets; and terms the
streetscape and then we tool our regulations to make sure we achieve the urban design attempts
expressed in the overall illustrative plan concept. This would be accomplished by using the map
as a guide, when we review developments (i.e., If this development on this street you have a
different set of standards to follow than if you are on a secondary street or one that doesn't have
the same pedestrian emphasis.). Commissioner Kosusko stated that Seattle's zoning code had
implemented something like this, where there are designated pedestrian corridors, and streets are
ranked according to their uses. He said that it has been codified into the zoning code now, but he
imagined that it started with some sort of regulating map.
Mr. Hugo, then drew the commission's attention to the second bullet. "The Regulating Map
shows towers that encroach visual focal points at key locations." One of the weaknesses with
the Illustrative Plan is that it is two-dimension. You cannot tell where the height is in the
building. During one of the Calthrop exercises this spring, I noted that San Francisco has a very
deliberate strategy using building rise to accentuate their topography. Where the natural form of
development might be where the ground is flat, you would do the easy tall buildings. Then when
the ground starts getting steep, you don't build as high because it might be more difficult. San
Francisco does just the opposite. When the ground is flat in the valleys, they keep the buildings
low. That's why you see predominately 2-4 story buildings throughout the low parts of San
Francisco. But particularly closer to the core, they try to get the higher density towers up the
hills and building them on top of the hills to even accentuate the hills more. So when you look at
San Francisco from the water or across the bay, you see that very characteristics hilly form.
Rather than the other way (natural form), might be the tall buildings will fill in the valleys and
the short buildings will chop up the ridgelines and you get a flat urban landscape. So, we are
missing the diagram that shows where building rises should go, for regulatory purposes. We
have now asked Matt Tucker or Calthrop, to provide a height map. Then when we get to the
next phase (Land Use Code or Zoning Code changes), we will have a diagram to propose to you
for consideration for a height plan.
Commissioner Dingfield asked if existing buildings would be grandfathered in and then as
changes are made, would they then conform to whatever is adopted? Specifically, the Caltrhop
plan, which has been in the public eye for some time - the plan shows that the Penney's Building
disappears. That's more of an open space in an urban center and we do have the Bremer Trust
now developing parking there. Mr. Hugo stated that buildings will have non-conforming rights.
They will be able to stay in their current configuration in perpetuity. Different communities use
different thresholds for how far you can redevelop a project before you essentially have to
conform to all the new codes. Sometimes there's a proportionate response. For example, if you
redo half the building you would be required to bring about half the things back into code
compliance. So, there would be a kind of negotiation that occurs. Some communities, you could
loose essentially 60-70% of the building to fire and still have a right to rebuild it to it's pre-fire
form without having to meet the new codes. We, the City of Bremerton, haven't gotten there
Planning Commission Meeting July 17,2001 Page 2 of 7
yet. That is an excellent question for the overall zoning code for the City, since those kinds of
thresholds applies everywhere. There was a short discussion about the Penney's building.
Mr. Hugo expressed that the draft code that will be presented to the commission, the policies are
not descriptive about which direction to go in terms of height. The height map will help
articulate that. We may need to bring it to you subsequent to this, as a compliment to this before
we get to the Land Use Code. It is essential because the draft code states that the waterfront
environment the height limit is 60 feet. That is how it is proposed in the downtown, waterfront
district from Washington Street to the waterfront. Everything on the interior of that proposed
height is 120 feet. Well 120 feet could be 10 stories of residential, for instance. That means that
such things as the government center might be built and then it could all of a sudden loose all of
it's view access from the high ground because of 10 story buildings being built on the low
ground that flattens out the landscape and essentially denies everybody any views. That is a
concern. We want the government building to stand out and be a civic icon. We don't want to
create unintended development patterns because we haven't thought about it enough.
Commissioner Kosusko asked if we waiting for the height map before we move on this agenda
item? Mr. Hugo said that we don't need to wait. This narrative goes to a point and then
discusses draft code concerns. Since we are still looking at this issues, we haven't brought the
land use (code) package to you. We have to review the floor ratio. For example, the proposal
we have before the Public Facilities District for a conference center, hotel, condos, parking
structure, retail, and restaurant. When I added up the floor areas of all those projects - the total
floor area was 4 times the site area. That means that the project requires a floor area ratio of at
least 4.0 to be accommodated. Yet the draft code says that if you do all the right things you can
get up to 3.0. We are a whole floor short. So we need to go back and check that code proposal
to verify that what the Illustrative Plan is showing can be accommodated within the code
structure.
In response to Mr. Hugo's example, Commissioner Kosusko initiated a discussion about the
proposal before the Public Facilities District. Based on this discussion, Mr. Hugo reassured the
he will remind the strategies committee looking at that map - don't make that 10 story ban or
locations many or too broad. That would make it too limiting, just try to achieve some very
specific urban design intents. Otherwise, he thinks it will kill the market.
Mr. Hugo stated that the narrative is informational to the commission. He said that the draft
code concerns should be noted that these are issues we are still looking at as we go through the
final step of the commission reviewing code for future recommendations. Commissioner
Kosusko asked if this is part of our comprehensive plan amendment. Mr. Hugo suggested that
the first part be added as a "front-end". It still requires some editing before the final publication.
Ms. Itonore made copies of the Downtown Core Policies for the commissioners.
Commissioner Kosusko asked if there was any public comment on this item. None. The public
heating was closed on this item. The commissioners concluded that there has been no
opportunity to deliberate on the Downtown Development Policies.
Commissioner Dingfield asked a question about the downtown core, both #8 and #9. Internal
corridors or terrace walkways. Is that something that private developers are going to be
responsible for doing or is that going to be part of City responsibilities. Mr. Hugo stated that
those kinds of features are something that City either negotiates with the project or has to require
Planning Commission Meeting July 17, 2001 Page 3 of 7
through an easement and public funds to develop. Unless the property owners see that it is in
their own interest and they think that it's a good idea to give access to our property from new
directions. Calthrop was not that excited about the cut-throughs, they are controversial. There
was a short discussion about block cut-throughs and alley spaces as interesting urban spaces. We
are leaving internal corridors, terrace walkways, and cut-throughs in. However, it is not
specified who is responsible for them.
Commissioner Dingfield stated that we are leaving them in as pretty arbitrary. She thinks we're
not leaving any room for movement on that (...new development should include...). Would it be
more appropriate to leave a little more "wiggle" room on that? Commissioner Kosusko
suggested rewording to .... new development is encouraged to include. Mr. Hugo explained that
one of the normal ways that planners craft policies for feeding back to the public is to use action
verbs as the word. For example: "Encourage internal corridors or terrace walkways .... to
traverse the steep topography..." Commissioner Kosusko stated that it would be stronger that
should, it is not must. Commissioner Kennedy stated that language can be vague - some
planners make a point of saying we must do this. Maybe that was the intent and maybe it wasn't.
Mr. Hugo stated that this is included on the Illustrative Plan, but we still wouldn't tell the that
they had to do that because it would be an exaction of a public benefit with no relationship to an
impact. I wouldn't do that. Anyone operating under the law should not do this. Commissioner
Kennedy asked if using the word "should" would make it a requirement. Mr. Hugo responded
that it would not, this is a statement of public intent as to what we want to accomplish and it
doesn't say who is responsible.
Commissioner Kennedy had a question regarding goals and policy suggestion under #5
"Downtown Waterfront Goals," office use on upper floors should be added to the list of uses
encouraged. She stated that this seems upside-down. The office should be on the street level
and the residential areas should be on the upper floors of the waterfront district according to what
we had discussed. Mr. Itugo stated that these comments are getting into the code section and
the land use codes should be considered as history of comment. It was determined that office use
is an 8-to-5, weekday use and doesn't activate the waterfront the way residential and retail use
does. The waterfront is too valuable to give up to 8-to-5, weekday use.
Commissioner Dingfield had a question about parking, #2 (Parking Standards). Mr. Hugo
stated that right now there is no parking required in the downtown area with new uses. Parking
is still something that is being discussed. There is a parking access and circulation study going
on, which will be presented to you before the final code is adopted. If you look in the code
section, there is a range from minimum to maximum. (Minimum of 1 parking space per 1,000
square feet, Maximum of 4.) This will be examined again to make sure there is adequate
capacity for uses, commuters, and daily patrons - office workers and people who are shopping.
We are on the verge of signing a contract for a fairly extensive study of parking and downtown
traffic circulation considering ferries and access to garages, etc. Commissioner Kosusko asked
if the Shipyard is part of that discussion. Mr. Hugo state that yes, they are. Commissioner
Dingfield asked if new construction would be held to a different standard than redevelopment?
Mr. Hugo repeated that it would depend on which threshold would initiate it. For example, if
you took older waterfront properties and redeveloped the whole thing for a new residential - all
of that would be subject to a new standard. If we put in a standard and you take an existing
building that hasn't been occupied for a couple of years, they might have to contribute to a
parking structure somewhere to meet their parking demand. Everyone downtown is going to
need parking. The land use section of this report should be completed by end of August or early
September. That parking report better be ready, because that is one of the things driving the
Planning Commission Meeting July 17, 2001 Page 4 of 7
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 carded.
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 draft 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 mad thc 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: Cockbum: yes; Dingficld: 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 ! Page 5 of 7
d. PL01-0016 - Front Yard Averaging 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 Dingfield 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: yes; Kennedy: yes;
Moshay: yes; and Kosusko: yes. Amendment adopted.
e. PL01-0017 - Common Open Space, Zoning Text Amendment. Mr. Hugo read the
facts and findings directly from the draft Findings and Conclusions. He then asked if
there were any questions. There was one typographical error. Commissioner Dingfield
made a motion that the Commission adopt the f'mdings and conclusions for PL01-
0010 as revised. Commissioner Kennedy seconded the motion. Called for a vote:
Cockbum: yes; Dingfield: yes; Kennedy: yes; Moshay: yes; and Kosusko: yes.
Amendment adopted.
A. Chair Report
1. Commissioner Kosusko publicly acknowledged the receipt of a letter from Mr. Moreno of
the Emanuel Apostolic Church. The letters appears to be a explanation and rebuttal of some
of our concerns from the last meeting.
2. Department of Transportation Meeting regarding the Wheaton Way Corridor.
Commissioner Dingfield had a School Board Meeting that evening. However, she sent
several letters to the editor regarding her input. Commissioner Kosusko suggested that if
anyone had input, they could still submit comments by e-mail. He stated that he tried to be
very positive and there was a question and answer session.
B. Director's Report - Mr. Hugo reported the following:
1. Updated on the Planning & Building Department reorganization. Please note that our new
Office Assistant Senior is doing very well. We are so happy to have Mitchelle. She is
making our operation much smoother. You can tell by the quality of the minutes that you
review, we didn't have to do too much this time. For the first time in months, they are not
only on time, they are also very accurate.
2. On Friday, your Chair and the rest of our panel are starting our Planner interviews. We have
six finalists with varied experience. We will be interviewing Friday morning and Monday
morning, six people. Our goal is to make offers to three of the six. One is local, one lives in
Seattle, two just graduated from Eastern Washington University with Planning degrees. Of
the other two: one is flying up from Arizona and has a history in the Northwest and is
wanting to come back. Is a town planner now in Arizona; and the other person also has a
history in the Northwest and is a young woman who has just graduated from Tuffs University
in Maine. She is flying here from Maine. Commissioner Kosusko added that he has the
applications and he is quite impressed by the quality of the applicants. There was a short
discussion of the test, the make-up of the interview panel, and the format of the interviews.
Mr. Hugo asked if anyone could help by providing tours to the applicants. Commissioners
Dingfieid and Moshay volunteered to help by providing tours.
Planning Commission Meeting July 17, 2001 Page 6 of 7
3. Our Building Development Specialist I that will do Land Use item for the counter - we are
halfway through the testing process. A County permit clerk, Valarie (Our Building
Development Specialist I for Building), and our Civil Service Officer are interviewing that
group of eight people to complete the testing process. They should all be scored from that by
July 27, 2001. Then early the next week, I'll be interviewing the top three candidates.
4. There may be a need for a special meeting, because of notification. Mr. Hugo will confirm
that as soon as possible. Findings and conclusions of the downtown policies that we have
just recommended for approval. Also, the eight other comprehensive plan map amendments.
The special meeting could be as soon as July 31, 2001. Commissioner Kosusko informed
the group that he will not be present at the August 21,2001, meeting.
5. The Mayor and the City Council has the Heating Examiner as a high priority. Now that we
have a new contract attorney to assist the City that I can turn the Heating Examiner proposal
over to the attorney. This will be his first assignment. I am committed to getting something
to the City Council by the end of August and with the Mayor setting that priority - it will
happen. There was a short discussion about the commission's role in assisting with this
priority. It was decided that the ordinances will come through the commission.
VII. Adjournment
Meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for August 21, 2001.
Respectfully submitted by:
Executive Secretary
Approved by:
Andrew J. Kosusko, Chairman
Planning Commission Meeting July 17, 2001 Page 7 of 7
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL: Proposed zoning code text amendment to change the parking
ratio for Food Store, Markets, and Supermarkets per BMC
21.02.670(b) and Figure 670(b).
DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 19,2001
APPLICANT OR PROPONENT (FILE NUMBERS): Albertson's Stores (PL01-0008)
CONTACT: Jim Towslee, Pacific Land Design, (206)522-9510
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: This proposal will apply to these uses within the entire city.
BACKGROUND: The Zoning Code adopted in 1998 to implement the Comprehensive
Plan specifies that food stores, markets, and supermarkets shall provide
one parking space for each 200 square feet of building gross floor area.
The applicant is proposing a new supermarket within the city on a site
that cannot meet the specified ratio. The proposed code amendment
would change the parking requirement for the Food Store, Markets, and
Supermarkets use category to one parking space for every 250 square
feet of building gross floor area. This would result in a 20% decrease in
the minimum parking requirement for these uses.
The main issues associated with on-site parking for non-residential uses
are meeting customer needs (or tenant demands) and avoiding off-site
impacts to other properties and uses. The ratios provided in the zoning
code are based on development practices over the past several decades
but are not necessarily consistent with future needs and community
values.
Factors such as proximity to other non-residential uses to allow shared
parking, the availability of other transportation modes besides
automobile, and the frequency and duration of peak demand can reduce
the need for parking area. However, whatever ratio is established,
parking should still reasonably accommodate customer demand and not
create "spill-over" impacts to other properties in the vicinity. This is
particularly sensitive in residential settings, permit pursuant to a public
hearing process to insure that issues of compatible use and
development are addressed.
PROPOSED ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT:.
In Figure 670(b) of BMC Chapter 21, make the following revision to the
table:
Land Use Min. Parking Requirements
Food Store (retail), 1 space per 250 sq. ft. of gross floor area.
Markets & Supermarkets A minimum of 6 spaces shall be provided.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION (SEPA): A Determination of Non-Significance was
issued for this non-project action in accordance with WAC 197-11 on April 23, 2001.
DECISION CRITERIA: There are two criteda that must be satisfied to approve an
amendment of development regulations in the zoning code. Both of them relate to
consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and its implementing regulations.
The primary associations between this proposed change in development standards and
the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan are in the area of land use efficiency
and environmental quality. This amendment would produce a 20% reduction in the
amount of parking area, land that could be used for other urban purposes. Further, it
would produce 20% less impervious surface, reducing the mitigating measures for
storm water management.
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. ~B~CT: FOR AGENDA: August 1, 2001
Appointment of District 8 Council Member ORIGINATING DEPT: City Council
ORIGINATOR: John Law, Council President
DATE SUBMITTED: July 27, 2001
2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS:
ENDORSEMENT ~ INFORMATION [] APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL BY
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
Conrad Esser submitted a letter of resignation as Council Member for District 8 effective July 20, 2001. The
position for District 8 Council member was then advertised, with 3 qualified applications received. Interviews
will be held during the Council meeting of August 1, 2001. City Council Members will then agree on
nominations and make a selection.
5. RECOMMENDATION:
Move to appoint as the new District 8 Council Member.
6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
7. NOTICE OF ACTION:
PULLED [~ TABLED [] APPROVED ['~ DISAPPROVED ~ AMENDED ~-] DATE:
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE:
8. AGENDA BILL NO.: DI- 17 ~
9. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
Citizens of District 8 will not be represented.
10. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
11. RESEARCH SOURCES: