Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/26/99 AGENDA5. 6. 7. 8. 9. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MAY 26, 1999 STUDY SESSION: 5:00 - 5:30 P.M. A. General Council Business CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M. A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Invocation- CONSENT AGENDA Items listed below have been distributed to Council members in advance for study and will be enacted by one motion. If separate discussion is desired on an item, it may be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed on the Regular Agenda at the request of a Council member. A. Minutes of Meeting - April 28, 1999 #AB99-087 B. Minutes of Meeting - May 5, 1999 #AB99-088 C. Minutes of Work Session - May 10, 1999 #AB99-089 D. Minutes of Meeting - May 12, 1999 #AB99-090 CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT LEGISLATIVE REPORT PUBLIC RECOGNITION -- (Comments Limited to 3 Minutes) NEW BUSINESS A. Anderson Creek Timber Sale Agreement B. Professional Services Agreement for the Signal and Lighting Design for Werner Corridor Improvements C. SR304 Transportation Project Asbestos Removal No. 3 Contract Change Order No. 1 #AB99-091 #AB99-092 #AB99-093 (CONTINUED ON BA CK...) 10. ORDINANCES A. Ordinance No. 4648 (2® Reading) Amending Section 6.02 Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee B. Ordinance No. 4649 (2® Reading) Regarding Changes to the Commute Trip Reduction Law; and Amending Chapter 10.40 Ordinance No. 4650 (2® Reading) Relating to Use of Right-of-Way; and Ordinance No. 4651 (2® Reading) Relating to Setting Fees for Right-of-Way Use Permits D. Ordinance (First Reading) Regarding Prosecution for Violations and replacing BMC Chapter 1.12 11. RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 2705 Proposing the Vacation of Five City Rights-of-Way; Setting Public Hearing Date of July 7, 1999 B. Resolution No. 2706 Proposing the Vacation of Five City Rights-of-Way; Setting Public Hearing Date of July 7, 1999 12. PUBLIC HEARINGS - (6:00 P.M. OR LATER) A. Public Hearing and Resolution No. 2707 Regarding Recovery of Fees for the Abatement of Garbage and Debris on the Property Located at 2764 Maple Street Public Hearing and~...J3esolution No. 27~08 Regarding Recove~.Fe~for the~of Ga~ris or,. t,,,~operty~LQ~;at~d'~t 2106 7~tr-ee't'~ Continued Public Hearing and Ordinance (First Reading) on Text Amendment ZTA 98-0001 :/¢AB99-081 #AB99-082 #AB99-083 #AB99-084 #AB99-094 #AB99-095 #AB99-096 #AB99-097 #AB99-074 55 (~o AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY CO%-NCIL S U'~J'=C"~: MINUTES OF MEETING -- APRIL 28, 1999 FOR AGENDA OF: MAY 26, 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: . £ ITY £0UN£ 11 ORIGINATOR: M~KF SHFPNERD: PRESIDh DATE SUBMITTED: MAY 20; 19qq 2. ~: (comlnent on back if necessary_) ENDORSEMINT INFORY~ATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT F~~TAL: MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT /'~// _ 4. ~ .UTLM__ARY STATEMENT AL~D REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: 8. RE CO.~_~3FE__NDAT!O}~: RESPONSIBLE OFFiCiAL: ENFORCEHENT OFFiCiAL: EXP!~~TION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: !0. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DATE: DISAPPROVED D 11. AGENDA BILL NO: TAPE #1613 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CiTY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 28, 1999 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4th Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, April 28, 1999, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President Mike Shepherd presiding. Council members present were Jim Reed, Carlos Montgomery, Carol Arends, David Farr, Lon Overson, John Law, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Also present were Assistant City Attorney Knute Rife, Deputy Clerk Paula Johnston, and Legislative Assistant Lori Smith. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Shepherd and invocation given by Pastor John Bergren of the Family of God Lutheran Church. President Shepherd made the following announcements: 1. City Council held a Study Session prior to the meeting to discuss general Council business, followed by a Deliberation Session to discuss the request by Inland Empire for a Special Use Permit for two group residential facilities - Class I to be located at 1006 and 1008 9th Street; and 2. New Business Item (10C) "Public Hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 98-001, and Resolution No. 2702" will be removed from the Agenda tonight. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting - April 14, 1999 #AB99-072 #0035 M/S/C/U (McConnell/Montgomery) Motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090 have been recorded on a listing that had been made available to the Council. #0060 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Arends) On April 28, 1999, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 230159 to 230369 in the amount of $456,882.95; and Retiree Payroll for the pay period ending April 30, 1999 in the amount of $128,447.30. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Montgomery_ reported that he went to the Bremerton High School to assist in interviewing students for the Mayor's Award, and was very impressed with the four students nominated, who were all outstanding, and are a credit to their high school and parents. Mrs. Arends commented on the repaying project on Burwell Street that is going along nicely. Mr. Farr invited the community to attend the dedication ceremony this Saturday, 10:00 AM for Haddon Park. He also commended the Parks Department for their excellent work. TAPE #1613 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes April 28, 1999 Page 2 of 6 Mr. OversQn appreciated the beautification efforts done around town by volunteers. Mr. Law asked citizens to report graffiti to the Council office (478-5280) or to the Mayor (478- 5266), so it can be removed promptly by Dave Boynton and his Ameri Corp Team. President Shepherd congratulated the community for their efforts in passing the Bremerton School levy; announced the new local radio station KTZZ 1400; and lastly, encouraged citizens to attend the Gilded Age Antique clothing exhibit this weekend. MAYOR'S REPORT (1) Due to the absence of Mayor Horton, Mrs. Carol Arends read her Proclamation, proclaiming May 6, 1999 as a "Day of Praye~', which was accepted by Jeffrey Flood. He invited citizens to attend the first National Day of Prayer celebration on Saturday, May 1, 1999, 1:00 P.M. at the Family Worship Center in Gorst; and (2) President She.oherd read the Mayor's Proclamation proclaiming May 2-8, 1999 as "National Drinking Water Weel~', which was accepted by Kathleen Cahall, Water Resources Department Manager. She invited citizens to attend the City of Bremerton Open House on Thursday, May 13, 1999, 3:00- 7:00 P.M. LEGISLATIVE REPORT Portions of a letter sent to Donna Gardner were read, in response to a concern she raised regarding parking notices received on vehicles parking in excess of 72 hours. It was explained that State law prohibits long-term parking on public streets, and after 72 consecutive hours, any vehicle is subject to receive a citation. Diamond Parking will continue to respond to complaints, but would not monitor properly permitted vehicles. PUBLIC RECOGNITION John Lyle, representing West Sound Arts Council and Evergreen Children's Theater, reported on several upcoming art events, including the Arts Walk and Gilded Age Exhibit. Don Larson, President of Kitsap Diving Association, provided a brief report on the Sinclair Inlet Clean-Up event that took place Saturday, April 17, 1999. He announced that another event is planned during Water Weeks in September. 9A - WATER SYSTEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, #AB99-073 The City of Bremerton is required by the Washington State Department of Health to update its Water System Plan every six (6) years. The next update is due in 1999. The City is also required by Environmental Protection Agency to perform an analysis of its chlorination facilities in 1999. Qualified consulting firms were invited to submit their qualifications. Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. (EES) was determined to be the most qualified to assist the City in meeting these requirements. The total project cost is $191,496.00, and is included in the 1999-2000 Public Works & Utilities Budget under Water Resources. TAPE #1613 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes April 28, 1999 Page 3 of 6 Kathleen Cahall, Water Resources Manager, stated the purpose of the City's Water System Plan is to document how the City manages the drinking water system in compliance with all regulations. It also outlines the plan for Capital Improvements over the next 20 years to maintain the water system and meet the demand for growth Public comment - none. Mr. Overson referred to the contract, and verified that it calls for five tasks to be completed: 1) Water System Plan Update; 2) Operation & Maintenance Plan; 3) Disinfection Evaluation; 4) Project Management; and 5) Supplemental Services. He also verified that the tasks would be completed for the stated costs, whether or not the hours listed are expended. Mr. Olsen asked if bids were received from other firms. Ms. Cahall stated that since this is a Professional Services Agreement, the only item reviewed are the qualifications. Mr. Farr questioned if any grants were applied for. Ms. Cahall stated that no grants for drinking water are available, only monies through state loans. #0975 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Overson) Motion for Council to approve the Professional Services Agreement with Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. for $191,496.00, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Agreement, subject to City Administrative Policies and Procedures. 10A - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION NO. 2700, APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR TWO GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES-CLASS ]; APPLICANT: INLAND EMPIRE RESIDENTIAL RESOURCES; LOCATION: 1006 AND 1008 9TM STREET: #AB99-068 Council must decide if the applicant's Special Use Permit Application (SUP 99-0001) meets the necessary tests and criteria required for approval of the Group Residential Facility - Class ]; use. President Shepherd reminded City Council this was a Continued Public Hearing, and Conflict of Interest issues have already been discussed. However, he asked if any Council member had any additional disclosures. All Council members remained seated. He then asked if any member of the public had any concerns regarding Conflict of Interest of any seated Council Member. There were no comments by the public. He admonished that the public record was closed, and the purpose of the Continued Public Hearing is to review the record, and hear discussion, comments, and questions from the Council. Mr. Montgomery_ referred to definitions used in the Bremerton Municipal Code to support his conclusion to disapprove this Application for not meeting criteria for a Special Use Permit. Mr. Law first noted the Planning Commission unanimously approved the Special Use Application; and then asked Mr. Shepherd if he supported the project, considering it would be TAPE #1613 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes April 28, 1999 Page 4 of 6 located in his district. Mr. Shepherd stated the Planning Commission addressed all concerns, and therefore did support approval of the permit. Mr. Overson stated that he had difficulty supporting the proposal due to the adverse affect to the existing neighborhood, the letters received from the neighbors, and his opinion that by looking at the map, it looked like a 4-plex, which is not allowed under the current zoning code. Mr. McConnell agreed with previous comments made by Mr. Montgomery and Mr. Overson. He voiced his concerns about the determinations presented to City Council, particularly the conflicting information contained in the reports about how many units this dwelling would contain. He had additional concerns regarding parking; density; and the current litigation in Superior Court. Mr. Reed clarified that this structure is a Group Residential Facility, and not held accountable to the Single Family Residential zoning requirements, which is the reason for the Special Use Permit. He felt this project was well designed, provides a commendable service to the community, and would be a nice asset to the City. He therefore supported the project. Ms. Arends mentioned her long-standing involvement with developmentally disabled people. However, she stated she did not support this project in its current form due to the limitations of recreational and parking space. She encouraged the developers to explore the possibility of acquiring additional property for expansion through use of Block Grant monies. Jon Holan, Planning Manager, briefly addressed several issues raised tonight, which were also considered by the Planning Commission in their deliberations. He then concluded by stating City Council must consider whether or not a Building Permit should be upheld for this particular project, and whether it required a Special Use Permit. Mr. Olsen asked whether the City could require payment in lieu of taxes for this project. Mr. Holan responded that an Ordinance would have to be in place prior to application of that particular proposal as stated by Mr. Olsen. He then deferred issue to Legal Counsel. Knute Rife, Assistant City Attorney, stated if the City had the power to do it, it would need to be done in uniform fashion, and an Ordinance would have to be passed. He further stated he has not had time to research the issue to see how the City could implement it. On other programs he is aware of, the authorization comes from the State level. Mr. Shepherd stated he gave considerable thought to all testimony and to the letters received on this issue. He supported the decision of the Planning Commission. He described the many challenges the City will face now and in the future with the "infill" issue, which is allowing construction and development on existing lots within the City. TAPE #1613 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes April 28, 1999 Page 5 of 6 Mr. Rife stated that the following points should be considered before passage of the Resolution: 1) Structure size; 2) clarify what type of structure this is; and 3) address the issue of on-site staff. Mr. McConnell asked for clarification on how many on-site staff members would be present. Mr. Holan stated it was his understanding that the number of staff would be 1-2 people, but would need confirmation of that information. Mr. MontcJomery_ pointed out that he did not believe any member of the City Council wanted to keep this type of facility out of the City, however, he stated existing rules and laws must be adhered to. He reiterated that Special Use Permits are not to be used to circumvent existing laws just to enable one to build a structure that is not allowed. Mr. McConnell also took issue with the statement that Council members were trying to keep this type of facility out of the City, and felt this issue was strictly an effort to twist the Zoning Ordinance to match the request of the applicant. #2970 M/S/C (FardReed) Motion to approve the Special Use Permit for two Group Residential Facilities - Class ~[, and pass Resolution 2700 with the following conditions: · Project must comply with applicable codes; · Barrier free van parking spaces must be provided per code; · Parking spaces must be located in the middle of the parking area in order to have adequate vehicular access; · Project must comply with any rulings from the Kitsap County Superior Court; · Council will not approve any conversion of the project to duplex dwellings. Any changes in type of use will need additional review and approval; · Applicant shall record this permit with the Kitsap County Auditor; and · Special Use Permit shall lapse one-year from Notice of Final Approval unless the applicant takes the following action: 1) Filing with Department of Community Development; and 2) Completing Building Permit applications for the project. Vote on Motion: In Favor: Law, Reed, Farr, Shepherd, Olsen Opposed: Overson, Arends, Montgomery, McConnell Motion carried. 10B - PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT ZTA 98-0001. #AB99.074 City Council is requested to conduct a public hearing on ZTA 98-0001 and at the completion of the hearing, take the appropriate action. ZTA 98-0001 is the adoption of a new chapter 21.03, Land Use and Development Procedures, amendment of portions of Chapter 21.02, Zoning Code, Repeal of Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development, and amendment of Chapter TAPE #1613 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes April 28, 1999 Page 6 of 6 21.12, State Environmental Protection Act. These proposed changes would adopt new permit process program for the City, eliminate shoreline requirements which have been superceded by the Shoreline Master Program for the City, eliminate shoreline requirements which have been superceded by the Shoreline Master Program, and revise the City's SEPA requirements to be consistent with state requirements and establish higher level of categorical exemptions in urban areas for minor construction. The proposed amendment is categorically exempt from SEPA requirements since it is the adoption of new procedures. #$040 M/S/C (Montgomery/Law) Motion to postpone public hearing for Council to adopt Zoning Text Amendment ZTA 98-0001 for 30 days until May 26, 1999. Vote on Motion: Motion carried. In Favor: Farr, Arends, Montgomery, Reed, Olsen, McConnell, Law, Overson Opposed: Shepherd With no further business meeting adjourned at 6:55 P.M. PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President City of Bremerton P J/MS/Is C: Normal Distribution File AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COIFNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING -- MAY 5, 1999 FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: MAY 26, 1999 CITY COUNCIL MIKE SHEPHERD: PRESIDE MAY 20~ lqq9 2. ~: (com3aent on back 3. T~: if necessary) 4. $IIMPLARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: $. ~COMMIENDATION: RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: NDE D TAPE #1614 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 5, 1999 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4t~ Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, May 5, 1999, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President Mike Shepherd presiding. Council members present were Jim Reed, Carol Arends, David Farr, Lon Overson, John Law, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Council member Carlos Montgomery was absent. Also present were City Attorney Glenna Malanca, Deputy Clerk Paula Johnston, and Legislative Assistant Lori Smith. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Shepherd and invocation given by Pastor Paul Meeker of Our Saviour's Lutheran Church. President She.Dherd made the following announcements: (1) City Council held a Study Session prior to the meeting to discuss general Council business; followed by an Executive Session to discuss "Personnel"; (2) City Council will hold a Study Session immediately following the City Council meeting to discuss "Proposed Amendments to Bremerton Municipal Code Chapters 21.02 - Zoning Code; 21.04- Shoreline Development; 21.12- State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA); and Adoption of new Chapter 21.03 - Land Use and Development Procedures"; and (3) City Council, along with the Planning Commission, will hold a joint "Work-Planning Session" on Monday, May 10, 1999, 5:00 - 9:00 P.M. to discuss Basics of Comprehensive & Zoning Planning; Zoning & Planning Goals; Develop Outline; and Schedule the Next Session. CONSENT AGENDA No items. CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090 have been recorded on a listing that had been made available to the Council. #0093 M/S/C/U (Arends/Law) On May 5, 1999, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 230371 and 230402 through 230583 in the amount of $248,315.99; and Regular Payroll in the amount of $946,680.26. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. McConnell discussed the current updates by TCI. Mr. Law invited the public to attend the next District 3 meeting to be held Tuesday, May 18, 1999, 7:00 P.M. at the Senior Center to discuss any area of interest. He also announced the return of the USS VINCENT from a 6-month tour tomorrow morning at approximately 8:00 A.M. and encouraged the public to welcome them home. TAPE #1614 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes May 5, 1999 Page 2 of 4 Mr. Fart was pleased to announce Rev. Cleveland Williams will be awarded the "Liberty Bell Award" by the Kitsap County Bar Association during a ceremony at the Courthouse on Friday. He also attended the dedication of the "Lulu D. Haddon" park on Saturday, and asked any citizens interested in volunteering to "clean-up" the park to call 478-5280. Mrs. Arends congratulated Rev. Williams for receiving the award. She reported that the Burwell street project is almost complete, and that the demolition of the houses is happening quite rapidly. Mr. Olsen announced that Sunday, May 9, 1999 is the last day to see the Community Theater showing of "Joseph & His Amazing Technicolor Dream Coat". He also reported on a tour of the recently completed Corrosion Control Facility with other members of the Council. President She_~herd reported on the Friday Art Walk event which was very successful, including the Gilded Age Clothing exhibit. He also reported on upcoming Armed Forces Day activities. In conclusion, he announced the next District 5 meeting to be held Thursday, May 20, 1999, 7:00 P.M. at the Memorial Lutheran Church at 10th & Veneta. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Horton announced the following events: · The City's "Open House" · Armed Forces Day Activities · "Smile Rescuers" Clinic · Military Equipment Display Military Appreciation Day She also reported on an Economic Development Workshop she attended in Long Beach, California. She plans to assemble some related information to bring to the State Legislatures. She concluded by sending her condolences to the City of Bainbridge for the loss of former Mayor of Bainbridge, Janet West. LEGISLATIVE REPORT No report this evening. PUBLIC RECOGNITION H.E. Moshay expounded on Armed Forces Day activities, including the Pancake Breakfast on May 15, 1999 from 7:00 to 11:00 A.M. and displayed a flyer indicating other events happening that day. She too, attended the First Friday Arts Walk, which she enjoyed very much. She also encouraged citizens to attend the welcoming of the USS VINCENT. Elizabeth Buell discussed scotch broom and other noxious weeds growing again near the Warren Avenue Bridge. TAPE #1614 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes May 5, 1999 Page 3 of 4 Roy Mclnni$ invited the public to hear the choir Mt. Zion Missionary Baptist Church this Friday evening beginning at about 10:00 P.M. and to attend a Spring Revival happening all week, beginning on May 10, at Sinclair Missionary Baptist Church 9A - LEASE OF WATER UTILITY LAND FOR IN-VESSEL COMPOSTING AND WOOD WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY, #AB99-076 Edwards Forest Products of Port Gamble, WA has requested leasing Water Utility land for the purpose of operating an in-vessel composting and wood waste processing facility. Current zoning of the site is industrial. The proposed operation uses technology that has successfully operated elsewhere. The proposed facility would have the capability of processing wood waste, yard waste, and biosolids into high quality compost for resale. An operation of this type is referred to in the November 6, 1998 draft of the Kitsap County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan as an effective element of overall waste management in the country. This facility could also provide an alternative for the City's Biosolids Management Program and lessen the City's dependence on land application. Bill McKinney provided the staff report. He stated his Department has reviewed the system, as well as a similar system in another area. He reported this facility would provide a benefit to the community as a place to dispose of yard waste. He stated this Lease is only the first step in achieving a successful facility. The process being proposed is an "in-vessel" system, where the composting takes place in contained vessels, completely sealed to control odors and eliminate leachate. An additional benefit is that it provides an alternative for the City's Biosolids Management Program and lessens the City's dependence on land application. Public comment - none. Mr. Reed spoke in support of this project. Mr. Overson voiced his concerns that Council is signing a "blank check", and asked for additional information on the costs of processing biosolids. Mr. McKinney answered that a firm price will not be available until Edwards is well under way, but an estimated range would be approximately $30-$40 per wet ton. Following establishment of a lease agreement, the actual price of the project can then be determined. He did assure Council the price would be "competitive". Gene Sampley, Director of Public Works & Utilities, elaborated that the various conditions placed on the project would determine the operating costs. He did not feel it was necessary to tie up the process with a condition that cannot be met. Ms. Malanca offered a solution, which would be to add general parameters to the rate in the lease agreement, rather than using the subjective term "competitive". Mr. McConnell asked if the facility would be allowed for public use. Mr. McKinney replied yes, and that the public use is so stated in the lease agreement. It TAPE #1614 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes May 5, 1999 Page 4 of 4 Mr. Law stated there have been two study sessions on this issue already, and noted that Edwards Forest Products have been cooperative in answering questions and concerns. He stated that if prices became excessive, the facility would then not be used, since use is optional, therefore he did not feel "parameters" were necessary. MY..J~c, JC~DEe~ also pointed out that there is language in the lease agreement that states the City has no obligation to provide yard waste to the facility. Mrs. Arends was pleased there would be an alternative to burning yard wastes, but asked for additional clarification on whether Council was only considering the lease agreement, and not a "finished product". Mr. McKinney stated that it depends how much Council wants to be involved in the process, since they must meet numerous parameters with multiple entities. Mr. Farr thanked Edwards Forest Products for taking the time to modify the location of the proposed site, and can now support this proposal. He stated the blanks on the open price for processing biosolids, and price per wet ton should be determined, even if on a broad range, based on currently known information to remove the competitive term. Mr. Overson noted the liability concerns raised by the City's Risk manager, and stated that even though there is possible risk with this project, there also appears to be possible benefits, however he suggested a rate parameter of $30 - $40. Mr. McKinney stated the cost $20 - $40 per wet ton could be added to the lease agreement. Mr. Shepherd pointed out the main purpose of the lease is to generate income, and developing alternatives to burning yard waste. #1830 M/S/C/U (Overson/©lsen) Motion to approve the attached lease for Water Utility property to Edwards Forest Products of Port Gamble, WA, including supplemental language at the end of Schedule ~[I to read: Payments to be negotiated will be competitive i.e. $20 - $40 per wet ton, with current operation costs of the City. Lessee will have the capability to handle approximately 50% of the City's current operation. The final negotiated amounts will be subject to City Council approval. Also authorize the Mayor to execute the attached agreement in accordance with established Administrative Policies & Procedures. With no further business meeting adjourned at 6:30 P.M. MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President City of Bremerton P J/MS/Is PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk C: Normal Distribution File AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COLrNCIL !. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: MAY 26, 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: MINUTES OF WORK-PLANNING SESSION - ORIGINATOR: MAY 10, 1999 DATE SUBMITTED: CitY COUNCIL MIKE SHEPHERD~ PRESIDEN MAY 20, 1999 2. ~: (conu~ent on back 3. ~: if necessary) ENDORSEMENT__ INFORMATION APPRO~ED BY COUNCIL P~LESIDENT FO~/S~TAL: MAYOR __ COUNCIL PRESIDENT /~~~J 4. SUltRY STATEMENT AND REOUIREM~NT FOR COUNCIL ACT_~ON: ~ 8. RECOM~ENDATION: RESPONSIBLE OFFICZAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: CENDED TAPES #1, #2, #3 Work-Planning Session May 10, 1999 Page 1 of 4 UNNAPROVED DRAFT Work-Planning Session May 10, 1999 This Work-Planning Session of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4~h Street, Bremerton, Washington, Monday, May 10, 1999, at 5:00 P.M., with Council President Mike Shepherd presiding. Council members present were Jim Reed, Carlos Montgomery, David Farr, Lon Overson, John Law, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Council member Carol Arends was absent. Planning Commission members present were Joan Dingfield, Jerry Griggs, Barbara Boyd, Larry Stone, and Ed Wolfe. Planning Commission member Donna Adams was absent. Also present were Mayor Lynn Horton, Community Development Director Phil Berry, Planning Manager Jon Holan, Building Department Manager Judy Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Knute Rife, Internal Auditor Michael Stephenson, and Legislative Assistant Lori Smith. The meeting was facilitated by Alfred Pinkham. 5:00 - 6:15 P.M. - BASICS OF COMPREHENSIVE & ZONING PLANNING Jon Holan, presented a slide presentation, beginning with a visual of the connections between the Mayor, City Council, Department of Economic & Community Development (with Planning, Community Development, Building, Economic Development), and the Planning Commission. Planning...What is it? · "The evolvement of an over-all program or design of the present and future physical development of the total area and services of the existing or contemplated municipality." · "Planning is a process in which community values, needs, goals, and objectives are expressed, typically through a comprehensive plan. The goals and objectives are then implemented through regulatory ordinances." Planning Activities · Legislative Actions · Administrative Actions- Quasi-Judicial Legal Authority for Planning · Police Power · Planning Enabling Act (RCW 36.70 - Counties only) · Optional Municipal Code (RCW 35A.63 - Code cities only) · Planning Commission Act (RCW 35.63) · Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70) TAPES #1, #2, #3 Work-Planning Session May 10, 1999 Page 2 of 4 UNNAPROVED DRAFT Goals of Growth Management Act (GMA) · Urban Growth · Reduces Sprawl · Transportation · Housing · Economic Development · Property Rights · Permits · Open Space and Recreation · Environment · Citizen Participation · Natural Resource Industries · Public Facilities and Services · Historic Preservation · Shoreline Management · Three parts association with GMA · Five Key Components: 1) Classify and designate resource and critical areas; 2) Regionalizing the local planning process; 3) Preparing the Comprehensive Plan; 4) Developing local land use regulations; and 5) Reviewing projects Planning Concepts · Citizen Participation (Coordination; Consistency; Conformance; Concurrency) Legal Concepts (Due Process; Taking; Take (ESA); Vesting) Comprehensive Plan · Countywide Planning Policies · Population Allocations · Urban Growth Areas · Regional Plans · Contents of Plan 1. Mandatory Elements (Land Use; Housing; Capital Facilities Plan; Utilities; and Transportation) 2. Other Components (Lands useful for public purposes; Open Space corridors) 3. Optional (Any elements, items, or studies relating to the physical development of the city; Recreation; Solar; Conservation) 4. Process Shorelines Management Act (RCW 90.58) · Application - within 200 feet · Waters of Statewide Significance · Part of Comprehensive Plan · Development Regulations 15 TAPES #1, #2, #3 Work-Planning Session May 10, 1999 Page 3 of 4 UNNAPROVED DRAFT Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan · Regulations 1. Zoning Ordinance 3. 4. 5. 6. Subdivision Ordinance (RCW 58.17) Ordinances related to conservation of natural resource lands Critical Land Ordinance Building and Fire Codes Health Codes Infrastructure 1. Capital Improvement Program 2. Concurrency (Transportation, Other Infrastructure) Local Project Review (ESHB 1724) 1. Offer consolidated permit review process 2. Combine environmental review with project review 3. One open record hearing and one closed record appeal 4. Determine application completeness within 28 days 5. Notice of Application - 14 days after application completeness 6. Notice of final decision within 120 days State · · · · · Environmental Policy Act (RCW 43.21C) Purpose- Informational; and Identity Applies to governmental actions Exemptions Threshold determination Appropriate environmental document A visual graph documented the City of Bremerton Permit Process: 1) Concept; 2) Pre- submittal Review; 3) Application Submittal; 4) Technical - SEPA Review; 5) Application Completeness/Notice of Application; 6) SEPA Determination; 7) Staff Report; 8) Decision; or Planning Commission Hearing/City Council Hearing/Decision Planning Issues for City of Bremerton · Vision for Bremerton · Comprehensive Plan Update · Economic Development Strategies · Neighborhood Planning Program · UGA's JPA's, Annexation and the County · New/Revised Development Regulations · Revised Shorelines Master Program · Buildable Lands Study TAPES #1, #2, #3 Work-Planning Session May 10, 1999 Page 4 of 4 UNNAPROVED DRAFT TAPES #2 & #3 6:45 - 8:00 P.M. - DISCUSSIONS OF ZONING & PLANNING GOALS Alfred Pinkham, Facilitator, led this discussion with members of the City Council, Planning Commission members, Mayor, and Planning Department staff members. 8:00 - 8:30 P.M. - DEVELOP OUTLINE AND SCHEDULE NEXT SESSION At the City Council meeting scheduled Wednesday, May 12, 1999, it was decided to discuss: · Who are we; · Where are we today, and · Where are we going. In addition, the City Council agreed to divide into three groups to form a Housing Committee; Economic Development Committee; and Transportation Committee. Each committee will work on Policy Statements. Meeting adjourned at 8:50 P.M. Approved by MIKE SHEPHERD MS:Is AGENDA BILL BREN~RTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING -- MAY 12, 1999 FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: MAY 26, 1999 CITY COUNCIL MtKF SHFPHFRD; PRESIDE MAY 20; 1999 (comment on back if necessary_) 3. E~qiB!TS: ENDORSE/~fENT INFOPd~_ATiON APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT ~R/~TTAL: MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT 4. ~RY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: 8. RECO~24ENDAT!ON: RESPONSIBLEO_.Wrr,~-:- - ENFORCEMENT OFFiCiAL: EXPIRATION EATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DATE: D I S APPRO%~E D DE D !1. AGENDA BILL NO: TAPES #1615 & #1616 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 12, 1999 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4"' Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, May 12, 1999, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President Mike Shepherd presiding. Council members present were Jim Reed, David Farr, Lon Overson, John Law, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Council members Carol Arends and Carlos Montgomery were absent. Also present were City Attorney Glenna Malanca and Legislative Assistant Lori Smith. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Shepherd and invocation given by Retired Pastor G.T. Johnson. President She_oherd made the following announcements: (1) City Council held a Study Session prior to the meeting to discuss general Council business, followed by discussion on reorganization in the City's Administrative Services Department; and (2) Item (SA) will be added to the Agenda tonight, for an Emergency Consideration to open a public hearing, and then to continue the matter for one week. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting - April 21, 1999 #AB99-077 #0056 M/S/C (FardMcConnell) Motion to approve Consent Agenda as presented. Vote on motion: In Favor: ©lsen, McConnell, Law, Farr, Reed, Shepherd Abstain: Overson CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090 have been recorded on a listing that had been made available to the Council. #0078 M/S/C/U (Overson/McConnell) On May 12, 1999, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 230627 through 230821 in the amount of $1,248,561.50; and Regular Payroll for the period ending April 30, 1999 in the amount of $946, 680.26. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Law announced the next District 3 meeting on Tuesday, May 18, 1999, 7:00 - 9:00 P.M. at the Senior Center located at 13th & Nipsic. It will be an "Open Forum", allowing citizens to discuss concerns regarding the City. The Beat Cop for the Manette area may also stop by. Mr. Overson is conducting a poll of the top 10 concerns from District #4 residents. He will then organize a meeting to discuss the top two choices. He encouraged citizens to become involved in the economic development of the City because it will affect their future. TAPES #1615 & 1616 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes May 12, 1999 Page 2 of 5 President She_oherd announced a District 5 meeting will be held next Thursday, May 20, 1999, 6:30 P.M. at the Memorial Lutheran Church at 10th & Veneta. The program will include a presentation by the Police Department, and an update by the Parks Department on Evergreen Park (a Grand re-Opening celebration is planned for August). He announced that later on this evening, the Council would be discussing Economic Development Strategies. It is the third such meeting held this year, and he also encouraged citizens to participate. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Horton was invited to take a helicopter out to welcome the crew from the USS VINCENT. She also discussed the City's Open House which will be Thursday, May 13, 1999, 3:00- 7:00 P.M. Mayor Horton read the following Proclamations: - May 16-23, 1999 as National Aquatic Week, which was received by Jeff Alavado, Glen Jarstad Aquatic Center; - May 1999 as Mental Health Month in Bremerton, which was received by Larry Keller of Kitsap Mental Health Services; May 14-15, 1999 as PoppyDay, which was received by Jenny Bailey of Unit 68 and Ruth Kenyates and Marge Pilot of Unit 149; and May 8-16, 1999 as Armed Forces Week, also acknowledged by Governor Locke. Mayor Horton introduced Chief Rob Forbes, who introduced three new full-time Police Officers; and 8 new Police Reserves who were all sworn in by Judge James Docter. LEGISLATIVE REPORT No report this evening. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Phil Drouin, Charter Member of Albert C. Kean Post 201/Post 149, read a letter written to the Sun regarding their request for the City to relocate American Legion Post 149 building to the Charleston Area, rather than demolish it. 8A - EMERGENCY CONSIDERATION TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING AND CONTINUF THE MATTER FOR ONE WEEK FOR ONE-YEAR EXTENSION FOR PRELIMINARY PUD APPROVAL FOR PUD 97-0003. WEST HILLS PUD; APPLICANT: OLYMPIC PROPERTY GROUP. #AB99-078 The applicant, Olympic Property Group, is requesting an extension on its preliminary approval for the West Hills PUD. The matter has been scheduled for a public hearing on May 19, 1999 based on information provided by the applicant. However, in reviewing the resolution for the Preliminary PUD, it was discovered that the City Council approved the PUD on May 14, 1997. The Assistant City Attorney has indicated that the Council, on an emergency basis, open the public hearing on the matter, then continue the item until the May 19, 1999 City Council meeting. 2O TAPES #1615 & 1616 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes May 12, 1999 Page 3 of 5 John Rose, Olympic Property Group/Pope Resources, thanked the Council for their consideration in this matter. #1437 MIS/C/U (McConnell/Overson) Motion to continue the matter for one week until May 19, 1999. Mayor Horton provided the following presentation on: "WORK-PLANNIN(~ SESSION -- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES" JUST WHAT IS BREMERTON'$ IDENTITY? Naval Community Blue collar, pro-union, but tends to be conservative Beautiful setting Great recreation High level of two-year degrees; fewer with four-year; highly technical skilled workforce; large secondary workforce due to military spouses People are best asset Longevity rate among highest in the world Half of community extremely stable; tend to be homeowners Other half of community extremely transient; renters; Iow income Affordable housing; in need of rehab; 60% absentee landlord Perceptions v. Reality (too much federal government dependency; not friendly toward business; parking problems; redevelopment too hard and costly; Bremerton will always be "run down"; Bremerton is filled with taverns and tattoo parlors) Added by City Council: Sewer rates too high; Family oriented; A community in transition; "Hard" to access transportation-wise. (Cecil McConnell departed meeting at 7:00 P.M.) WHAT ARE OUR BEST ASSETS? Transportation (Kitsap Transit added by Council) Puget Sound Naval Shipyard infrastructure Electronic Commerce Resource Center Highly skilled workforce Olympic College, Harrison Hospital; Thriving Auto Center Waterfront amenities Growing arts community High quality of life Quality City Services Stable City Government Ample Office Space Available TAPES #1615 & 1616 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes May 12, 1999 Page 4 of 5 WHERE ARE WE NOW? - Washington State and Puget Sound economies are strong but predicted to cool off - Kitsap County and Bremerton have not benefited from strong regional economy due to military downsizing - Ferry transportation lacking in quality and quantity - Salmon issues unknown but may cloud development - Partners in economic development: EDC; Port of Bremerton; Bremerton Area Chamber of Commerce; Kitsap Visitor & Convention Bureau; and Bremerton Main Street Association. - Tourism features (Outdoor recreation; Kitsap Historical and Bremerton Naval Museum; Arts District and Admiral Theater; Elandan Gardens; and Waterfront amenities Olympic College Harrison Neighborhood Health care complex Auto Center Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Neighborhood Business Centers (Charleston Business District; Kitsap Way business corridor; Manette Business District; and Wheaton Way Corridor) Development in the works (Sinclair Landing; Werner Road/Auto Center; West Hills Industrial Park; and Northwest Corporate Campus) Manette Bridge Replacement in Design 1993 KITSAP COUNTY ECONOMIC DIVERSIFICATION SUMMIT Businesses and industries with desirable characteristics: Tourism; Healthcare; Education (4-Year College); High tech companies; Light Industrial; State Offices; Marine Industry; Biotechnology; Software; Street Vendors; Electronic Assembly; Printing & Publishing; Food Processing; Telecommunications; Recreation; Recycling Industries; Conference & Convention Facilities; Transportation Firms; Ship Building; World Class Marina; Golf Courses; Destination Resort; Nuclear Technology; Fishing; Metal Fabrication; Environmental Business; Horticulture; Telemarketing; Forestry Products; Theme Park; Cottage Industries; Data Management; Research Firms; and Mail Order Businesses (David Farr and Lon Overson departed meeting at 7:40 P.M.) WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? · Consider zoning that will encourage economic development · Workwith PSNS to expand workload · Develop strategies with Harrison Hospital to prepare for Baby-Boomer retirement and expand health care industry · Seek multi-family housing along downtown waterfront · Review and modify taxing policies to encourage economic development · Formulate strategy for facilitating telecommunications TAPES #1615 & 1616 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes May 12, 1999 Page 5 of 5 · Identify and use the benefits of our Enterprise Zone status · Market for tourism and economic development · Continue work with Kitsap County on the South Kitsap Industrial Lands · Use Transportation Committee to lobby and raise awareness for ferry deficiencies · Use Housing Committee to upgrade and redevelop housing · Continue to support Sinclair Landing, West Hills and Northwest Corporate Campus · Promote better linkage with Olympic College · Continue working with PSNS on Redevelopment of East Park VISION STATEMENT The goal of Bremerton is to achieve economic health and vitality in order to provide adequate service to our citizens without an unfair burden on any taxpayer and to ensure that today's generation and future generations can enjoy the quality of life we all hold so dear. Council will discuss these issues further with their constituents, and bring back comments and issues, to merge them into an overall comprehensive plan for economic development for the City of Bremerton. In addition, three joint-committees with the City Council and the Planning Commission will be established to focus on the elements of Housing; Transportation; and Economic & Development. Mayor Horton has offered to attend District meetings to discuss these issues. Mr, Olsen suggested a town meeting held in the Council Chambers for those Council members that do not hold Council District meetings. President Shepherd agreed with the idea, and estimated early June for such a meeting. With no further business meeting adjourned at 7:50 P.M. PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President City of Bremerton P J/MS/Is C: Normal Distribution File Memorandum DATE: TO: FROM: RE: May 26, 1999 Mayor Horton City Council President Shepard City Council Members Judy Johnson, C.B.O. ~ Your request for code sections re: Quality Tires from the 5/19/99 meeting Per your request, I am addressing the issue of citing the B.M.C. or various code sections of any particular violation in our correspondence to the owner or occupant involved. That is our policy and we try to make sure the applicant gets that information in a clear and concise manner. In the case of Mr. McDonald, and the letter which was sent on May 14, 1999, we gave him copies of the permit he had signed with the items listed, on which all of the code sections were referenced. He signed that permit on May 29, 1998. Mr. McDonald went through a special exception process which was completed on April 14, 1998 which included the landscaping and parking requirements which contained all of the code sections. This list was also sent to Mr. McDonald on May 14, 1999, as an attachment to the letter. We thought we had given him every code section as well as copies of the fire code sections when he received these multiple pages in the May 14, 1999 letter. We have been working with Mr. McDonald since 1997 on these issues and yet I can see how we should continue with each letter to make sure that each section is again referenced, in case someone doesn't see the entire package of information sent. CITY OF B~IER'IY)N · 239 4th Street * Bremerton. WA 98337 Department of Community Develcpment Building, Land Use, and Environmental Services Apdl 1, 1998 Clarence Thomas McDonald 893 4~" Street Bremerton, WA 98337 Re: 502 Naval Avenue SE98-0005 Dear Mr. McDonald: I am enclosing the notes from our phone conversation this aftemoon outlining the additicnal items that must be indicated on your site before we can continue processing :/our application for a Zoning Ordinance Special ~xception. if you have any questions, please contact our office at 478-5275. Sincerely, James Coombes Land Use Specialist Enclosure. cc: Judy Johnson · Celebrating 50 Years of Freedom · Zoning Ordinance Special Exception Application SE98-0005 502 Naval Avenue 75% destruction of building terminates nonconforming status. In addition to the setback relief request in the ZOSE, the following items will need to be indicated on the site plan: Landscapinq & Parkinq 2t .02.710 - Street trees at a minimum interval of one every 25 feet along all frontage, but branches must not be lower than 8 FT within vision triangles or corridors. [21.02.740] 5 FT landscaping strip along frontage to street with at least 50% living material. 5 FT wide landscaping along property lines adjacent to residential property. 5 FT high solid fence or shrubs along property line adjacent to residential. 5 dimensioned parking spaces including one barrier-free van space [Figure 670 (b) Appendix: Page 41]. Show dimensioned aisles, loading spaces, and internal circulation for vehicular traffic [21.02.930 (d) (3)] Outdoor Stora,qe [21 .O2.72O] (a) Storage yards shall be surrounded by a 6 FT high solid wall or sight obscuring fence. The wall or fence shall be considered a structure and shall conform to setbacks which may be required for building on street frontage. (20 FT setback on street frontage in GB zone.) (b) Outdoor storage of materials shall not exceed 6 FT in height when visible from a right-of-way. NOTE: Please provide site plan to scale. AIA 98337 360 ) 478-5278 8RE~IERTON PER~I I T 286 4th Street, Breme~ton, Phone: ( 260 ) 478-5275 FAX: BUILD!N~ PER~/T Add~: 502 NAVAL AVE Permit Nc: ',..ocatior: 502 NAV~;.. AV~ Status: ~a~ce] No: 3717002-02~-0009 4pp] issued: :cant: THOMPSON'S ~N'TERPRISF]S 792-91.50 Exp~ res: ~327 L.AKEHORS} DR BRFMERTON WA ~8312 Owner: MCDONALD, THOMAS 893 ATH ST BRFMERTON WA 98337 THOMPSON 'S .F. NTF. RPRiSES 7~2--.~i50 ~327 ~AKEHLIRS~ DR BREMF..RTON WA 98312 r~¢ ¢.,-.. RFMg[)FL./REPAiR FX' c'~'~NG STRUC'fURF ~ .;H~_.~.~ ONLY; .......... ~,., , ~. ,"' , ' r:OR PROPOSE[) ¢S'7-06~5:. ~'OP RO0~ ',),z~ ua:: 4on ~ Permit Fees: 1 33.0~h Total. Ca i. cu;at;ee ' ..,~e,.k Fees: 57.92 ~dd~t~ona~ ~ O~her Fees: i33.14 Total,. ~EC~AN;CAL./~LOMBIN6 FIXTURES-- MECH-Exhaus; Fane ............ : ~ ~LBB-Lava~or7 days from the date of such permit, or if this building or work authorized by suon permit is susmenoec o* a~andonec at any t:me after the ~ork is commenced for a period of 180 days. NDTiCE - I: is the responsibility of the ~ermit holder, not the City of Bremerton or Building Offic:a; ts see :~ ~t ~na. requi~ed inspections are made The permit holder must notify :he Building Official when ~eacy ~or ,nspestioqs. =allure of the permit holOer to notify She Building Official of required inspecs!ons ma)' res~s is she sso~oage of she work untiI such time that the permit holder can substantiate ~o the ~ui!cing ~=~:c:aZ ::na? sos conceaied work meets or exceedm code requirements. Any Oemolition, testing, or financial bu¢~r sqaZi as Os, ne directly' Dy the permit holder. Failure :o substantiate code requirements ws11 indemn:f? the ~::? ag~:n~: any and all remponetbi!Ity or liability connected with the construction. hereby certify that i have read and examined this permit and know the same to be true and correc:. -~rovtsions of laws and ordinances governing thi~ type of work will not. The granting of a pe?mlt does not pre~ume to give authority to v~otate or cancel the ~rovisions other starer local law regulating construction or the performance of construction. ....... .... ...... s,:rt;f¢ th~t I am exempt fro~ the requirement8 of the state contractor's registration !a~, under Sectlon 3, Ohapter 12s, laws of '~R,.:.M ~.R TON . [ I' CliENTI,~]F~ PENM .r 'F CONI~ I .... [ ~.~ [3N.:, Job ~Or a ...... ~.. . ,t..,~ .... NO :; >37 t 7CO~.7 r ,~ ,,. Owr~,::r": MCDC1NAI53, 'FJ~OM, AS ac't: o'r :~ 'T'F!OMF;SCN ' '..~ ENT~-~;Rr.:~R .[ S~iE; .......... ::~E ';~'3' 000..~ 1. ~;~b~:'r) ~:~"::~ ',~;[:~iEC][~L. E~XCY, EI::~'i"~I:]N .... ~'"~:' ...... '~":' ~I::~:~F~(3VPfl '"' ' , ,~,...I.:..~ ~,.':.~.~l.~ [ ,'~:::.,..3 , . ,.d" ~"F'~JE};~[';" 'r',: r:' "-':' ," ,'"'," ~ "3 .... ' 4 : .... URf..,,..,~:. ONE S'FC]RZ ~C)~'F'iEN 'r'U % "' ["t "r'"r - · ."} ~'~1::'~...='~.., ~ N[~ ;.Nt.., .... ~ , ~ NG i'O UI::'C 4.9 .............. · ,-u ..... iM r'~'H2t. J'l~ ~:::' ~ ,.~I ............. u,S , R~:~MP, ~:N UNO'~F;"' 4~ C. ,,:~ ,..,n ~!; ~'.::; C C] N N i:' :;: 'F '; C) N C l:N"r"[~l. ',~F~U'I:fi~:L4 OIz -r'l.qE :~ '::' ,,.u .... t:~,,'::'(.~t.;;:~,,:; ...... 4N...~ ~; ~U~M [ ' ....... N ~.~ ............. ""-.,.:~: F:' C%',... 3W ",: N(.: ~ :~ 1-::~:2;~ r'~r ....i"i.41.:: ~.::;.) ::M~I .... " ~.. i'~ , ..... '~ (., .... ~ ~ ............... ~'o ....... ":[ F ..... "' ,. ,~F t 360 )478..,.,..., ~,..: 7 ,. 5., ..,~' ','~ ,... ~'~ S. .::,'"' [::: [] N N ','E C T' r. C) N C 0 N T' 'R (] L. ~ ~.:~c.~[~l... ,h~. [C bi!,,~',.::~ ~N[) t.l'r'iTM,[ F r"::g ........ ~c., ,. ~;: .;, ':. ~, 0 r ' ~" ~,),".NU ':'. , ::];:~ '~:M 6.. E] LJ .[ ~.. r) '[ N G ~ ) ;;,)?: ¢:~M J;, i F'(?i~...~t",t.::' ~'' I..L LiN ~' v ..... :~l'::'i:::' ~:!:~ 'lC) ['~[~:'1:?~:~:'i'' )t g )' -' C) E, 1. ..~,.' ,i: ,"',;~.,. !:31::q:~:M E R T ON ,OERM 1: 'T F)ERM:[ T' C[.)N~) ce~'mi~ No~ 98.-0177 ROOF S r'RUC'TUI~E:, , ' ' ;':UI.J..Y SC~L. IED F'I..O(:'.]I.~ I:~I..~N [Or~:NT[I~'TI:NG St~iM ~: 'F r'Ct.) ANO ,~¢¢~(]L~H:~) ~[~ I:~]R F(~ ANY ~'~"~ ...... C) ~L..I.. WORK MUST EilE i~:[:¢'""7::'r~,.~,r. ,...,¢ ,..,_, i~]Y I:)CD D ) ,".,'",' .::,,::..,.::. NO FE'S ON S:['FI: r:~L.~N F'C]R U~N ~CCESS.LEit...E ~l:E :~t.J '1; RtEME]NI'S. '7 t:~" 'r i 1'~ i N G .,., ,...,_,,. ...... , ~,"r:m- ,~rr-.~ ....... I::IF: NE] Dr:.V:[,~'t"~'(3NS .... ~ ..... ' "~ "~ t " ~ ....... h ) FHI:r:[~E E;I"'!~I.I... ~:iE:. NO BUSINESS (.,(.¢NI.,t..,C,T~:.[.) i:::'RON S ) 'FHE:;:~E: N'ri...L. I~E NO STORAGE OF' i"'rRE:S b [,:~ F~I.. '"' DN '.'-, '~:; ~:-- ~vac~ \ May 26,1999 Mayor Lynn Ho~on ~d ~e City Council CiW of Breme~on 239 4~ S~eet Bremegon, WA 98337 WASTE MANAGEMENT PO Box 990 Bremcrton, WA 98 ~ 37 (360) 674-3166 (360) 674-3646 Fax Dear Mayor Horton and the City Council: It has recently come to my attention that the City Council has been misinformed about the final destination of Brem-Air Disposal/Peninsula Recycling recyclable materials. The purpose of this letter is to assure the City Council and the residents of the City of Bremerton and Kitsap County that no source segregated recyclable materials are ever dumped at the landfill. We receive materials in our curbside blue bins and multi-family toters that are not recyclable, such as: window glass, dishes, butter containers, oranges juice jugs, etc. that are sorted out at our Materials Recycling Facility. These materials are then placed in our yard box and disposed of at the landfill. In our daily cleanup of our Materials Recycling Facility we sweep up all loose material that remains after processing. While the majority of this material is still able to be recycled, a small percentage that has been contaminated or is broken ~nto tiny pieces is also placed in our yard box and disposed of at the landfill. As an approved Kitsap County recycling method, recycled crushed glass, recycled crushed concrete, and crushed rock were used as road bedding when building roads at Olympic View Sanitary Landfill. It is highly possible that someone has seen unrecyclable or contaminated materials being disposed of and mistook this for landfilling recyclables. Or they witnessed recyclable materials being used as road bedding and they were not aware that this is a Kitsap County approved recycling method. I have enclosed a list of destinations for recyclable commodities and a monthly recycling activity report that includes a description of materials and their final destination. In closing, I would like to invite the Mayor and this council to come and tour our Materials Recycling Facility, our offices, and Olympic View Sanitary Landfill at your earliest convenience. Stephen H Walker Cc: Kathy McCluskey, City Clerk A i)ivision of Brem Air Disposal, Inc. MONTHLY RECYCLING ACTIVITY REPORT April 1999 Kitsap District TONNAGE Number Loads Location OCC (Corrugated Cardboard) *Smurfit 218.86 *PTP 123.56 Weyerhaeuser 241.73 total OCC 584.15 9 6 12 27 ONP (Newspaper & magazines) *Smurfit 526.03 20 *ACN 0.00 0 *WH 214.99 6 total ONP 741.02 26 OPl(Office Paper) *IDEAL PAPER *WEYERHAEUSER totalOP1 WL (White Ledger) MWP (Mixed Waste Paper) PET Plastic (Pop & liquor bottles) HDPE Plastic (Milk Jugs) Glass UBC (Aluminum Cans) Steel Cans 70.46 0.00 70.46 19.21 88.89 18.59 20.65 120.54 31.02 53.25 48.44 FER (Scrap Metal) 3 0 3 1 4 1 1 9 3 2 N/A 6-Simpson,3-JSC 6-PTP 11 -Sonoco, 1-Simpson 20-Daishowa 5-QSC, 1-Greenstone 3-Ponderosa 1 -CAMAS 4-Export (ACN) 1-Export 1 -Export WMI Seattle 3-1mco(Tomra) 2-AMG Navy City Metals TOTALS 1,796.22 tons DESTINATIONS FOR RECYCLABLE COMMODITIES PENINSULA RECYCLING Newspaper Corrugated Cardboard Mixed Waste Paper Office Pack HDPE Natural Plastic (Milk Jugs) PET Plastic (Pop & Liquor bottles) Steel Cans Daishowa America Port Angeles, WA QSC, Norpac Portland, OR JSC Tacoma, WA Port Townsend Paper Port Townsend, WA Export-Shanghai JSC Tacoma, WA Ponderosa Wallula, WA Camas Fort James, WA Export-China Export-Canada Export-China Export-Canada AMG Resources Indiana Aluminum Cans Glass Tomra Pacific Seattle, WA Golden Metals Post Falls, Idaho Gallo Winery Napa, CA Via WM-Seattle ---from the Seattle Code of Ethics: "No current City officer or employee shall engage in any transaction or activity, which is, or would to a reasonable person appear to be, in conflict with or incompatible with the proper discharge of official duties, or which impairs, or would to a reasonable person appear to impair, the officer's or employee's independence of judgement or action in the performance of official duties and fail to disqualify him or herself from official action in those instances where the conflict occurs." AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: ANDERSON CREEK TIMBER SALE FOR AGENDA OF: May 26. 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works/Uti¥~ ORIGINATOR: ForestD- Manager DATE SUBMITTED: May 18. 1999 2. CLEARANCES (comment on b~if,~;sa~'): 3. EXHIBITS: Timber Sale Contract DirectOrcity A.omevPW &U ~-- CiW T~asurer Fi~ '& Budget'Comm~ ...x~ Z nO t NX 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: This contract covers timber included in the "Option to Purchase Unimproved Property" a~eement xvith Ronald Sciepko and Ellen Lunde approved by the CiW Council on November 29, 1995 and executed December 22, 1995. Timber will be removed under a Forest Practices permit for conversion to a non-forest use. Total purchase price for timber only per the above referenced agreement is $906.020. 8. RECOMMENDATION oR; u. Ce-~nc!~. approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the attached Bill of Sale and Contract to Pay for and Remove Forext Products from City Lands in accordance with established Administrative Policies and Procedures. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Public Works & Util. Director ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: .......... EXPIRATION DATE: 2/28/2000 REVIEW DATE: NA PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMENDED DATE:~ ~ ll. AGENDA BILL NO: qq ~ Oq I 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 3. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION (continued from page 1) The Water UtiliD' will benefit from the proposed sale at this time by receiving a substantial percentage of the total purchase price earlier than the scheduled closing date of Februa~' 28, 2000 for the Purchase and Sale .~lgreement. 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Receipt of payment to Water Utility for timber ;xSll be delayed. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES: Staffing: Budget: Facilities/Equipment: NA Part of anticipated timber revenues for Water Utility. NA 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: Public Works & Utilities Director. Forestry Manager 2 CITY OF BREbIERTON Department of Public Works and Utilities BILL OF SALE AND CONTRACT TO PAY FOR AND REMOVE FOREST PRODUCTS FROM CITY LANDS SALE # 99-2 CONTRACT # SAlvE NAME: Anderson Creek Conversion, Units EXPORT STATUS: Export Restricted THE PARTIES to this Bill of Sale and Contract for the Removal of Forest Products are the CITY OF BREMEKTON, a Washington municipal corporation, situated in the County of Kitsap, State of Washington, the address of which is 239 - 4th Street, Bremerton, Washington 98337, hereina~er referred to as the "CITY", and RONALD S. SCIEPKO and ELLEN B. LUNDE, whose mailing address is 3023 W. State Highway 16, Bremerton, Washington 98312, hereinafter referred to as the "PUP, CHASER". 1-0 GENERAL TERMS 1.1 Title Conveyed: The sale of forest products described herein has been authorized and ordered by the City Council by approving "Option to Purchase Unimproved Property" agreement, per Kitsap County Auditor's File No. 9501030128 dated January 3, 1995, with Purchaser for certain land and timber, which includes the forest products described below and that agreement establishes the total purchase price for the forest products. The City hereby sells and conveys to Purchaser title to said forest products under the terms and conditions more fully described herein. 1.2 Products Sold: The forest products conveyed to the Purchaser are described as follows: all timber bounded by timber sale boundary tags and flagging comprising approximately 1,491 MBF and 2,137 tons of merchantable timber, as determined by a cruise summary report dated December 4, 1995 by Washington Timberland Management. 1.2.1 Volume Estimates: Amounts of forest products sold under this contract are estimates only and for purposes of this sale, have been established and fixed by the cruise summary report cited in Paragraph 1.2 above. 1.3 Sale Area: The sale area consists of 111 acres, more or less, situated in Kitsap County, State of Washington, and described as: part of the El/2 SWl/4 Section 33, Township 24 North, Range 1 East; portions within the W3/4 of the N1/2 of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 1 East; W.M. Sale area is more fully depicted in map marked Exhibit "A". 1.4 Operating Authority: Purchaser is hereby granted permission to enter upon City lands and remove the forest products itemized in Clause 1.2 upon execution of this contract by the City and its authorized representatives and upon payment as set forth in Clause 2.0. Purchaser hereby agrees to remove said forest products by February 28, 2000. 1.5 Representatives: 1.5-1 City: The rights and duties of the City under this contract will be exercised by the City's Public Works and Utilities Director or such officer as may be othenvise designated by the Director. 1.5-2 Purchaser: Purchaser agrees, within five (5) days of full execution of this agreement, to notify the City in writing of the name, and address of a person who will be readily available at all reasonable times during the construction and logging operations, and who shall be authorized to receive on behalf of the Purchaser, any instruction or notice given by the City in regard to performance under this contract, or breach thereof. 1.6 Insurance: Purchaser shall, before commencing operations, provide the City with a certificate of insurance evidencing commercial general liability coverage of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence including logging broad form property damage. The City of Bremerton shall be named an additional insured, and the policy shall be kept in full force during the lifetime oftkis agreement. 1.7 Taxes. Purchaser has sole responsibility for paymem of timber excise tax as well as any other taxes levied by any government agency having authority thereof. 1.8 Export Restrictions: Timber conveyed under this contract is restricted from export under WAC 240-15 and is subject to all laws applicable under this chapter. 1.8-1 Purchaser Certificate: Purchaser shall complete a Purchaser Certificate included with this contract and return to the City prior to the commencement of logging operations. 1.8-2 Log Marking: All logs shall be branded at both ends w/th a registered log brand and painted at both ends with durable red paint. Purchaser is responsible for providing the brand and paint at his expense. 2-0 PAYMENT 2.1 Forest Products. Purchaser agrees to pay for the forest products herein before conveyed on the basis of the accepted purchase price, said purchase price being in the amount of $906,020. Purchase price to be paid according to the following schedule: sixty-five percent (65%) of the log value based on scale. Any difference in total receipts to the City based on scale and the above accepted purchase price shall be paid to the City upon closing of the real estate purchase agreement, but shall be no later than February 28, 2000. 2.2 Scaling Information. Purchaser agrees to furnish the City with scaling information showing the scale, count and measure of forest products removed. The scaling information shall be furnished to the City concurremly with log payments. 2 3.0 LOGGING 3.1 Plan of Operations/?reconstruction and Pre-Logging Meeting. The Purchaser shall, before starting operations within the sale area, submit to the City Representative, a plan of logging operations, including a summary of methods to be utilized, the sequence to be followed, times to be maintained, and such other information as may reasonably be required by the Public Works and Utilities Director, or his appointee. Upon approval by the City, the Purchaser shall carry out its operation under this contract in compliance with and pursuant to the plan. Purchaser shall arrange to meet with the City Representative before commencing any operations on City land. 3.2 Falling. The Purchaser shall fall all timber into the sale area whenever reasonably possible. The tops, limbs and trees felled into adjacent areas shall be removed concurrently with the logging operation. Directional falling is required along streams or stream courses, lakes, ponds, reservoirs, etc. 3.3 Forest Practices and Other Applicable Laws. Purchaser shall fully comply with all provisions of the Forest Practices Act of the State of Washington as now existing or as subsequently amended, and all other applicable laws, rules and regulations and shall hold the City harmless fi-om any obligation or liability arising thereunder. 3.~4 Equipment. Forest products sold under this Contract shall be removed by rubber-tired skidder or tractor. Equipment used shall be sized so as not to cause damage to soils or residual stand. 3.5 Tops. If not otherwise removed, non-merchantable tops and limbs shall be lopped and scattered within the selective cut sale area. All woody debris generated within the right-of-way area shall be disposed of in a manner acceptable to the City. 3.6 Stump Height. If the stumps are not removed for clearing, all trees shall be cut as close to the ground as practicable. 3.7 Stream Protection. Yarding equipment and any other equipment shall be set back from any stream bank so that the act of yarding storing or operation will not damage or encroach upon the flowing stream in violation of any statute, rule, regulation or agreement in relation thereto. No timber shall be felled across, or into, and no yarding shall be permitted in or through such stream courses, lakes, or ponds, as designated by the City, or by any agency of the State having jurisdiction thereof, unless permission to do so is granted in writing by the City and/or the appropriate State agency. 3.8 Rub Trees. Rub stumps or trees shall be leR on main skid trails, to protect leave trees. Rub stumps or trees may be removed at the end of logging operations. 3 3..~9 Spur Roads/Skid Roads. Whenever practical, existing spur roads and skid roads shall be utilized. Additional spur roads shall be approved by the City prior to construction. No skidding on existing main roads unless authorized in writing by the City Representative. 3.10 Landings. Wherever practical, existing openings shall be used for landings. Landings shall not be located on main access roads. Landing location shall be approved by the City Representative. 3.11 Water Bars. Prior to termination of this contract or cessation of use, whichever is sooner, the Purchaser shall construct water bars across hauling and yarding roads and fire trails in locations designated by the City if deemed necessary by the City Representative. 3.12 Logging Release. Purchaser shall obtain a written logging release from the City where there has been satisfactory compliance with all contractual requirements, including but not limited to, all slash disposal work. The receipt of such logging release and/or acceptance does not relieve the Purchaser of compliance with any slash disposal requirements that are listed within the contract or additional fire hazard reduction measures as may be provided herein. Upon issuance of said release, however, all cutting rights revert to the City. Provided: Hours of operation near residential areas shall be limited to between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 4-0 DAMAGES 4.1 General. All operations of the Purchaser under this agr~eemem, including any construction, whether of roads or otherwise, and cutting and removal of timber, shall be so conducted as to minimize, so far as is reasonably practicable, danger to adjacent City timber, or reserve trees within the sale area or within any area within which Purchaser carries on activities, whether transportation or otherwise, as well as to any stream course, stream side, reservoir, lake or pond within such areas, and to all other properties affected thereby. 4.2 Stream Courses. Reservoirs, stream courses, stream sides, lakes and ponds in or adjacent to the sale area shall be cleared of logs, chunk and other debris deposited therein, as a result of operations under this contract. Such material shall be removed and deposited in such a manner as is satisfactory to the City. Use of machinery in such waters is prohibited unless provision for such is granted in writing by the City and approved by all appropriate agencies having jurisdiction thereof. 4.3 Erosion and Damage to Soil. During operations under this agreement, including the construction of roads and landings, Purchaser shall take such precautions as are necessary to minimize erosion and damage to the soil, and make certain that no governmental laws, roles or regulations or laws are violated through such erosion, or as a resuk of its operations. Purchaser shall exercise every necessary means to prevent contamination and pollution of the waters or any reservoir, stream course, lake or pond as a result of any operation by Purchaser during the performance of this contract. 4 4.~4 Deleterious Material. All possible care shall be taken by the Purchaser to prevent fuel, oil, grease or other harmful materials from entering the waters of any reservoir, lake, stream course or pond as a result of any operation of Purchaser. Refuse resulting from Purchaser's use, servicing, repair or betterment of its equipment shall be immediately removed from City property. 4.6 Other Damages. Any damages to fences and/or other structures caused by the Purchasers operations shall be repaired at the Purchasers sole expense. 5-O SURVEYS AND MARKERS 5.1 City Marks. The City has located and marked or othenvise designated all sale boundaries. Purchaser has gone over the boundary lines on the ground, knows where they are and agrees to confine his or its cutting to the forest products contained within the boundaries and to be responsible for any violation of this requirement. 5.2 Preservation of Markers. Any land, subdivision, survey, comers, witness objects or survey markers of any type are to be preserved. If such are destroyed or disturbed the Purchaser shall re-establish them by a licensed land surveyor in accordance with United States General Land Office Standards at Purchasers own and sole expense. Comers and/or witness objects that must necessarily be disturbed or destroyed in the process of road construction must be adequately referenced and such reference approved by the Utilities Director prior to the removal of said comers and/or witness objects. 6-0 SLASH DISPOSAL - FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL 6.1 Slash Defined. The term "slash", as that term is utilized for the purposes of this contract, shall mean all debris of whatsoever type created on the sale area and fight-of-way thereto by logging, milling, and other related operations of Purchaser, or by windstorm. 6.2 Slash Disposal/Fire Hazard Reduction Plan. A slash disposal/fire hazard reduction plan, if required, will be part of this contract by attachment and will become part of the contract therein. 6.3 Waiver of Slash Disposal Treatment. The City reserves the right to waive any requirement relating to slash disposal or fire prevention, so long as such waiver is made in writing by the City after Purchaser has been provided alternative methods for disposal and fire prevention, which have been approved by the City: Provided: That such waiver shall be subject to revocation in the event of any failure of the Purchaser to comply with such alternative methods. 6.4 Men and Equipment. The Purchaser agrees to provide persons and equipment at its own expense to fulfill any requirement that may be established by law, whether State or Federal, 5 whether such persons or equipment are to be utilized for slash removal or fire prevention and suppression. 6.5 Clean Firebreaks. The Purchaser shall, upon completion of logging and at such other periodic times as may be stated in writing by the City, clean out all fire trails and skid roads designated by the City as fire breaks, leaving them fi'ee of debris for suitable fire breaks. When designated by the City, water bars and cross ditches are to be installed on trails to prevent erosion. 6.6 Fire Responsibility.. Purchaser shall reimburse the City, its agents or employees, for ali costs and/or liability of whatsoever nature incurred as a result of negligence of the Purchaser in the creation, spreading or escape of fire, whether such liability is incurred by the City through and/or to private parties or governmental agencies. 6.7 Operating Equipment During Closed Season. The Purchaser agrees: Not to operate any equipment powered by a spark-emitting engine between April 15 and October 15 of each year for logging, milling, fire suppression or road construction and maintenance or any activity whatsoever within the sale area, unless it is equipped with spark arrestor of a type approved by the State of Washington for utilization within its lands. Nor shall it operate any power saw or power equipment in any condition, which is known or can reasonably be known to start fires. The City reserves the right during periods of dangerous weather as designated by the City, to prohibit the operation of any or all such spark emitting engines within the sale area. 6.8 Fire Hazard Reduction. In the event the City furnishes a fire ha:,ard reduction plan to provisions relating to but not limited to slash disposal and reduction of fire dangers, the Purchaser agrees to carry forth the measures at such time as may be established within the plan, but no later than the completion of logging in an area or at such other time as may be directed by the City. 6._Q9 Fire Extinguishers, Fire Tools. Every internal combustion motor, yarder or vehicle shall be equipped with a chemical fire extinguisher and shall comply with all State established regulations relating to such equipment. Purchaser further agrees during the period of April 15 to October 15 to maintain on his operation toolboxes and other fire equipment as required by Washington State law. 6.10 Charge for Slash Disposal Work Not Completed. In the event that the Purchaser falls to carry forth the slash disposal preparation work or reasonable measures to prevent fires from starting or spreading from or within the timber sale area by the date that is designated by the City in any hazard reduction plan set forth or within this contract, the City shall have the right to complete such work or preparation and the Purchaser agrees to pay to the City the sum of monies reasonably expended by the City in such work. The Purchaser further agrees to pay all costs and liabilities incurred by the City as a result of the failure of Purchaser to either complete the slash disposal preparation work, fire reduction measures, or to make available the men and equipment as required by the terms of this contract. 6.11 Weather Instruments. During the period fi-om April 15 to October 15, the Purchaser shall provide and maintain such weather instruments which will at all times measure the relative humidity and temperature of the air, and make the reports therefrom available to the City upon request. Observations shall not be required on any day that rain is falling. At such time as the relative humidity is 30% or less, operation of any and all spark emitting machinery, with the exception of automobiles, must voluntarily cease, unless permission to continue is given in writing by the appropriate offidals of the City. 6.12 Watchperson. During the period April 15 to October 15 and such other times as may be designated by the City, Purchaser shall have a watch person on duty for at least two hours after the closure of operations for the day, or any part thereof in which operations occur: Provided: That with the written permission of the City this requirement may be waived or modified. All watch persons shall be competent and trained in fire detection and suppression activities. 6.13 Open Fires. Purchaser shall not set or allow to be set or maintained by his employees or subcontractors any open fire at any time of the year without first having obtained permission in writing from the City. 6.14 Fire Lines. Purchaser shall construct a fire lane or firebreak along the outer boundaries of the logging area or areas if required by a slash disposal/fire hazard reduction plan attached to this contract. Such fire lanes or breaks shall be located and constructed to the satisfaction of the City. On or adjacent to the fire lane or break, all dead trees shall be felled and all flammable materials, including slash, reproduction and debris, shall be pushed or otherwise moved into the area to be logged. The cleared width ordinarily may not be required to exceed that of the bulldozer blade used in construction, but additional width may be required if considered reasonably necessary for safety by the City or Purchaser. When deemed necessary in the judgment of the City, a continuous lane cut to mineral earth shall be provided on the exterior edge of the cleared area. 7-0 ROADS 7.1 Authorization. Purchaser is authorized to construct and maintain on the City lands all necessary roads, bridges and other transportation facilities needed for the cutting and removal of the timber included in this contract. When utilized throughout this contract, the term, "construct", shall include the term, "reconstruction", or "reconstruct". 7.2 Road Construction. All construction, reconstruction, and betterment of roads covered under this contract shall be located and constructed as approved by the City and/or will be in accordance with a plan provided by the City and made a part of this contract by attachment, if required. 7.3 Location, Design, and Construction. Such roads and other facilities shall be located and maintained in accordance with the provisions and specifications set forth in this contract or the attachments thereto and shall at all times remain the property of the City. Any existing road or facilities utilized by the Purchaser in the performance of its activities under this contract shall be maintained and left by Purchaser, in as good or better condition than found at the date of Purchasers initial use. The relocation, design and construction techniques of all such roads and facilities shall be approved by the City before construction is commenced by the Purchaser. Purchaser agrees that any transportation fadlity needed for operation under this contract shall be located, constructed, operated, and maintained in a satisfactory manner. The City shall further have the right to utilize and allow the utilization of any road construction by the Purchaser under this contract for any and all purposes in connection with the protection, administration and utilization of the area here in question: Provided: That as to any non-public road constructed by the Purchaser any such utilization shall not materially interfere with the operations of the Purchaser. 7.4 Liability_ for Damage. Any required payment or maintenance carried out by the Purchaser shall not relieve the Purchaser fi-om liability to the City for repair or damage to the roads, including bridges and culverts, due to overloading trucks, carelessness or negligence on the part of the Purchaser, its employees, subcontractors and their employees, or any other party utilizing the roads with pennission of Purchaser. 7.__~5 Reservations. The City shall have the right to use, without charge, all existing roads and/or any road constructed or reconstructed on City lands by the Purchaser under this contract for any and all purposes deemed necessary or desirably in connection with the control, management, harvest and administration of City-owned land or the resources thereof and the City may extend such fights and privileges to others, provided such use by others shall be controlled so it will not, in the opinion of the Public Works and Utilities Director, interfere unduly with the use of the road by the Purchaser. 8-0 BUII~DINGS AND IM~PROVEMENTS 8._21 Buildinesandlmprovements. Purchaser may construct on City lands, when authorized to do so by the City, such buildings or other improvements as may be reasonably necessary for logging the timber included in this agreement. All such buildings or improvements shall be located to prevent pollution of the water in streams or lakes and shall in no event violate any applicable City, State or Federal law, rule or regulation. When such improvements are to be moved or abandoned, the Purchaser shall dispose of the improvement in such a manner as is acceptable to the City. The authorization granted hereunder to build or maintain improvements upon the City lands terminates with the termination of this agreement. 8.__g_2 Abandoned Property. Any improvement, whether a building or otherwise, constructed upon the property of the City may, with the consent of the City, be left upon the property from the termination of this contract: Provided: That upon any such action, title thereof shall pass to the City. 9-0 OTHER CONDITIONS 9.1 Notice. All notices to be given by either party to this contract in relation to this agreement shall be in writing and may be served personally upon the parties at the addresses noted below or by certified mail, remm receipt requested, addressed to the party to be served at the address hereinafter set forth. Any notice to be given by certified mail shall be deemed to have been received four days after the posting thereof in the United State Postal Service, postage prepaid. 9.2 Breach of Contract. In the event the Purchaser violates or breaches any term of this agreement or any requkement hereunder, the City shall have the fight to suspend operations of the Purchaser hereunder by the giving of written notice, specifying the breach alleged. If such breach is not remedied within thirty (30) days after the giving of the notice, the City may terminate this agreement and the Purchaser shall have no further fights under this Bill of Sale and Contract. Upon such termination, the City shall noti~ the Purchaser of a Breach of Contract and the deposit made in connection herewith may be forfeited upon order of the City Council and action may be taken to recover damages from the Purchaser and surety. 9.3 City's Right to Remedy Breach of Contract. In the event the Purchaser has violated or breached any term of this agreement and has failed to remedy the breach thereof~ the City shall have the option to remedy of any such breach if, after the giving of notice of breach required hereby, the Purchaser shows no indication of attempting to remedy the breach, or if there is an apparent inability of Purchaser to remedy the breach as such absence of attempt or inability may be reasonably determined by the City, the City may, in its discretion, immediately enter upon the property and commence attempts to remedy the breach. Any expense so incurred by the City shall be charged against the Purchaser and be paid to the City by the Purchaser within thirty (30) days after receipt of the billing for the expense. Purchaser shall, in addition to the cost of the attempt to remedy the breach, be responsible to the City for any such losses or liabilities as may be incurred by the City, as a result of the breach, such losses to be paid to the City by Purchaser within thirty (30) days of notice of the amount in question. 9.4 Assignment. The Purchaser shall not assign any rights hereunder without the consent of the City in writing, signed by the Mayor of the City of Bremerton. No purported assignment of any such right shall be effective without the consent herein anticipated. 9.5 Purchaser Complaints in Writing. Complaints by the Purchaser as to any action taken, or any action not taken by the City, in respect to this contract, shall not be considered unless made in writing to the City within thirty (30) days of any such action or non-action. 9.__~6 Compliance with Laws. Purchaser, its employees, subcontractors and their employees shall conduct their activities in a safe and workmanlike manner to comply with all appropriate City, State and Federal laws, rules and regulations in relation to such activities, and shall cooperate fully in making it possible for the City's officers to inspect the cutting, logging, construction and other 9 activities of the Purchaser under this contract, and to conduct their official duties on the sale area and its vicinity. 9.7 City Hold Harmless. The Purchaser shall hold the City, its agents, officers and employees harmless fi-om any liability of any sort whatsoever, whether for injury to persons or property or otherwise arising out of any cause whatsoever related to Purchaser's operations or performance, action or inaction of this contract. Purchaser shall further, upon the tender of any such claim, assume the defense of any claim filed or brought against the City arising out of Purchasers performance of this contract. In the event Purchaser fails to comply with the provisions of this paragraph, it shall pay to the City any and all expenses and monies reasonably expended in the processing, defense and settlement of any such claim, with the payment to be made within thirty (30) days of the tender of a statement therefor. 9.8 City's Right to Close Operations. If,, for any reasons, including but not limited to danger of fire determined to be excessive by the City, and any reasonable perceived threat to persons, property or the environment, the City exercises its fight to order the closure of operations under this contract, (said fight being hereby recognized, established, and acknowledged) the time of completion of this contract shall be extended by the number of days or portion thereof contained within said closure, so long as the closure is not as a result of actions of Purchaser or any person or entity acting upon Purchasers behalf which are actions in breach of this contract. The extensions of time shall be Purchasers sole remedy under this contract for any such closures and shall be in lieu of any other right, whether at law or at equity, including but not limited to monetary damages. If the closure is as a result of Purchaser's breach of this contract or is a breach of the contract any person or entity acting on Purchaser's behalf, there shall be no right to the extension provided for hereunder. 9.9 Venue. Any litigation commenced between the parties to this contract arising out of this contract shall be filed in the Superior Court of the State of Washington, in and for the County of Kitsap, which shall be the court having proper venue thereof. 9.9.1 Settlement. In addition to any other relief granted to one party against the other, the parties agree that the non-prevailing party in any such litigation shall pay to the prevailing party, in addition to any such other relief, the sum determined by the court to constitute reasonable attomey's fees. 10-0 EQUAL OPPORTUNYFY 10.1 During the performance of this contract, the Contractor agrees as follows: (a) The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Such action shall include but not be 10 limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and sdection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex or national origin. 114) SPECIAL PROVISIONS 11.1 Sanitary_ Regulations. Sanitary regulations by the Washington State Departmem of Health shall be observed. Sani-Can type restroom facilities shall be provided by the Purchaser. 11.2 Firearms. No firearms shall be permitted on any properties covered by this agreemem or Bremerton Watershed lands. 12-0 MISCELLANEOUS 12.1 Merger. This agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. There shall be no oral modification of this agreemem. 12.2 Law Applicable. The laws of the State of Washington shall be applied in construing this agreement. 12.3 Time. Time is of the essence in performance of this agreement. EXECUTED as of the date first above written. PURCHASER: By Title II II CITY OF BREMERTON: By Lynn S. Horton, Mayor Director of Public Works and Utilities Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: Glenna Malanca, City Attomey Date ATTEST: Kathleen L. McCluskey, City Clerk Date 12 : i ! ! C..L E~ItRC~4T 1 PRE: V ~o u$ l~ql 7-,,!4/V 7-~ 8/V / Iff60 C. L~.e~CuT' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor Lynn Horton Bremerton City Council ~ Bill McKinney, Forestry Manager( 5/17/99 Anderson Creek Timber Sale This proposed timber sale contract with Ronald Sciepko and Ellen Lunde covers the timber included under the Option to Purchase Agreement (Agreement) approved by the City Council in November 1995 and executed in December 1995. To date Sciepko-Lunde have paid $178,000 to the Wmer Utility, of which $175,000 applies toward the purchase price of the land (land ~alue: $2,400,000 as determined by app .raisal and stated in the Agreement). The purchase transaction for land and timber is scheduled to close on or about February 28, 2000. Total price (land andtimber value) for 168 acres is $3,306,020 and is so stated in the Agreement Sciepko-Lunde have proposed to purchase the timber now, which can be accomplished under the attached Bill of Sale and Contract to Pay for and Remove Forest Products from City Lands (Contract), and conduct harvest operations this summer. Total value of the timber is $906,020, based on a December 1995 evaluation and included in the above Agreement total price. Two parcels will be harvested: a commercial parcel of 56 acres and an industrial parcel of 55 acres (see Contract map - "Exhibit A"). Payment schedule is contained in section 2.1 of the Comract. Any balance remaining for timber payment is due upon closing of the land purchase. This contract uses our standard timber sale format with some minor revisions appropriate for this transaction. There is a joint benefit to the City and to Sciepko-Lunde to move forward with the timber sale at this time. The Water Utility benefits financially by receiving a substantial percentage of the total purchase price earlier than the scheduled land sale closing date of February 28, 1999. It should be noted that this timber is supplementary to our forest inventory and does not affect the balance between our inventory and sustainable harvest volume. Obtaining the forest practices application (FPA) and harvesting the timber now, completes the conversion from forest to residential and commercial use. Harvesting now will provide enhanced marketing opportunities for the developer as well as preparing the site for viewing and construction plan development. k is the recommendation of Public Works & Utilities staffto approve the sale &the timber a~ this time as per the attached Agenda Bill. For the benefit of those members who were not on the Council at the time this transaction was initiated, the following chronology is offered: December 1994 - City Council approves surplus of 300 (+) acres. An Option to Purchase Agreement is signed between the City and Sciepko-Lunde. Payment of $3,000 received for first year option. This Agreement also included annexation of 76 acres of adjacent property owned by Sciepko-Lunde. Anderson Creek T.S. page 2 · November 29, 1995 - Public Hearing and decision by Council to Consider Surplusing and Sale of 168 Acres in Anderson Creek Basin. City Council approved surplus and sale. · December 1995 - Revised Option to Purchase Agreement is signed between City and Sciepko-Lunde. Payment of $20,000 received for second year option - applies to land purchase. Early 1996 - Suit by Association to protectAndkrson Creek, (APAC) against City and Sciepko-Lunde filed · April/May 1996 - City requests summary judgment and recommends deni~! of APAC cross-motion · December 1996 - Payment of $25,000 received for third year option - applies to land purchase · April 1997- Decision by State appellate court against APAC~ No action currently pending · December 1997 - Payment orS10,000 received to exercise option to purchase - applies to land purchase · December 1998 - First Addendum to Purchase and Sale Agreement of December 22, 1995 signed to extend closing date to February 28, 1999. Payment of $20,000 received - applies to land purchase. · February 1999 - Second Addendum to Purchase and Sale Agreement of December 22, 1995 signed to extend closing date to February 28, 2000. Payment ors100,000 to be received on or before April 30, 1999. · April 28, 1999 - Payment orS100,000 for above extension received - apphes to land purchase. · March - May 1999 - Due to long lead time, Forest Practice and SEPA process initiated to obtain permits for timber harvesting, subject to City Council approval of timber sate contract. c: Gene Sampley file AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: WERNER CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR SIGNAL AND LIGHTING DESIGN 2. CLgARA~GES: (Comment on back Di~,ct0r~offPublic~/Util'tie s '"city Rttorney City.~Clerk r"% - CoLn3O,1Fj~caJ~ Budget C.o)flmit-t.e~-' Cou'-" - ncii (5p~nl ~mmit~ee- FOR AGENDA OF: May 26, 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & Utils ORIGINATOR: R. Witt, City Engineer: DATE SUBMITTED: May 17, 1999 3. EXHIBITS: 1. Professional Services Agreement ENDORSEMENT ~]5 INFORMATION [ ] APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL: / MAYOPC~ ',/J ~-~ COUNCIL 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The West Hills Commercial/Wemer Corridor Improvements Project includes electrical design work for installation of signals at the intersections of Wemer Road and Auto Center Way and at Werner Road and Kean Street. and addition of street lighting along Werner Road and Rogers Street. Also, due to the listing of the Chinook as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, a Biological Assessment must be done to determine affects to the species by this project. City staff requires the expertise of a design firm skilled in the design of traffic signals and lighting, and a qualified biologist to accomplish a Biological Assessment. Skillings-Connolly was selected from the City on-call consultant ¢$.~.,.0..~ CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 8. RECOMMENDATION:alv4~ 4-° The City Council approve a $40,000 Professional Services Agreement with Skillings-Connolly, Inc. for the signal and lighting design, and~Biological Assessment and authorize the Mayor to execute the same. \O6 ~r~g~/ 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED [] TABLED 11 COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED Il AMENDED Il (OVER)4t 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 4. SUMMARy STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION - Continuation roster and has provided City staffwith a scope of work and cost for these services of $40,000. The action before the City Council is approval of a Professional Services Agreement with Skillings-Connolly, Inc. for the design of the signals and lighting, and provide a Biological Assessment for the West Hills Commercial/Werner Corridor Improvements Project. 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The City will not be able to complete design of the project, and we will not be in compliance with the Endangered Species Act. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES: Staffing: No impact Budeet: No impact. Funds included in design budget Facilities/Equipmertt: No impact. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT West Hills Commercial/Werner Corridor Improvements Signal Design THIS AGREEMENT is between the City of Bremerton, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City") and Skillings-Connolly, Incorporated, (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant"). WITNESSETH: 1. SCOPE: Consultant agrees to provide professional services for the preparation of contract plans, technical specifications, and opinions of cost to signalize the Werner Road/Oyster Bay Road/Auto Center Way intersection, the Werner Road/Kean Street/Union Street intersection and street lighting on portions of Rogers Street, Kean Street, Auto Center Way, Union Avenue, Oyster Bay Avenue and Werner Road within the City of Bremerton, as further described in the Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit "A". Consultant also agrees to provide professional services for the Biological Assessment for the project. This assessment will be done in accordance with the Local Agency Guidelines, Chapter 24 Supplement dated March 15, 1999. 2. TERM: Contract shall commence on the date of this agreement and will terminate on December 31, 1999, unless otherwise extended by the City. 3. COMPENSATION: City. shall pay Consultant compensation as follows: Total fees under this Agreement shall not exceed Forty Thousand ($40,000). Charges for services shall conform to the fee schedule attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibits "B" and Consultant shall submit a monthly statement describing the services rendered with a breakdown for work completed as authorized under this Agreement. The City upon receipt of the completed statement, shall promptly process said claim for payment 4. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES: The parties understand and agree that Consultant is a firm skilled in matters pertaining to Civil Engineering and will perform independent functions and responsibilities in the area of its particular field of expertise. Consultant and its personnel shall act as independent contractors and not employees of the City. As such they have no authority to bind the City nor control employees of the City, contractors, or other entities. Within the performance of these duties. Consultant shall work under the direction of the Director of Public Works and Utilities. 5. INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE: Consultant agrees to provide for State industrial insurance coverage for its personnel as required by State law. 6. LICENSE AND TAXES: Consultant shall possess a current Bremerton Business License and any regulatory license required to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. B&O taxes shall be paid when due and Consultant, by this Agreement, assigns any payments due under this Agreement to the City Clerk for payment of such taxes, which have been declared delinquent. Skillings-Connolly, Inc. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT West Hills Commercial/Werner Corridor Improvements Page l 7. INSURANCE AND HOLD HARMLESS: Prior to and during the performance of the work covered by this Agreement, Consultant shall provide the Risk Manager for the City of Bremerton with evidence that it has obtained and maintains in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement a policy of professional liability insurance, providing coverage of at least $1,000,000.00 against professional liability or errors and omissions in connection with the work to be performed by Consultant under this Agreement. Risk Manager shall be provided thirty (30) days' written notice of any cancellation of said professional liability insurance. Consultant 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 arisen 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 Consultant, its subcontractors, agents, successors or assigns. This provision shall be inapplicable to the extent the City is judicially found solely negligent for such damage or injury. 8. GENERAL CONDITIONS: a. Reports and Information - Consultant, at such times and in such forms as the City may require, shall furnish the City such reasonable periodic reports and documents as it may request pertaining to the work or services undertaken pursuant to this Agreement, the costs and obligations incurred or to be incurred in connection therewith, and any other matters covered by this Agreement. Consultant will maintain accounting records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principals and practices to substantiate all invoiced amounts. b. Entire Agreement - This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and both parties acknowledge that there are no other agreements, written or oral, that have not been fully set forth in the text of this Agreement. There are attached hereto and incorporated by reference as part of this Agreement Exhibit "A". c. Amendments - The parties hereby further agree that this Agreement cannot be amended or modified without the written concurrence of both parties. d. Notices - Any notices required to be given by the City to Consultant or by Consultant to the City shall be in writing and delivered to the parties at the following addresses: City Clerk 239 Fourth St. Bremerton, WA 98337 Skillings-Connolly, Inc. 5016 Lacey Boulevard SE Lacey, WA 98503 e. Waiver - Failure 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 ~vaiver of any other breach. f. Compliance with State, Local and Federal Laws - Consultant agrees to comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws in performance of all services under this Agreement. Skillings-Connolly, Inc. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT West Hills Commercial/Werner Corridor Improvements Page 2 g. 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. h. Attomey Fees - The substantially prevailing party in any litigation arising hereunder shall be entitled to its reasonable attorney's fees and court costs, including appeals, if any. 9. NONDISCRIMINATION: Consultant 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 employment actions based on a bona fide occupational qualification. 10. TERMINATION: This A~eement may be terminated by either party for convenience upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party, or for cause if either party fails substantially to perform through no fault of the other and does not commence correction within five (5) days of written notice and diligently completes the correction thereafter. Upon such termination, City will be entitled to reports showing the status of all matters upon which Consultant is advising the City as of the effective date of termination. IN WITNESS WltW~REOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the date and year indicated. SKILLINGS-CONNOLLY, INC. Date: BY: TOM SKILLINGS CITY OF BREMERTON DATE: BY: DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL: LYNN HORTON, Mayor W. EUGENE SAMPLEY, P.E., Director of Public Works/Utilities APPROVED AS TO FORM: GLENNA MALANCA, City Attomey ATTEST: KATHLEEN L. MCCLUSKEY, Clerk Skillings-Connolly, Inc. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT West Hills Commercial/Wemer Corridor Improvements Page 3 EXHIBIT A PROJECT #99024 PHASE 30 SCOPE OF WORK Project No. 99024 Werner Road/Oyster Bay Road/Auto center Way Traffic Signal Werner Road/Kean Street/Union Street Traffic Signal General Description Skillings-Connolly, Inc.(CONSULTANT) shall provide professional services for the preparation of contract plans, technical specifications, and opinions of cost to signalize the Werner Road/Oyster Bay Road/Auto Center Way intersection, the Werner Road/Kean Street/Union Street intersection and street lighting on portions of Rogers Street, Kean Street, Auto Center Way, Union Avenue, Oyster Bay Avenue and Werner Road within the City of Bremerton. Work shall be done to the WSDOT standards, as modified by the City of Bremerton (CITY). The project includes final design of new signals at the intersections described above, illumination for those portions of Werner Road, Auto Center Way, Kean Street and Rodgers Road within the project limits and the signal interconnect. The contract documents generated under this scope of work will be part of a larger project being prepared by the CITY. The CITY will be responsible for the design of all alignments, channelization, earthwork, paving, drainage, signing and associated improvements. The project includes preparing a Biological Assessment for the project. The CITY has sent letters to the appropriate resource agencies and is awaiting responses. It is assumed, for the purposes of this scope and estimate of hours, that the project will have no significant impact on endangered species and that a letter of no impact is all that will be required. If it is determined that there are impacts requiring mitigation, beyond the standard stormwater detention and treatment, the work necessary to address those impacts will be considered extra work. The CONSULTANT shall perform the following tasks: Task No. 110 - Project Administration The CONSULTANT shall provide project administration and management. Tasks shall include preparing progress reports, monthly invoices, coordination meetings with the City, progress schedules, QA/QC for budget, schedule and deliverables, and sub- consultant management. Bremerton/Skilling s-Con nolly, Inc. Werner Road Signals and Illumination Page 1 of 4 PROJECT #99024 PHASE 30 Task No. 120 - Data Collection The CITY shall provide and the CONSULTANT shall review and compile: · Base map in hard copy and as an AutoCAD DWG file. · Channelization plans in hard copy and as an AutoCAD DWG file. · Traffic counts and projections, full traffic study if available. · Sufficient geotechnical analysis to determine the design parameters for the signal pole foundations. · Copy of the CITY development guidelines. · The AutoCAD PCP file the CITY uses to plot their drawings · Copy of the CITY drafting standards. Federal Aid No. for the project. Task No. 130 - On-Site Kickoff Meeting The CONSULTANT shall meet with the CITY on-site, to discuss signal design options, system maintenance issues and potential utility conflicts prior to commencing any design work. Task No. 140 - Base Map Preparation The CITY will provide the base maps with topography and existing features in AutoCAD- 14 format. The CONSULTANT will review the base map to determine if there is sufficient data included in the base map for the intersection design. Any pick-up surveying work required to supplement the base map (utility locates, etc.) will be identified by the CONSULTANT and performed by the CITY. Task No. 150 - Traffic Data and Operation Analysis The CITY will provide current turning movement traffic volumes. The CONSULTANT shall meet with the city to review the preliminary channelization and to make suggestions, if appropriate, to optimize the flow of traffic. The CITY shall determine the turning-lane storage lengths and intersection channelization requirement for existing and future year traffic volume conditions. The CONSULTANT shall determine loop placement on intersection approaches based on the posted speed limit. The CONSULTANT shall prepare a traffic operations analysis to identify appropriate signal phasing. The traffic analysis shall be performed using Signal 94 intersection analysis software. Task No. 160 - 25% Design Prepare plans for the illumination and signal improvements. The design shall be completed in accordance with the WSDOT plan preparation manual, design manual, LAG manual, 1998 Standard specifications and City of Bremerton design criteria. The CONSULTANT shall receive from the CITY a layout of the intersection on the 1"=20' scale base map. This plan shall show horizontal alignments; proposed channelization; turning radii. The CONSULTANT shall determine the location of new illumination, traffic signal poles and control cabinets. Also included shall be traffic engineering back-up data including loop placement calculations and phasing analysis to justify left turn Bremerton/Skillings-Connolly, Inc. Werner Road Signals and Illumination Page 2 of 4 - PROJECT #99024 PHASE 30 phasing required now or in the future. CONSULTANT will field verify that above ground and underground features do not conflict with existing utilities or adjoining property uses. The CONSULTANT shall submit three copies of the layout plan along with engineering backup data for CITY review and comment. Upon review by the CITY, a meeting shall be held to review comments and project status. Task No. 170- 50% Design The CONSULTANT shall prepare 50% signal design plans that include the wiring diagram, signal standard chart and final verification of the signal pole placements at the intersection. Illumination calculations and a preliminary cost estimate will be prepared. This stage of the preliminary design will be used to coordinate design activities with the utility companies and to notify them of potential conflicts that may require relocation of their facilities. The CONSULTANT shall submit three copies of the design plan along with engineering backup data for CITY review and comment. Upon review by the CITY, a meeting shall be held to review comments and project status. Task No. 180- 75% Design The CONSULTANT shall incorporate all review comments and finalize the plan. The CONSULTANT shall prepare the technical special provisions (hard copy & electronic format in Word 6.0) based on the current WSDOT / APWA Standards and list the general special provisions by title for the CITY. The CITY will run theGSPs and compile the specifications. The preliminary cost estimate will be finalized. The CONSULTANT shall provide three copies of plans, specifications, and construction estimates of the 75% submittal for CITY review and comment. Upon review by the CITY, a meeting shall be held to review comments and project status. Task No. 190 - Plans, Specifications and Estimate The CONSULTANT shall provide reproducible copies of the plans of the 100% submittal for bidding purposes. The plans shall be 24" x 36" size and one copy at 11" x 17" and prepared in AutoCAD-14. The CITY will prepare the bid package and advertise the construction of the project. The CONSULTANT shall prepare final design plans based on the preliminary design, guidance from CITY staff. The format for contract plans is proposed as follows: · Illumination plans; which illustrate project channelization, location of light standards and luminaries, light cabinet, conduit runs and any required illumination schedules. · Signal and Signal Interconnect plans, which will illustrate the location of the signal poles, signal controllers, loop detection system and the signal conduit runs within the intersection. · Signal wiring diagrams · Signal pole, foundation and details. · Illumination and Interconnect details · Miscellaneous details · Final plans and specifications will be stamped and signed by the responsible engineer. Bremerton/Skillings-Connolly, Inc. Werner Road Signals and Illumination Page 3 of 4 - PROJECT ~99024 PHASE 30 Task No. 200- Biological Assessment The CONSULTANT shall meet with the CITY design staff for a comprehensive review of the nature and scope of the project, especially those items of work that might have an impact to the environment. The CONSULTANT shall review the project site as necessary to gain an understanding of existing conditions and the project impacts to the species listed by the resource agencies. The CONSULTANT shall prepare a Biological Assessment for the project per the Endangered Species Act and in accordance to the Local Agency Guidelines, Chapter 24 Supplement dated March 15, 1999. Schedule It is understood that the CITY is currently in the process of designing the project and wishes to advertise for bids as early as December, 1999. The CONSULTANT will schedule a meeting with the City to coincide with authorization to proceed. The meeting will be for the purpose of familiarizing the CONSULTANT with the project and to allow the CONSULTANT to make suggestions for optimizing the channelization. The CONSULTANT will begin work as soon as all deliverables are received from the CITY. The CONSULTANT shall complete the work described in Tasks No 120 through 160 within 30 calendar days of beginning work. Upon notification that the CITY is 75% complete with their design, the CONSULTANT will proceed with, and complete their remaining work within 30 calendar days, excluding review time. A draft copy of the Biological Assessment will be prepared for the CITY's review within three weeks of the initial meeting. Budget Allowance A budget reserve fund is established for work requested by the CITY which is outside of this scope of work. The CITY will provide the CONSULTANT with written authorization to perform any work using the Budget Allowance item. Bremerton/Skillings-Connolly, Inc. Werner Road Signals and Illumination Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT B PROJECT NAME: z Werner Road/Oyster Bay -o m m m m Road/Auto Center Way Traffic Signal, Warner Road/Keen Stme~Union Street Traffic Signal m' m ~ Z ~ ~ m m TASK ~TASK DESCRIPTION 111 Project Administration 1 4 6 121 Data Collection 2 2 131 On-site kickoff meeting 4 4 141 Base map preparation 1 4 151 Traffic data & operational analysis 8 12 ,160 ~,, 5~DESIGN ~ 161 25% design 1 8 24 18 1 171 50% design 1 2 16 60 40 181 75%design 2 12 48 32 2 191 Plans, Specifications & Estimate 2 12 32 32 2 Project Review 1 8 Site Review 8 Write leper 12 4 HOURS P~R DISCIPLINE 8 0 68 210 126 0 0 0 0 16 Bremertnn/,gkillin ~s-Connnllv. Inc. 5'~ EXHIBIT C CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION -- SUMMARY SHEET PROJECT NAME: Werner Road/Oyster Bay Road/Auto Center Way Traffic Signal, Werner RoadlKean Street/Union Street Traffic Signal DIRECT SALARY COST (DSC): Classification Man Houm X Rate = Cost PRINCIPAL 8 X $44.54 = $356.32 PROJ. ENGINEER 68 X $29.95 = $2,036.60 ENGINEER 210 X $20.50 = $4,305.00 TECHNICIAN 126 X $18.50 = $2,331.00 CLERICAL 16 X $15.00 -- $195.00 Total Hours = 428 Total DSC = $9,223.92 OVERHEAD Including Salary Additives (OH): OH RateX DSC 159.00% X $9,223.92 = $14,666.03 FIXED FEE (FF): FF Rate x (DSC) 36% X $9.223.92 = $3,320.6' REIMBURSABLES: MILEAGE @ 360 x 0.315 = $113.40 MISC. EXPENSE $120.00 SUB TOTAL $233.4C TOTAL $27,44 3.96 BUDGET ALLOWANCE SUB TOTAL = $12,556.04 GRAND TOTAL = $40,000 Bremerton/Skillings-Cormolly, Inc. AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: DATE SUBMITTED: May 17, 1999 SR 304 TRANSPORTATION PROJECT ASBESTOS REMOVAL NO. 3 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR AGENDA OF: May 26, 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & Utils ORIGINATOR: R. Win, City Eng. 2. CLI~ARAN/CF~8/ (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXItIBITS: 1. Change Order No.1 ' ~ llltleS -,t~ of l~uNic ~~/''' ~aslng.~u~or Co--il Fis~l & Budget ~i~ee ~Councii operations Co~i=ee ENDORSEMENT/~INFO~ATION [] APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FQR SU~VIITTAL: 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Change Order #1 for the SR 304 TIP Asbestos Removal No.3 contract consists of four items. The 1s' item is for deleting the asbestos abatement work at 114 S. Wycoff. The 2nd item is for the removal of additional asbestos at 245 S. Wycoff. The 3rd and 4th items are for the removal of asbestos containing material from 113 S. Callow and 205 S. Wycoff. This change order will increase the total contract price by $16,607.00 to $45,121.00. S. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council approve Change Order #I for the SR 304 Transportation Improvement Project - Asbestos Removal No. 3 contract and authorize the Mayor to execute the same. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED [l TABLED [l COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [1 9C 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 3. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION - Continuation 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Funding by the State and Federal agencies used for thc design of this project will have to be returned. The project will not be built and existing traffic capacity safety issues will remain. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES: Staffing: 20 staff hours for construction administration, inspection. Budget: This project is included in the 1999 budget as part of the 1999 Arterial Street fund and sufficient funds exists to do this work with the additional funding the City will receive from other funding sources. The City will be receiving funding from the Federal Highway Administration and the State Transportation Improvement Board. Facilities/Equipment: No impact. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: Rece.tved: 5/11/99 7: 3OAM; CITY OF BREMERTON CROWN DELTA; Page 2 _ 255 P02 HRY 11 '99 06:31 CHAN(.:iE UMIJEm Project Name SR304 TIP Asbestos Removal No.3 Project No, A42046 Contractor Crown Delta Environmental, Inc. Page Contract Change Order No. 1 Orig. Contract Amt, $ 28r514.00 Prey, Appvd, Changes $ 0,00 This Change $ 16~607,00 Revised Contract Amt, $ 45rl 2.1.00 I of 1 Days N/A Days __ Days 33 Days 53 This Change Order covers changes to the subject contract as described herein, The Contractor shall construct, furnish equipment and materials, and perform all work as necessary or required to complete the Change Order Items for a lump sum price agreed upon between the Contractor and the City of Bremerton. -Description of Changes Increase in (Decrease) Contract Contract in Contract Time Amount Amount Extension (5) ($) (days) 1. Delete Bid Item #5 from the cor;trac~. 8764.00 2. Additional asbestos removed from 245 S. Wycoff, $12,760.00 3. Remove and dispose of asbestos containing material 51,821.00 33 days from 113 S. Callow 4, Remove and dispose of A.C.M. from 205 S. Wycoff 82,790.00 Totals t~ 17,371.00 ~764.00 33 days Net change in contract amount Increase or (decrease) $16,607,00 The undersigned Contractor approves the foregoing Change Order as to the changes, if any, in the contract price specified for each item including, any and all supervision costs and other miscellaneous costs relating to The change in work, and as to the extension of time allowed, if any, for completion of the entire work on account of said Change Order. The Contractor agrees To furnish all labor and materials and perform all other necessary work, inclusive of the directly or indirectly related to the approved time extension, required to complete the Change Order items. This document will become a supplement of the contract and all provisions will apply hereto. [t is understoo~...~;hat th~/C~h~_~nge.. ~ Order shall be effective when approved by the~ City of/Bremerton. Recommended: c~:¥.~ ~ ~(]~/~ /Project En~iineer Date: ~//~/~ / Recommended: ~ '~ /City En,ineer Date: ,~ ~,~ ~ Approved: /Mayo_[ Date: si- AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: Ordinance # ~~ Amending Section 6.02 Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL FOR AGENDA OF: Ma'~' 1~ 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: Admin. Service~ ORIGINATOR: K. McCluskey DATE SUBMITTED: April 27. 1999 2. ~: (comment on back 3. if~~ary) /~ ~ ~-~ ~~-~---- ~ ,~ //~/W~/~ .//~=~_ Ordinance Attorney PW&U Director ENDORSEMENT~ INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT Z~R~U~ITTAL: 4. S~Y STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The ordinance reduces committee membership from 11 to 7 and establishes meetings as necessary rather than monthly. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve amending ordinance on first reading. Motion to pass Ordinance # -r-,..~ ~:. on second reading. o RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Executive ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Executive EXPIRATION DATE: N/A REVIEW DATE: N/A PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS (cont.~: 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT (cont,): IMPACT ON WON-PASSAGE: Use existing ordinance. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EOUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES None. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: ORDINANCE NO. ,z~ (v, ~ ~, AN ORDINANCE amending section 602.110 and 6.02.120 of' the Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 6.02 Solid Waste Management. THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Amendment: Chapter 6.02 Solid Waste Management is hereby amended as follows: · 110 Membership and Terms of Office, (a) The comrmttee shall be compnsed of seven members, including: City Council Members (1) Public Works & Utilities Director or designee (1) Administrative Services Director or designee (1) City Attomey or designee (1) Bremerton Citizen Members (3) (b) The members of the committee are encouraged to maintain dialogue with and obtain advisou input from representatives of: Washington State Department of Ecology; Washington State Department of Trade and Economic Development; Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission; Association of Washington Cities; Kitsap County Solid Waste Manager; Bremerton Kitsap County Board of Health; Washington Waste Management Association; Kitsap County. Solid Waste Advisory Committee (c) Citizen members shall be appointed and removed by the Mayor w~th the concurrence of the City Council. Citizen members shall be appointed for terms of two years. The Ct5,. Council President shall appoint the Council Member, who shall serve as Chair. · 120 Meetings. The Committee shall meet as directed by the Chair. The Mayor shall provide administrative support, as required, for the committee. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective ten (10) days after passage and publication. Approved this __ day of Mike Shepherd, Council President ~ 1999. Attest: Lynn Horton, Mayor Kathleen L. McCluskey, City Clerk Chapter 6.02 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Sections: 6.02.010 6.02.020 6.02.030 6.02.100 6.02.110 6.02.120 PURPOSE. SOLID WASTE PLANNING SOLID WASTE GOALS. SOLID WASTE COMMITTEE - ESTABLISHED. MEMBERSHIP AND TERMS OF OFFICE. MEETINGS. 6.02.010 PURPOSE. This chapter establishes all solid waste regulations, service levels, and types of service within the corporate limits of the Ci.ty of Bremerton including but not limited to: storage, collection, permanent actions, transportation, treatment,, utilization, processing and disposal of solid waste. (Ord. 4219 §2 (in part), 1989) 6.02.020 SOLID WASTE PLANNLNG The City of Bremerton will jointly participate in a Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan to be coordinated by Kitsap County. in order to provide support and enhance regional solid waste management; Provided, however, That the CiD' does not abrogate any of its powers to regulate levels and types of serv/ces within the corporate limits of the City.. Approval by the CiD' Council shall be required before the Kitsap County Reg/onal Plan together with amendments and supporting plans, will have any force and effecct within the CID.' of Bremerton. Implementing ordinances and regulations shall be passed by the City. pursuant to Section 10 of the Washington Solid Waste Act of 1989. (Ord. 4219 §2 (in part), 1989) 6.02.030 SOLID WASTE GOALS. (a) The CiD' of Bremerton has determined that the following priorities for the collection, handling and management of solid waste are necessary, and should be following in a descending order as applicable. (1) Waste Reduction. (2) Recycling with source separation of recyclable materials as the preferred method. (3) Separated waste. (4) Energy Recovery., Incineration, or Landfill of mixed waste. (b) It is the City. of Bremerton's goal to reach and maintain at least a 50% recycling rate by 1995. Rec'ycle programs implemented with/n the City must attempt to make recycling as affordable and convenient as mixed waste disposal. (Ord. 4219 §2 (in part), 1989). 6.02.100 SOLID WASTE COMMITTEE - ESTABLISffED. There is established a Solid Waste Advisory Committee responsible for advising the Mayor and City. Council on solid waste management and services. It shall recommend the solid waste services which should be available to the citizens of Bremerton and determine the most equitable means of providing these services. These services shall support environmental concerns of the State and City, be in accordance with the Kitsap Coun .ty Solid Waste Comprehensive Plan. promote the public health, and support efforts to reduce the wasm stream and re%'cle materials. The Committee shall recommend methods and policies to support local economic development based upon use of materials in the communip,.' waste stream. Th_is Committee shall make recommendations to negotiators of collection contrac:s for the City's solid ,a~ste. (Ord. No. 4261 51 (in part), 1990). 6.02.110 MEMBERSHI:P .-~.ND TERMS OF OFFICE. (a) The committee shall Dc comprised of ~ 41,,,,~,~1) voting members, including: C~2,' Comnci! Solid Waste Coor~i~tflr Ciw Co.oil members ~ C~ ~ c~ Ciw U~lifies Director m ~ ~k~~ City Anomey O~ &~ t~ Director ofA~iNs=a~ve Semces ~w ~ t~ Breme~on ci~zen momars (3) ~ Rcq,'c!ing C~r~nater 6-1 (b) The _A.:~_ members of the Committee are encouraged to maintain dialogue with and obtain advisory input from representatives of: Washington State Department of Ecology Washington State Department of Trade and Economic Development Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission Association of Washington Cities Kit.sap County Solid Waste Coordinator Bremerton Kit.sap County Board of Health Washington Waste Management Association Kit.sap County Solid Waste Advisory Committee (c) Citizen members shall be appointed and removed by the Mayor with the Concurrence of the City Council. Citizen members shall be appointed for terms of two years. The City Council President shall appoint the Council member~... (Ord.. 4261 §1 (in part), 1990). 6.02.120 MEETINGS. The Committee shall meet ~ at ~.:'zk ct,~,:.r ~iF,,cz as directed by the Chair. The Mayor shall provide administrative support, as required, for the Committee. (Ord. 4261 § 1 (in part), 1990). 6-2 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: ORDINANCE # REGARDING CHANGES TO THE COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION LAW AND AMENDING BMC CHAPTER 10.40 2. CLEARANqES;,%Comment on back 3. if ce s ) Di~, ',~to~r of-pu~ic Works &.~flities City;Attorney / City Clerk Council Fiscal & Budget Committee ¥~uncil O per'aSio ns"'~'~ o~nmitt e e FOR AGENDA OF: Mgyq~, 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & Utils ORIGINATOR: R. Witt, City Engineer. ' "~0,~\~\ DATE SUBMITTED: May 10, 1999 EXHIBITS: 1. Ordinance # ~t (v q- ci 2. BMC 10.40 with changes ENDORSEMENT.,~,- INFORMATION MAYOR ~' ~- ~. .... ,;,z." ,~ ,5._ [ ] APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT F ~J:}~R SUBMITTAL: COUNCIL PRESIDENT 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The State Legislature has amended several sections of the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) law after a review of its impacts in recent years on both the environment and major employers throughout the state. These amendments affect the goals, reporting, good faith efforts, exemptions and enforcement in the CTR program. These amendments must now be incorporated into the City CTR ordinance, by modification of BMC 10.40. 5. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Motion to approve Ordinance 2) Motion to pass Ordinance # on first reading on second reading 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED [l TABLED [] COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. APPROVED [] NOTICE OF ACTION DISAPPROVED [1 AMENDED Il 1()13 (OVER) 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 3. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION - Continuation 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The City will be in violation of State Law by not having the BMC consistent with RCW requirements. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES: Staffing: Administration of the program will remain at the cra'rent level Budget: No impact Facilities/Equipment: No impact. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: ORDINANCE NO. ~ ~ ~ c[ AN ORDINANCE amending Chapter 10.40, Commute Trip Reduction Plan. Whereas, the State Legislature has amended the Commute Trip Reduction Law; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Amendment. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 10.40, Commute Trip Reduction is hereby amended as follows: 10.40.010 PURPOSE. The purpose of this chapter is to establish Commute Trip Reduction Program requirements for affected employers within the City of Bremerton. These requirements will promote alternative commute modes and reduce the total number of single occupant vehicle (SOV) commute trips, and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per employee, thereby, decreasing traffic congestion, automobile related air pollution, and energy use within the City of Bremerton. The City of Bremerton recognizes the importance of increasing individual citizens' awareness of air quality, energy consumption, and traffic congestion and the contribution individual actions can make toward addressing these issues. 10.40.020 DEFINITION. The following definitions shall apply in the interpretation and enforcement of this chapter: (3) "Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Goals" mean the goals established by the State CTR Law and the CTR Task Force Guidelines for affected employers. These goals are to reduce the Vehicle Miles Traveled per employee and the Single Occupant Vehicle commute trips from the base year value established for the Commute Trip Reduction Zone at least 15 percent by January 1, 1995; 20 percent by January 1, 1997; 25 percent by January 1, 1999, and 35 percent by January 1,2005. (g) (1) requirements "Good Faith Effort" means that an employer has met the minimum identified in this chapter and in RCW 70.94.531, and is working collaboratively with Kitsap Transit to continue its existing CTR program or is developing and implementing program modifications likely to result in improvements to its CTR program over an agreed upon length of time. 10.40.050 APPLICABILITY. (c) Newly-Affected Employers. (1) Reporting Date. Newly-affected employers shall identify themselves to Kitsap Transit within ,qinety (90) days of becoming an affected employer or moving into the boundaries of the City of Bremerton. (2) CTR Program Submittal. Newly-affected employers shall be granted a minimum of one hundred-eighty (180) days from the date of official notification by Kitsap Transit that they are an affected employer or from the date of self-identification to develop and submit a CTR program. (3) CTR Goals. Newly-affected employers shall have two years from the date of their CTR Program approval to meet the first CTR goal of fifteen (15) percent; four years from the date of their initial CTR Program approval to meet the second CTR goal of twenty (20) percent; six years from the date of their initial CTR Program approval to meet the third CTR goal of twenty five (25) percent; and twelve years from the date of their initial CTR Program approval to meet the fourth CTR goal of thirty five (35) percent. Page2 L~ 10.40.070 REQUIREMENTS FOR AFFECTED EMPLOYERS. (a) CTR Program Submittal Date. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, not more than one hundred-eighty (180) days from the effective date of this chapter, all affected public and private employers within the City of Bremerton shall submit a CTR Program to Kitsap Transit. (b) CTR Program Implementation Date. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, an affected employer's CTR Program shall be implemented not more than one hundred-eighty (~180) days from the date the CTR Program was initially submitted to Kitsap Transit for approval. (c) Mandatory CTR Program Elements. The employer's CTR Program must be designed to achieve the CTR Goals set forth in this chapter. The employer shall make a good faith effort, as defined in this chapter and in RCW 70.94.531, to develop and implement a CTR program that will encourage its employees to reduce VMT per employee and SOV commute trips. At a minimum, an employer's CTR Program shall include the following elements: (1) Site description. A general description of the employment site location, to include: level of transit service, parking availability, access to highways, and unique conditions experienced by the employer or its employees that might affect the level of SOV commuting and VMT per employee. (2) Employee Information. The total number of affected employees. (3) Employee Transportation Coordinator. The name of the employer's designated Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC) to administer the CTR Program. The ETC's name, location, and telephone number must be displayed prominently at each affected worksite. The ETC shall oversee all elements of the employer's CTR Program and act as liaison between the employer and Kitsap Transit. (4) Information Distribution. A commitment to regularly distribute to its employees information about alternatives to SOV commuting. Each employer's subsequent annual report must include a description of the information to be distributed and the method of distribution. Page3 ~ (5) Annual Progress Report. A commitment to annually review employee commuting and progress toward meeting the CTR goals. Affected employers shall file an annual progress report with Kitsap Transit. The annual report form shall be provided by Kitsap Transit and shall be consistent with the CTR Task Force Guidelines. Survey information or approved alternative information must be provided in the reports submitted in the second, fourth, sixth, eight, tenth, and twelfth year after program implementation begins. (6) Record Keeping. A list of records that will be kept by the employer that can be used to evaluate the employer's CTR Program. Kitsap Transit and the affected employer shall agree in writing on the record keeping requirements as part of the affected employer's approved CTR Program. Employers will maintain all records listed in their CTR Program for a minimum of twenty-four (24) months. (d) Request for Modification of CTR Program Elements. An affected employer may request a modification of the CTR Program elements. This request must be in writing and delivered to Kitsap Transit. Such request may be granted by Kitsap Transit if one of the following conditions exist: (1) Beyond Control. The affected employer can demonstrate it would be unable to comply with the CTR Program element(s), for which the affected employer seeks an exemption, for reasons beyond the control of the employer; or (2) Undue Hardship. The affected employer can demonstrate that compliance with the CTR Program element(s) would constitute an undue hardship. (e) Exemption From CTR Program. (1) Exemption from all Requirements. An affected employer may submit a request to Kitsap Transit to grant an exemption from all CTR program requirements or penalties for a particular worksite. The employer must demonstrate that it would experience undue hardship in complying with the requirements of this ordinance as a result of the characteristics of its business, its work force, or its location(s). An exemption may be granted if and only if the affected employer demonstrates that it faces extraordinary circumstances, such as bankruptcy, and is unable to implement any measures that could reduce the proportion of SOV trips and VMT per employee. Page 4 ~' Exemptions may be granted by Kitsap Transit at any time based on written notice provided by the affected employer. The notice should clearly explain the conditions for which the affected employer is seeking an exemption from the requirements of the CTR program. Kitsap Transit shall review annually all employers receiving exemptions and shall determine whether the exemption will be in effect during the following program year. (2) Exemption for Employees Using Vehicles for Work. An affected employer may submit a request to Kitsap Transit to exempt specific employees that must use their own vehicles during the work day for work purposes. The employer shall provide documentation indicating how many employees meet this condition and must demonstrate that no reasonable alternative commute mode exists for these employees. Under this condition, the applicable CTR Goals will not be modified but those employees who need daily access to the vehicles they drive to work will not be included in the calculations of proportion of SOV commute trips and VMT per employee used to determine the employer's progress toward meeting its CTR Program Goals. (3) Exemption for Variable Shift Employees. An affected employer may submit a request to Kitsap Transit to exempt specific employees who work variable shifts throughout the year and who do not rotate as a group to identical shifts. Kitsap Transit will use the criteria identified in the CTR Task Force Guidelines to assess the validity of employee exemption request. Kitsap Transit shall review annually all employee exemption requests, and shall determine whether the exemption will be in effect during the following program year. 10.40.080 CTR ZONE, BASE YEAR VALUES AND GOALS. (a) CTR Zone and Values. The City of Bremerton authorizes the Board of Commissioners of Kitsap Transit to, by resolution, establish the CTR Zone(s) boundaries, and the base year values for SOV rate and VMT per employee within the CTR Zone(s). This resolution shall be passed by January 31, 1993. Page 5 (b) Percentage Reductions of SOV's and VMT Per Employee. The CTR Goals for an affected employer's CTR Program shall be a reduction in the proportion of SOV commute trips and VMT per employee by: 1. 15% by 1995; 2. 20% by 1997; 3. 25% by 1999; and 4. 35% by 2005 from the base year values of the CTR Zone in which the affected employer is located. The methods used to determine an affected employer's SOV rate and VMT per employee shall be consistent with the CTR Task Force Guidelines (RCW 70.94.537). (c) Modification of CTR Program Goals. An affected employer may request that Kitsap Transit modify the employer's CTR goals. Such request shall be filed in writing at least 60 days prior to the date the worksite is required to submit its program description and annual report. The goal modification request must cleady explain why the worksite is unable to achieve the applicable goal. The worksite must also demonstrate that it has implemented all the elements contained in its approved CTR program. Kitsap Transit will review and grant or deny requests for goal modifications in accordance with procedures and criteria identified in the CTR Task Force Guidelines. An employer may not request a modification of the applicable goals until one year after Kitsap Transit has approved the employers initial program description or annual report. 10.40.090 CREDIT FOR COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION EFFORTS. (c) Notice of Leadership Certificate. As public recognition for their efforts, affected employers who meet or exceed the CTR Goals as set forth in of this chapter, will receive a Commute Trip Reduction Certificate of Leadership from the City of Bremerton. A notice of this Certificate of Leadership shall be published in the official newspaper. 10.40.100 CTR PROGRAM REVIEW AND ANNUAL REPORTS. (a) CTR Program Review. Page 6 ~,"'~ (1) Approval. Kitsap Transit shall provide the employer with written notification if the employer's CTR Program is deemed acceptable. Such notification shall be by certified mail or delivery, return receipt, addressed to the employer's Employee Transportation Coordinator. If the employer receives no written notification of extension of the review period or comment on the CTR Program within forty-five (45) days of submission, the employer's CTR Program shall be deemed approved. Kitsap Transit may extend the review period up to ninety (90) days. The implementation date for the employer's CTR program will be extended an equivalent number of days. (2) Conditional Approval. Kitsap Transit may determine that an employer's CTR Program is approved on the condition that certain aspects of the Program be modified. In this case, Kitsap Transit shall notify the affected employer of the required modifications. Such notification shall be by certified mail or delivery, return receipt, addressed to the affected employer's Employee Transportation Coordinator. Affected employers will be given thirty (30) days from the date of such notice to submit a revised CTR Program. Kitsap Transit shall have thirty (30) days from the date the revised CTR Program was received to accept or reject the revised CTR Program. (3) Rejection. Kitsap Transit shall provide the employer with written notification if the employer's CTR Program is deemed unacceptable and therefore, rejected. Such notification shall be by certified mail or delivery, return receipt, addressed to the affected employer's Employee Transportation Coordinator within forty-five (45) days of the CTR Program submittal date. The letter will specify the cause(s) for the rejection. Kitsap Transit will schedule a meeting with the affected employer within twenty-one (21) days of the date of notice. During the meeting, Kitsap Transit will provide technical assistance to the affected employer. The affected employer will be given thirty (30) days from the date of the meeting to submit a revised CTR Program. Kitsap Transit shall have thirty (30) days to accept or reject the revised CTR Program. (b) CTR Annual Progress Reports. Kitsap Transit shall establish the affected employer's annual reporting date upon review of the employer's initial CTR Program. The reporting date shall not be less than twelve (12) months from the date the employer's CTR Program was approved. Each year on the employer's reporting date, the employer shall submit to Kitsap Transit its annual CTR Program progress report. Page ? Kitsap Transit shall provide and the affected employer shall use a standard annual report form. 10.40.120 ENFORCEMENT. (a) Compliance. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, compliance shall mean fully implementin9 all provisions in an accepted CTR Program and satisfying the requirements of this chapter. (b) Required CTR Program Modifications. Kitsap Transit shall use the following criteria in determining whether an affected employer shall be required to make modifications to its CTR Program: (1) Achieves Either or Both Goals. If an employer makes a good faith effort, as defined in this chapter and in RCW 70.94.531, and meets either or both the applicable SOV or VMT goal, the employer has satisfied the objectives of the CTR plan and will not be required to modify its CTR program. (2) Fails to Achieve Either Goals. i. With Good Faith Effort - If an employer makes a good faith effort, as defined in this chapter and in RCW 70.94.531, but has not met or is not likely to meet the applicable SOV or VMT goal, Kitsap Transit shall work collaboratively with the employer to make modifications to its CTR program. After agreeing on modifications, the employer shall submit a revised CTR program description to Kitsap Transit for approval within 30 days of reaching an agreement. ii. Without Good Faith Effort - If an employer fails to make a good faith effort, as defined in this chapter and in RCW 70.94.531, and fails to meet either the applicable SOV or VMT reduction goal, Kitsap Transit shall work collaboratively with the employer to identify modifications to the CTR program and shall direct the employer to revise its program within 30 days to incorporate the modifications. In response to the recommended modifications, the employer shall submit a revised CTR program description, including the requested modifications or equivalent measures, within 30 days of receiving writ't, en notice to revise its program. Kitsap Transit shall review the revisions and notify the employer of acceptance or rejection of the revised program. If Page 8 a revised program is not accepted, Kitsap Transit will send written notice to that effect to the employer within 30 days and, if necessary, require the employer to attend a conference with program review staff for the purpose of reaching a consensus on the required program. A final decision on the required program will be issued in writing by Kitsap Transit within ten working days of the conference (c) Violations. The following constitute violations of this chapter: (1) Failure to develop and/or submit a complete CTR Program by the applicable deadlines as stated in this chapter. (2) Failure to implement an approved CTR Program by the applicable deadlines as stated in this chapter. (3) Failure to modify an unacceptable CTR Program by the applicable deadlines as stated in this chapter. (4) Failure of an affected employer to identify itself to Kitsap Transit within ninety (90) days of the effective date of this chapter. (5) Failure of a newly affected employer to identify itself to Kitsap Transit within ninety (90) days of becoming an affected employer. (6) Failure to submit on time an annual CTR Program Progress Report to Kitsap Transit. (7) Failure to maintain agreed upon CTR Program records. (8) intentionally'submitting false information, data and or survey results. (9) Failure to make a good faith effort, as defined in this chapter and in RCW 70.94.531. (d) Penalties. (1) Class I Civil Infraction. Any affected employer violating any provision of this chapter shall be liable for a Class I Civil Infraction, and subject to civil penalties pursuant to RCW 7.80.120. (2) Separate Offenses. Such affected employer shall be liable for a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which any violation of this chapter is committed or continued and shall be subject to civil penalties as herein provided; and (3) Failure due to Union. An employer shall not be liable for civil penalties if failure to implement an element of a CTR program was the result of an inability to reach Page 9 agreement with a certified collective bargaining agent under applicable laws where the issue was raised by the employer and pursued in good faith. Unionized employers shall be presumed to act in good faith compliance if they: i. propose to a recognized union any provision of the employer's CTR program that is subject to bargaining as defined by the National Labor Relations Act; and ii. advise the union of the existence of the Washington State CTP, Law, this chapter, and the mandates of the CTR program approved by Kitsap Transit and advise the union that the proposal being made is necessary for compliance with this chapter and state law (RCW 70.94.531). (4) Not Liable. No affected employer with an approved CTR program may be held liable for failure to reach the applicable SOV or VMT goals. 10.40.130 APPEALS, (a) Hearing an Appeal (1) Venue. The affected employer shall select to appeal the initial order of the Presiding Officer in either the City of Bremerton District Court or through the administrative process set forth in this chapter. (2) Time. An appeal of a determination that an affected employer or newly- affected employer committed a civil infraction under this chapter shall be commenced by filing a written notice of appeal within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the Presiding Officer's written findings. Section 2. Effective date. This ordinance shall become effective ten days after passage and publication as provide~. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of ,1999. Page 10 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremer[on this day of ,1999. MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President APPROVED this day of ,1999. LYNN HORTON, Mayor ATTEST: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk Page City. of Bremerton Chapter 10.40 CO1VEVIUTE TRIP REDUCTION PLAN Sections: 10.40.010 10.40.020 10.40.030 10.40.040 10.40.050 10.40.060 10.40.070 10.40.080 10.40.090 10.40.100 10.40.110 10.40.120 10.40.130 PURPOSE DEFINITIONS THE CITY OF BREMERTON'S CTR PLAN RESPONSIBLE AGENCY APPLICABIZLITY NOTIFICATION OF APPLICABH.,ITY REQUIREMENTS FOR AFFECTED EMZPLOYERS CTR ZONE, BASE YEAR VALUES AND GOALS CREDIT FOR COMZMUTE TRIP REDUCTION EFFORTS CTR PROGRAM REVIEW AND ANNUAL REPORTS EXTENSIONS ENFORCEMZENT APPEALS 10.40.010 PURPOSE. The purpose of this chapter is to establish Commute Trip Reduction Program requirements for affected employers within the City of Bremerton. These requirements will promote alternative commute modes and reduce the total number of single occupant vehicle (SOV) commute trips, and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per employee, thereby, decreasing traffic congestion, automobile related air pollution, and energy use within the City. of Bremerton. The Ci~. of Bremerton reco:~nizes the importance Q. f increasing individual citizen~' awarene$~ of air quali~., energy, consumption, and traffic congestion and the contribution individual action~ can make toward addressing these issues. 10.40.020 DEFINITION. The following definitions shall apply in the interpretation and enforcement of this chapter: (a) (1) "Affected Employee" means a full- time employee who begins his or her regular work day at a single worksite between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. (inclusive) on two (2) or more weekdays per week for at least twelve (12) continuous months. The following classifications of employees are excluded from the definition of affected employees: i. seasonal agriculture employees, including seasonal employees of processors of agriculture products; and ii. employees of construction worksites when the expected duration of the construction is less than two (2) years. (2) "Affected Employer" means a public or private employer that employs one hundred (100) or more affected employees. (3) "Alternative Commute Mode" refers to any means of commuting, other than that in which the single-occupant vehicle is the dominant mode. Telecommuting and compressed work weeks are considered alternative commute modes, if they result in reducing commute trips. (4) "Alternative Work Schedules" are programs such as compressed work weeks that eliminate commute trips by affected employees. (b) (1) "Base Year" means the period from January 1, 1992, through December 31, 1992, on which goals for vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per employee and proportion of single- occupant vehicle (SOV) commute trips shall be based. (RCW 70.94.524.7) (c) (1) "Carpool" means any motor vehicle occupied by two (2) to six (6) people traveling together for their commute trip that results in the reduction of a minimum of one motor vehicle commute trip. (2) "Commute Trip*' means a trip made from a worker's home to a ~vorksite to begin a regularly scheduled work day between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. (inclusive) on weekdays. (3) "Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Goals" mean the goals established by the State CTR Law and the CTR Task Force Guidelines for affected employers. These goals are to reduce the Vehicle Miles Traveled per employee and the Single Occupanf Vehicle commute trips from the base year value established for the Commute Trip Reduction Zone at least 15 percent by January I, 1995; 25 20 percent by 1 January 1, 1997; and 35 2.7..percent by January. 1, 1999, and 35 percent by .hmuat? I, 2005. (4) "Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Plan" means the City` of Bremerton's plan which is designed to achieve reductions in the proportion of single occupant vehicle (SOV) commute trips and the commute trip vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per affected employees of affected public and private sector employers within the City of Bremerton. (5) "Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Pro,am" means the affected employer's strategies to reduce the proportion of single occupant vehicle commute trips and the commute trip vehicle miles traveled per affected employees. (6) "Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Task Force Guidelines" means the official guidelines to RCW 70.94 developed by the Washington State Commute Trip Reduction Task Force committee. (RCW 70.94.537) (7) "Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Zone" means an area,, such as a census tract or combination of census tracts, within the City.' of Bremerton, characterized by similar emplo.vment density`, population density', level of transit service, parking availability., access to high occupancy vehicle facilities, and other factors that are determined to affect the level of SOV commuting. (8) "Commuter Ride Matching Service" means a system that assists in matching commuters for the purpose of commuting together. (9) "Compressed Work Week" means an alternative work schedule, in accordance with employer policy, that regularly allows a full-time employee to eliminate at least one (1) work day every two (2) weeks by working longer hours during the remaining days, resulting in fewer commute trips by the employee. (10) "Custom Bus/Buspool or Worker/Driver Bus" means a commuter bus service arranged specifically to transport employees to work. (d) (I) "Day(s)" means calendar day(s). (2) "Dominant Mode" means the mode of travel used for the ~eatest distance of a commute trip. (e) (1) "Employee Transportation Coordinator" means a designated on-site employee who is responsible for administering the employer's Commute Trip Reduction Pro,am. (2) "Employer" means a sole proprietorship, parmership, corporation, unincorporated association, cooperative, joint venture, agency, department, district or other individual or entity, whether public, non-profit, or private, that employs workers. (f) (1) "Flex-Time" is an employer policy allowing individual employees some flexibility. in choosing the time, but not the number, of their working hours to facilitate the use of alternative commute modes. (2) "Full-Time Employee" means a person, other than an independent contractor, scheduled to be employed on a continuous basis for 52 weeks for an average of at least 35 hours per week. (g) ft~ "Good Faith Effort' meanx that em£loyer ha3' met the rnmimwn requiremenrx identit~ed in thix chapter and in RCW 7t). and is working coYaborativeIv with D'ansit to continue iix e.ri.~ting CTR pro,am i3' developin~ and imp[omen[lng pro?am modifications likely to rexu[t in improvements' Jar CTR pro,am over an a~'eed upon [en.;,th time. "Hearing Examiner" means a the Washin~on State Bar (h) (1) member of Association. (i) (1) "Implementation or Implement" means active pursuit by an employer to achieve the CTR Goals of RCW 70.94.521-551 and this chapter. (m)(1) "Mode" refers to the means of transportation used by employees, such as single-occupant vehicle, carpool, vanpool, transit, ferry, bicycle, and walking. (n) (1) "Newly-Affected Employer" is an employer that is not an affected employer upon the effective date of this chapter but becomes an affected employer subsequent to the effective date of this chapter. (p) (1) "Presiding Officer" means a person or persons designated by Kitsap Transit to hear and determine a contested Notice of Civil Infraction. (2) "Proportion of Single-Occupant Vehicle Commute Trips" or "SOV Rate" means the number of commute trips over a set period made by affected employees in SOVs divided by the number of affected employees working during that period. (s) (1) "Single-Occupant Vehicle (SOX/)" means a motor vehicle occupied by one (1) employee for commute purposes, including a motorcycle. (2) "Single Worksite" means a building or group of buildings on physically contiguous parcels of land or on parcels separated solely by private or public roadways or rights-of-way occupied by one or more affected employers. (t) (1) "Telecommuting" means the use of telephones, computers, or other similar technology to permit an employee to work at home or at a location closer to home than the employer's worksite. (2) "Transit" means a multiple- occupant vehicle operated on a for-hire, shared- ride basis, including bus, ferry, shared-ride taxi, shuttle bus, worker/driver bus, or vanpool. (3) "Transportation Demand Management (TDM)" means the use of strategies to reduce commute trips made by single occupant vehicles and vehicle miles traveled (V-MT) per employee. (v) (1) "Vanpool" means a vehicle occupied by seven (7) to fifteen (15) people traveling together for their commute trip. (2) "Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Per Employee" means the sum of the individual vehicle commute trip len~hs in miles made by affected employees over a set period divided by the number of affected employees during that period. (w) (l) "Week" means a seven day calendar period, starting on Monday and continuing through Sunday. (2) "Weekda? means any day of the week except Saturday or Sunday. (3) "Writing," "Written," or "In Writing" means original signed and dated documents. Facsimile (fmc) transmissions are a temporary notice of action that must be followed via mail or delivery of the original signed and dated document. 10.40.030 THE CITY OF BREMERTON'S CTR PLAN. The 1992 City. of Bremerton's Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Plan set forth in Attachment A is wholly incorporated herein bv reference. 10.40.040 RESPONSIBLE AGENCY. The City of Bremerton has determined that it is within the best interest of the public to enter into an interlocal a~eement (pursuant to RCW 39.34 and RCW 70.94.527) with Kitsap Transit, located at: 234 South Wycoff Bremerton, Washin~on 98312, whereby Kitsap Transit ~vill be the agency responsible for implementing and administering the City of Bremerton's CTR Plan and this chapter. 10.40.050 APPLICABILITY. (a) Affected Employer. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all affected employers at any single worksite within the unincorporated areas of the City, of Bremerton. (b) Change in Status as an Affected Employer. Any of the following changes in an affected employer's status may change the employer's CTR program requirements: (1) Becomes a Non-Affected Employer. If an employer initially designated as an affected employer no longer employs one hundred (100) or more affected employees and expects not to employ one hundred (100) or more affected employees for the next twelve (12) months, that employer is no longer considered an affected employer. It is the responsibility of the employer to notify, Kitsap Transit, in writing, that it is no longer an affected employer; 3 (2) Change in Status Within Twelve (12) Months. If the same employer returns to the level of one hundred (100) or more affected employees within the same twelve (12) months, that employer will be considered an affected employer for the entire twelve (12) months, and will be subject to the same CTR Program requirements as other affected employers. It is the responsibility of the employer to notify. Kitsap Transit, in writing, that it has become an affected employer; and (3) Change in Status After Twelve (12) Months. If the same employer returns to the level of one hundred (100) or more affected employees twelve (12) or more months after its change in status to an "unaffected" employer, that employer shall be treated as a newly- affected employer, and will be subject to the same CTR Program requirements as other newly-affected employers. It is the responsibility, of the employer to notify Kitsap Transit, in writing, that it has become an affected employer. (c) Newly-Affected Employers (1) Reporting Date. Newly-affected employers shall identify themselves to Kitsap Transit within ninety. (90) days of becoming an affected employer or moving into the boundaries of the City. of Bremerton. (2) CTR Program Submittal. Newly- affected employers shall be granted a minimum of one hundred-eighty (180) days from the date of official notification by Kitsap Transit that they are an affected employer or from the date of self-identification to develop and submit a CTR program. (3) CTR Goals. Newly-affected employers shall have two years from the date of their CTR Program approval to meet the first CTR goal of fifteen (15) percent; four years from the date of their initial CTR Program approval to meet the second CTR goal of twenty. five (25) percent; and six years from the date of their initial CTR Program approval to meet the third CTR goal of thirty five (35) percent. (3) CTR Goals. Newly-affected employers shall hm'e m,o yearx fi'om the date of their CTR Program approval to meet the first (.'TR ~oal t~'fifteen (15) percent; ]bur years fi'om the date qf their initial CTR Pro,re'am approval to meet the second CTR ~r;rtl qf m;en~_, (20) .percent; six .veqrs _from the date Rt' their initial (~TR Pro?am ,?proval to meet the third CTR goal qf twenrv.five f25) percent: and twelve year&from the date of their initial CTR program approval to meet the low'th CTR goal rtl thiro, .five ~35) percent. 10.40.060 NOTIYlCATION OF APPLICABILITY. (a) Publication of Notice. In addition to the City. of Bremerton's established public notification procedures for adoption of an ordinance or an amendment to an ordinance, a notice of the availability, of a summary of this chapter or an amendment to this chapter shall be published at least once in the City. of Bremerton's official newspaper within thirty. (30) days of the effective date of this chapter or any amendments hereto. (b) Notice to Know Affected Employers. Known affected employers located in the City of Bremerton shall receive written notification from Kitsap Transit that they are subject to this chapter. Kitsap Transit shall also send to all known affected employers notice of any amendments to this chapter. Such notices shall be by certified mail or deliveD', return receipt, addressed to the employer's Employee Transportation Coordinator. Such notification shall be delivered within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this chapter or any amendments hereto. (c) Self-Identification. Affected employers who, for whatever reason, do not receive notification within thirty. (.30) days of the effective date of this chapter shall identify. themselves to Kitsap Transit within ninety (90) days of the effective date of this chapter. Upon self-identification, such affected employers will be granted one hundred-eighty (180) days from identifying to submit a CTR Program. 10.40.70 REQUIREMENTS FOR AFFECTED EMPLOYERS. (a) CTR Program Submittal Date. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, not more than one hundred-eighw (180) days from the effective date of this chapter, all affected public and private employers within the Ciw of Bremerton shall submit a CTR Program to Kitsap Transit. (b) CTR Program Implementation Date. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, an affected employer's CTR Program shall be implemented not more than one hundred-eighty (180) days from the date the CTR Program was initially submitted to Kitsap Transit for approval. (c) Mandatory CTR Program Elements. The employer's CTR Program must be desig'ned to achieve the CTR Goals set forth in I0.40.080 of this chapter. At a minimum, an employe?s CTR Program shall include the following elements: &') Mandato~. CTR Pro?am Elements. The employer's CTR Pro?am must be desi~ed to achieYe the CTR Goals set forth in this thai?tot. The employer shall make a .good f_aith e/i~;rt, ay defined in this chapter and in RCW 70.94.531, to develop and implement a CTR £rogram that will encourage its e~ohqvees to reduce }4¥~T per employee and SOP' commute tres. .4t a minimum, an enhplqver(s CTR Prop'am shall include the following elements: (1) Site description. A general description of the employment site location, to include: level of transit service, parking availability, access to highways, and unique conditions experienced by the employer or its employees that might affect the level of SOV commuting and VMT per employee. (2) Employee Information. The total number of affected employees. (3) Employee Transportation Coordinator. The name of the employer's designated Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC) to administer the CTR Program. The ETC's name, location, and telephone number must be displayed prominently at each affected worksite. The ETC shall oversee all blements of the employer's CTR Program and act as liaison between the employer and Kitsap Transit. (4) Information Distribution. A commitment to regularly distribute to its employees information about alternatives to SOV commuting. Each employer's subsequent annual report must include a description of the information to be distributed and the method of distribution. (5) Annual Progress Report. A commitment to annually review employee commuting and progress toward meeting the CTR goals. Affected employers shall file an annual pro~ess report with Kitsap Transit. The annual report form shall be provided by Kitsap Transit and shall be consistent with the CTR Task Force Guidelines. (5) Annual pro?ess Report. A commitment to ~rnnualh~ review emph)yee commuting and.progress toward meeting tl~e CTR .goals. Affected employers shall file an annual pro?e~8 report with Kitsap Transit 77~e a~nual report.form shall he 7~rovided by Kir~ap Transit and shall be consistent with the CTR Task Force Gtddelines. Survey information or ~(l~proved alternative information mu4't be [provided in the relports si~bmitred in the second ..fi;urth, sixth, ei~,ht, tenth, crud rwelfth year ,~f)e.; ?to?am implementation begins. (6) Record Keeping. A list of records that will be kept by the employer that can be used to evaluate the employer's CTR Program. Kitsap Transit and the affected employer shall agree in writing on the record keeping requirements as part of the affected employer's approved CTR Program. Employers will maintain all records listed in their CTR Program for a minimum of twenD'-four (24) months. (7) Specific Measures. In addition to the mandatory, program elements described above, the employer's CTR program shall include specific measures to be implemented to meet the CTR goals. These measures may include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following: (i) a provision for preferential parking or reduced parking charges, or both, for high-occupancy vehicles; ii. instituting or increasing parking charges for SOVs; 5 iii. a provision for Commuter Ride Matching services to facilitate employee ride- sharing for commute trips; iv. a provision for subsidies for transit fares; v. a provision for vans or buses for use as vanpools or custom bus/buspools (Kitsap Transit's worker/driver buses); vi. a provision for subsidies for carpools or vanpools; vii. permitting the use of the employer's vehicles for carpooling or vanpooling; viii. permitting flex-time to facilitate employees' use of transit, carpools, or vanpools; ix. cooperation with transportation providers to provide additional regular or express service to the worksite; x. construction of special loading and unloading facilities for transit, carpool, and vanpool users; xi. a provision for bicycle parking facilities, lockers, changing areas, and showers for employees who bicycle or walk to work; xii. a provision fora program of parking incentives such as a rebate for employees who do not use the parking facilities; xiii. establishment of a telecommuting program to permit employees to work part-or full-time at home or at an alternative worksite closer to their homes: xiv. establishment of a program of alternative work schedules such as a compressed work week which reduces commuting; xv. establishment of a Guaranteed Ride Home program that would provide transportation home, in case of an emergency, to employees who normally use an alternative commute mode; and x¥i. implementation of other measures designed to facilitate the use of high- occupancy vehicles, such as on-site day care facilities and emergency taxi services. (d) Request for Modification of CTR Program Elements. An affected erflployer may request a modification of the CTR Program elements. This request must be in writing and delivered to Kitsap Transit. Such request may be granted by Kit.sap Transit if one of the following conditions exist: (1) Beyond Control. The affected employer can demonstrate it would be unable to comply with the CTR Program element(s), for which the affected employer seeks an exemption, for reasons beyond the control of the employer; or (2) Undue Hardship. The affected employer can demonstrate that compliance with the CTR Program element(s) would constitute an undue hardship. (e) Exemption From CTR Program. An affected employer may request Kitsap Transit to grant an exemption from all CTR program requirements. The affected employer shall demonstrate that it would experience undue hardship in complying with the requirements of this chapter as a result of the characteristics of its business, its work force, or its location(s). An exemption may be granted if and only if the affected employer demonstrates that it faces extraordinary circumstances, such as bankruptcy, and is unable to implement any measures that could reduce the proportion of SOV commute trips and VMT per employee. Exemptions may be granted by Kitsap Transit during the initial review of the affected employer's CTR Program or at the time of the annual Program review process. Kitsap Transit shall review annually all employers receiving exemptions, and shall determine whether the exemption will be in effect during the following program year. re) Exemption7 From CTR Il) Exemption fi'om ail Requiremenr.~. An a.f'fected employer mrrv s,~brnit a req~texr Kitsap Transit to gr(mt an exemption from CTR pro.?am requirdments or penalties for particular ~,orlcsite. The emph?yer mttSt demonstrate that it wozdd ex?erience undue hardship in complying with the reqzdremems this ordinance as a restdt qf the characteristicx o.f its bttsiness, its work.force, or its location~s;. An exemption rnay~ ' he .~'anted land only (f the qffected employer demonstrates that it faces extraordinary circumstances, ~uch as bankruptcy, and is unable to implement rnea~ures that could reduce the proportio~ 6 SOP' trips and V,3,tT l2er employee. Exemptions ma3; be granted by Kitsap Transit at any time ba.ved on written notice provided by the q_ffected employer. The notice Should clearly explain the conditions, for which the q~ected emplr~ver is seeking an e~remption_~m the requirements ~f the CTR pro,am. Kitsap Transit ,~hall review annually all employer4' receding exemprion,~ and shall determine whether the exemption will be in effect during the following pro?am year. f2) Exemption..~)r Employees U~ing [~hicles ~br Work. An q~ected employer m~, ,s'uhtnit a request to Kitsap Tr~sit to exempt specific employee$ ~hat mz~t use their own vehicles during the work d~ for work purposes. The emplQver shall provide documentation indicatin~ how ma~ employees meet this condition and must demons~ate that no reasonable alternative commut~ mode exists fi)r these employees. U~,der thi~ condition, the applicable CTR Goals will not be modified but those emptoyee~' who need daily access to the vehicles they drive to work will not be inchded in the calculation$ pf proportion qf SOV commute ~ips and [4~T per employee used to determine the employer's pros~es.~ toward meerinff its CTR Pro,am Goals. 3. Exemption for P2~riable Sh~B Employee~ An q~ected employer mrs' submit a request to Kit,'ap Trane'it to exempt sFec~fic employees who work variable sh~x throughout the year and who do not rotate a~ a 3,n'Oup to identical sh~s. Kitsap D'ansit will use the criteria ident~ed in the CTR T~'k Force Guidelines to assess the validly' of emp[ovee exemption request. Kitsap Transit xhall review a~mually all emphtvee exemption requests, and shall determine whether the exemption will be in ~ect during the.fqllowing program year 10.40.080 CTRZONE, BASE YEAR VALUES AND GOALS. (a) CTR Zone and Values. The City of Bremerton authorizes the Board of Commissioners of Kitsap Transit to, by resolution, establish the CTR Zone(s) boundaries, and the base year values for SOV rate and VMT per employee within the CTR Zone(s). This resolution shall be passed by January 31, 1993. (b) Percentage Reductions of SOV's and VMT Per Employee. The CTR Goals for an affected employer's CTR Pro,am shall be a reduction in the proportion of SOV commute trips and VIvlT per employee by: 1. 15% by 1995; 2. 25% by 1997; and 3. 35% by 1999 from the base year values of the CTR Zone in which the affected employer is located. The methods used to determine an affected employer's SOV rate and VMT per employee shall be consistent with the CTR Task Force Guidelines (RCW 70.94.537). (bi Percentage Reductions c~f SO V's and I(3~f' Per Employee. The CTR Goals for an q.ffected employer's CTR Prog-ra~n shall be a re..duction in the proportion of SO v commute trips and VMT per employee l. 15% by 1995: ? 20% by 3. 25% by J999: and 4, 35% hv 2005 .b'om die base year vahtes o. f the CTR Zone in w...hich the affected employer is located. The methods' used to determine an q~'ected employer'x SO V rate and ~:~dT Fer employee shall be c'on,'istent with the CTR Task Forc~ Guidelines ;RCW 70.94.53 ~. (c) Modification of CTR Program Goals. An affected employer may request from Kitsap Transit a modification of the CTR Goals. Grounds for granting modification are limited to the following: (1) Worksite Next To Another CTR ZONE. An affected employer demonstrates that its worksite is contiguous with a CTR Zone boundary and that the worksite conditions affecting alternative commute options are similar to those for employers in the adjoining CTR Zone. Under this condition, the employer's worksite may be subject to the same CTR Goals for VMT per employee and proportion of SOV commute trips as employers in the adjoining CTR Zone. 7 (2) Lack of Alternative Commute Modes. An affected employer demonstrates that opportunities for alternative commute modes do not exist due to factors related to the worksite, its work force, or characteristics of the business that are beyond the employer's control. (3) Employees Use Vehicles At Work. An affected employer can demonstrate that it requires significant numbers of its employees to use the vehicles they drive to work during the work day for work purposes. The employer shall provide documentation indicating how many employees meet this condition and must demonstrate that no reasonable alternative commute mode exists for these employees. Under this condition, the applicable CTR Goals will not be modified but those employees who need daily access to the vehicles they drive to work will not be included in the calculations of proportion of SOV commute trips and VMT per employee used to determine the employer's pro~ess toward meeting its CTR Program Goals. (c) Modification qf CTR Program Goals. An a_ffected employer mca, request that Kitsa? Trrmsit mod{.~. ' the emplo.ver's (TTR goals. Such request shall be filed in writing at least 60 ckrv.~ prior to the date the worksite is required to submit its prog-ram description and annual report. The goat modification request must clearly explain why the work~ite ts' unable to achieve the applicable goal. The ~vorkxite must a/so demons~ate that it has imple~nented all the elements contained in its approved CTR pro.am Kitsap Tranxit will review and grant or deny requests fi;r .goal modifications in accordance with procedurex and criteria identified in the CTR Task Force Guidelines. An empkhver m~, not request a modification Qf the %~olicable goals until one .year t~ter Kitsap Transit hay approved the employers initial pro.~am description or annual report. 10.40.090 CREDIT FOR COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION EFFORTS. (a) Credit for Programs Implemented Prior to the Base Year. Employers with successful Transportation Demand Management (TDM) pro,ams implemented prior to the 1992 base year, may be eligible to receive a special one- time CTR program exemption credit, which exempts them from most CTR program requirements. Affected employers wishing to receive this credit must apply to Kitsap Transit within ninety (90) days of the adoption of this Ordinance. Application shall include data from a survey of employees or equivalent to establish the applicant's VMT per employee and proportion of SOV commute trips. The survey or equivalent data shall conform to all applicable standards established in the State CTR Guidelines. An affected employer shall be considered to have met the 1995 CTR Goals if their VMT per employee and proportion of SOV commute trips are equivalent to a twelve (12) percent or greater reduction from the base year CTR Zone values. point credits apply (b) Process to Exemption Credit. These three (3) percentage only to the 1995 CTR Goals. Apply for CTR Program Affected employers may apply for program exemption credit for the results of past or current CTR efforts by applying to Kitsap Transit in their initial CTR Program description or as part of any other annual CTR progress report. Application shall include results from a survey of employees, or equivalent information that establishes the applicant's VMT per employee and proportion of SOV commute trips. The survey or equivalent information shall conform to all applicable standards established in Section 7 (Survey Guidelines) of the CTR Task Force Guidelines. Employers that apply for program exemption credit and whose VMT per employee and proportion of SOV commute trips are equal to or less than the CTR Goals for one or more future goal years, and commit in writing to continue their current level of effort, shall be exempt from the requirements of this chapter except for the requirements to report performance in 1995, 1997, and 1999. If any of these reports indicate the employer does not satisfy the next applicable CTR Goal(s), the employer shall immediately become subject to all requirements of this chapter. (c) Notice of Leadership Certificate. As public recognition for their efforts, affected employers who meet or exceed the CTR Goals as set forth in 10.40.086(b) of this chapter, will receive a Commute Trip Reduction Certificate of Leadership from the City. of Bremerton. A notice of this Certificate of Leadership shall be published in the official newspaper. 10.40.100 CTR PROGRAM REVIEW AND ANN-UAL REPORTS. (a) CTR Program Review. (1) Approval. Kitsap Transit shall provide the employer with written notification if the employer's CTR Program is deemed acceptable. Such notification shall be by certified mail or delivery, return receipt, addressed to the employer's Employee Transportation Coordinator. If the employer receives no written notification of extension of the review period or comment on the CTR Pro,am within forty-five (45) days of submission; the employer's CTR Program Shall be deemed approved. Kitsap Transit may extend the review period up to ninety (90) days. The implementation date for the employer's CTR pro,am will be extended an equivalent number of days. (2) Conditional Approval. Kitsap Transit may determine that an employer's CTR Program is approved on the condition that certain aspects of the Program be modified. In this case, Kitsap Transit shall notify the affected employer of the required modifications. Such notification shall be by certified mail or delivery., return receipt, addressed to the affected employer's Employee Transportation Coordinator. Affected employers will be given thirty (30) days from the date of such notice to submit a revised CTR Program. Kitsap Transit shall have thirty. (30) days from the date the revised CTR Program was received to accept or reject the revised CTR Program. (3) Rejection. Kitsap Transitshall provide the employer with written notification if the employer's CTR Pro?am is deemed unacceptable and therefore, rejected. Such notification shall be by' certified mail or deliver3,,, return receipt, addresjed tO the q.f-fected emplo3,'er's Employee D'ansportation Coordinator within for~_'-five t'45.i da3;s of the CTR Pro?am submittal date. The letter will spec(~., the caz~ed~) for the rejection. Kitsap Transit will schedule a meeting with the effected emphtver within ~venO,-one ?21~ d~'s Of the date 2f notice. Oltring th~ meeting. Kits~p Transit will provide technical cz,jist~ce to the affected emplQver. The q~ected e~oloyer ,viii be given third, ?30) d~;x.&om the date 2f the meeting lo submit a revi$ed CTR Program. Kit.~ap Transit shall have thir¢' ?30~ d~,.*' to accept or r~/ecr the revised ~'TR Progrt~m. (b) C~ Annual Progess Repo~s. Kiuap Tr~sit shall establish the affected employeFs ~nual reposing date upon review of ~e employer's initial C~ Pro~m. ~e reposing date shalI not be less th~ ~elve (12) monks ~om the date the employer's C~ Proem w~ approved. Each ye~ on ~e employer's reporting date, the employer shall submit to Kitsap Transit its ~nual C~ Proem progess repom Kimap Transit shall provide ~d the affected employer shall use a st~dard a~ual report fora. 10.40.110 EXTENTIONS. An affected employer may request from Kitsap Transit additional time to submit a CTR program, or CTR annual progress report, or rv implement or modify, a CTR Program. Such requests shall be made in writing and delivered by certified mail to Kitsap Transit no less than thirty. (30) days before the due date for which the extension is being requested. Extensions nor to exceed ninety. (90) days may be considered for reasonable cause. Kitsap Transit shalI ~anr or deny the employer's extension request by certified letter, return receipt within fifteen (~5) days of receiving the request. If there is no response issued to the employer, an extension is automatically ~anted for thirty (30) days. Extensions shall not exempt an employer from any responsibility, in meeting the CTR Goals. Extensions granted due to delays or difficulties with any CTR Program element(s) shall not be cause for discontinuing or failing to implement other program elements. An employer's annual reporting date shall not be adjusted permanently 9 as a result of these extensions. An employer's annual reporting date may be extended at the discretion of Kitsap Transit. 10.40.120 ENFORCEMENT. (a) Compliance. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, compliance shall mean fully implementing all provisions in an accepted CTR Pro.am and satisfying the requirements of this chapter. (b) Required CTR Program Modifications. Kitsap Transit shall use the following criteria in determining whether an affected employer shall be required to make modifications to its CTR Program: (1) Achieves Both CTR Goals. If an affected employer achieves both the SOV and VMT Goals for the current goal year, the employer has satisfied the objectives of this chapter and will not be required to modify, its CTR Program. (2) Achieves One CTR Goal. If an affected employer achieves one of the CTR Goals for the current goal year, Kitsap Transit may recommend program modifications, but in recognition of the employer's successful efforts in achieving one of the Goals, Kitsap Transit will not require the employer to modify, its CTR Program. (3) Fails To Achieve Any CTR Goals. If an employer fails to meet both the SOV and VMT Goals for the current goal year, Kitsap Transit shall propose modifications to the employer's CTR Program and direct the employer to revise its CTR Program. The employer shall submit a revised CTR Program, including the proposed modifications or equivalent measure(s), within thirty (30) days of receiving notice to modify, its CTR Program. Kitsap Transit shall review the revised CTR Program and notify the employer's Employee Transportation Coordinator within thirty. (30) days, by certified mail, of acceptance or rejection of the revised pro.am. If a revised program is not acceptable, Kitsap Transit shall require the employer to attend a conference with · pro.am review staff for the purpose of reaching a consensus on the required CTR Program. A final decision on the required CTR Program will be issued in writing by Kitsap Transit within fifteen (15) days of the conference. (b~ Required CTR Pro,am Modifications. Kitsap D'ansit shall use the fidlowing criteria determining whether ,rn qffected employer be required to make modifications to irs CTR Pro?am: /l) ,4chieves Either or Both Goals. an emplover makes a ~ood fi~ith effort, a, &fined in this chapter and in RCg" 70. 9& ~3 and meets either or both the applicable SO F or ~'MT goal, the emph~;er ha~ sati,[fied the o~iectives ~f the ~'TR plan and will not be required to mod~O~ its CTR pro,am. (2) Fails to .4chieve Either Goab. i. I~'ith Good Faith E~ort - [fan emphhver makes a good.faith e~orr, as d~fined in this chapter and in RCW 70. 9d. 531, but has not met or is not likely to meet the applicable SO k' or Yzl,[T goal, Kit~ap D'~sit ~hall work ¢ollaborative~;, with the employer to make modifications to its CTR pro,am. a~eeing on modifications the empire;er sh~dl submit a revised CTR pro,am description Kitsap Transil.fi)r approval within 30 dm,s reachin.~ an a.greement. ii. grithow Good Faith ~ort- ~' an employer.fails to make a .~ood faith ~ffort. ax defined in this chapter ~md in RCg~ 70.94.53] and fails to meet either the applicable SO 7 k~'~ reduction _goal, Kia~ap Trrwyit shay work collaborativelv with the employer to identi~: modifications to the CTR £ro?am and shai! direct the enLtvloyer to re;,ise its ?ro?am within 30 dcn.'s to incorporate the modi/~cations. [n response to the recommem'[ed modifications, the employer shall submit a revised CTR pro~cvn description, including the requested modifications or equivalent measures, within 30 days of receivin.g written notice to revise its program. Kitsap Transit shah review the revisions and noti2~', the employer of'acceptance or rejection of the revised ~ro?am. [_fa revised pro?am is not accepted, Kitsap Transit wi[! · send written notice to that effect tO the employer within 30 day.'., and, [f necessar3,, require the e.Lvloyer to attend a conference with pro?am review staff for the purpose of reachin.~ a lO consensus on the required pro?am. A final decision on the required pro?am will be i4',yued in ~4,riting by' Kits~ Transit within ten working d~s 2f the COnference (c) Violations. ~e follow~g constitute violations of this chapter: (1) Failure to develop ~or submit a complete CTR Pro,am by ~e applicable deadlines as stated in this chapter. (2) Failure to implement an approved C~ Proem by ~e applicable deadlines as stated in ~is chapter. (3) Failure to modi~ ~ unacceptable C~ Program by ~e applicable deadlines ~ stated in this chapter. (4) Failure of an affected employer to identi~ itself to Kitsap Transit wi~in nine~ (90) ~ys of~e effective date of~is chapter. (5) Failure of a newly affected employer to identi~ itself to ~tsap Tr~sit wi~in nine~ (90) days of becoming ~ affected employer. (6) Failure to submit on time an annual CTR Program Progress Report to Kitsap Tr~sit. (7) Failure to maintain a~eed upon CTR Progrm records. (8) intentionally submi~ing hlse info~ation, dam ~d or su~ey results. f9) Failure to make a .good fi~ith ~ort, as d~fined in this chapter and in RCW 70. 94. 531. (d) Penalties. (1) Class I Civil Infraction. ~y affected employer violating any provision of this chapter shall be liable for a Class I Civil Infraction, and subject to civil penalties pursuant to RCW 7.80.120. (2) Separate Offenses. Such affected employer shall be liable for a separate offense for each and eve~ day during any portion of which any violation of this chapter is commined or continued and shall be subject to civil penalties ~ herein provided; and (3) Failure due to Union. An employer shall not be liable for civil penalties if hilure to implement an element of a CTR pro,am was the result of an inabiliw to reach a~eement with a certified collective bargaining agent under applicable laws where the issue was raised by the employer and pursued in good faith. Unionized employers shall be presumed to act in good faith compliance if they: i. propose to a reco~ized union any provision of the employer's CTR program that is subject to bargaining as defined by the National Labor Relations Act; and ii. advise the union of the existence of the Washin~on State CTR Law, this chapter, and the mandates of the CTR pro,am approved by Kitsap Transit and advise the union that the proposal being made is necessary, for compliance with this chapter and state law (RCW 70.94.531). (4) Not Liable. No q,ffected employer with an approved CTR pro,am may he heht liableJbr failure to reach the applicable SO[" or VMT goals. (e) Adjudicative Procedure. (l) Service of the Notice of Infraction. An adjudicative procedure under this chapter is commenced by the issuance of a Notice of Civil Infraction. Service of a Notice of Civil Infraction shall be by either personal service or by certified mail, return receipt requested. (2) Contents of the Notice of Civil Infraction. The Notice of Civil Infraction shall contain the following: i. A statement that the notice represents a determination that a civil infraction has been committed by the affected employer or newly-affected employer named in the notice and that the determination is final unless contested as provided in this chapter. ii. A statement that a civil infraction is a non-criminal offense for which imprisonment may not be imposed as a sanction. iii. A statement identifying the party issued the Notice of Civil Infraction. iv. A statement of the specific civil infraction for which the notice was issued. v. A statement of the moneta~ penalty established for the civil infraction. vi. A statement identifying the procedure to contest the Notice of Civil Infraction. 11 vii. A statement that a party must respond to a Notice of Civil Infraction within 15 days of the date the Notice of Civil Infraction was received. viii. A statement that failure to respond to the Notice of Civil Infraction as directed in this chapter will result in a default jud*M-nent for the identified monetary penalty. being entered against the party, named in the Notice of Civil Infraction. (3) Failure to Respond. A Notice of Civil Infraction represents a determination that a Civil Infraction has been committed. The determination is final unless contested as provided in this chapter. (4) Hearing on a Civil Infraction. i. An affected employer or newly- affected employer issued a Notice of Civil Infraction may request a hearing on the infraction by submitting a written request for a hearing to the Presiding Officer not later than fifteen (15) days from the date the Notice of Civil Infraction was received. ii. The Presiding Officer shall set a meeting between the affected employer or newly-affected employer and the Presiding Officer not later than fifteen (15) days after the notice requesting a hearing is mailed. At such meeting, the affected employer or newly- affected employer will explain its view of the alleged Infraction and the Presiding Officer will explain Kitsap Transit's view of the matter. iii. If the affected employer or ne~vly-affected employer to whom a Notice of Civil Infraction is issued is found to have committed the infraction, the Presiding Officer shall, within ten (10) days, serve upon the affected employer a written determination of the reason(s) for the decision and information about appeal procedures. iv. The written findings of the Presiding Officer shall be considered an initial order. If the affected employer does not appeal as provided for in this chapter, the initial order shall become the final order. (1) Venue. The affected employer shall select to appeal the initial order of the Presiding Officer in either the City of Bremerton District Court or through the administrative process set forth in Section 10.40.130(3) of this chapter. (2) Time. An appeal of a determination that an affected employer or newly-affected employer committed a civil infraction under this chapter shall be commenced by filing a written notice of appeal within thirty. (30) days of the issuance of the Presiding Officer's written findings. (3) Administrative Process. i. Kitsap Transit shall hire and pay for a hearing examiner for the sole purpose of hearing appeals brought pursuant to this chapter. ii. Appeals shall be heard within sixty (60) days of the date the notice of appeal is received by the Presiding Officer, however no appeal shall be set less than fifteen (15) days after notice of the date for the appeal is mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the party, seeking review. iii. The Hearing Examiner will evaluate employers' appeals of administrative decisions by determining if the decisions were consistent with this chapter, the Washin~on State CTR Law and the CTR Task Force Guidelines. Appeals may be ~anted by the CTR Hearing Examiner if the employer can show the violations for which the penalties were imposed occurred for the reasons beyond the control of the employer, or the penalties were imposed for the failure of the employer to revise its CTR Program as directed bv Kitsap Transit and the employer can demonstrate that measures Kitsap Transit directed the employer to incorporate in its CTR Program are unlikely to reduce the proportion of SOV commute trips and/or VIvlT per employee. iv. The decision of the hearing examiner shall be a final administrative decision in the matter. 10.40.130 APPEALS. (a) Hearing an Appeal AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Ordinance Number ~-~ ~ ,¢ C~ , relating to use of the right of way. Ordinance Number ~ ~ ~ I , relating to setting fees for Right-of-Way Use permits. FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: May ~ 1999 PW&U Engineenng Div. Randy Witt, City Enmneer May 11, 1999 ~'~o (BMC 11.02, ll.12and 17.24) ! ,,,., 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back j~j~q~.sar~ ~ 3. EXHIBITS Director, Public Works/Utilities ?~:f')~~ ~, ~ z4/o ~' Riv_ht of Wav Use C~t,. Attorney ~ (,.Z~ ,~-¢~'~oz~_c~-~-~and ~ts summary. City Treasurer "~ .~ ._k-2---~<. 2. Ordinance ~ ~ -~-~ , Setting Fees and Citv Clerk ~k'~x_'Nh. C2~W~-I~'- --' Charges for Right-of-Way Use Permits. He~rd at City Council Study Session of May 3, 1999. I 3. Summary of the major features of the Right- of-Way Use Ordinance. ENDORSEMENT "( INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRE~I~DENT~~MITI'Ak: . ;4.~-.' -~ ...g / / 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: City staff have prepared a new Right-of-Way Use Ordinance that combines, simplifies and addresses conflicts in three existing chapters of the Bremerton Municipal Codes that currently regulate use of the right-of-way. The new Right-of-Way Use Ordinance repeals existing BMC Chapters 11.02, Standard Specifications for Public Wor~. 11.12, Breaking Pavement, and 11.24, Construction on Public Property; and replaces them with a new Chapter 11.02, Right-of-Wa~v Use, and provides a new name for Title 11, Streets and Rights-of-Way. A Summary Ordinance for publication and an ordinance establishing fees and charges for the new Right-of-Way Use Permits have also been prepared. Attached is a summary of the major features of the Rift-of-Way Use Ordinance. Staff recommends passage of the ordinances. B. 1) Motion to pa% Ordinance N4m~er second reading. 2) Motion to pass Ordinance Number Permits upon second reading. ~d its su~a~ related to use of the right of way, upon related to seaing tees ~d ch~ges t~r ~t-otZWay Use 9. ~SPONS~LE OFFICI,~: City Engineer E~ORCEMENT OFFICIO: N/A E~TION DATE: ~VIEW DATE: PULLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE TABLED 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DAT~: I l l. AGENDA BILL NO:~q"' 0 8~ 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: City staff will continue to process Right-of-Way Use Permits using the existing ordinances. existing process and inefficiencies created by use of that process will continue. The confusion in the 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: No change. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. --~50 AN ORDINANCE relating to the uses of the Right-of-Way and repealing Chapter 11.02 of the Bremerton Municipal Code and replacing it with a new chapter entitled Right-of-Way Use and repealing Chapters 11.12 and 17.24 of the Bremerton Municipal Code in their entirety and changing the name of Title 11 of the Bremerton Municipal Code to read Streets and Rights-of-Way. Section 1. Repeal and Replace. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 11.02 Standard Specifications for Public Works is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced with the following: Chapter 11.02 RIGHT-OF-WAY USE Chapter 11.02, Right-of-Way Use, contains the following sections in its entirety; Purpose, Territorial application, Construction -Intent, Definitions, Powers of the Director, Permit required, Additional permits, Right-of-way use permits, Applications and processing of permits, Renewal of permits, Permit exception, Permit fees and charges, Specifications, Notice of intent to start work, Inspections, Completion of work, Shared use of excavations, Underground utility location required, Warning and safety devices, Temporary parking restriction notification, Materials testing, Performance and warranty deposits, Insurance, Hold harmless, Correction and discontinuance of unsafe, nonconforming, or unauthorized conditions, Debris and spilled loads in the right-of-way, Nuisance in the right-of-way, Revocation of permits, Stop Work Orders, Adoption of policies, Appeals, and Violation - Penalty. Section 2. Repeal. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 11.12 Breaking Pavement is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 3. Repeal. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 17.24 Construction on Public Property is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 4. Repeal and replace. The name of the Bremerton Municipal Code Title 11 Streets and Sidewalks is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced with the name Streets and Rights-of-Way to more accurately reflect the content of this Title. Section 5. Effective date. The ordinance shall become effective ten days after passage and publication. SUMMARY OF RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page I Approved by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ day of 1999, and Passed by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ ,1999. day The full text of this ordinance is available in the office of the City Clerk, 239 Fourth Street, Bremerton, Washington 98337. SUMMARY OF RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 2 ORDINANCE NO. ~-~C AN ORDINANCE relating to the uses of the Right-of-Way and repealing Chapter 11.02 of the Bremerton Municipal Code and replacing it with a new chapter entitled Right-of-Way Use and repealing Chapters 11.12 and 17.24 of the Bremerton Municipal Code in their entirety and changing the name of Title 11 of the Bremerton Municipal Code to read Streets and Rights-of-Way. Whereas, Bremerton has several existing ordinances regarding regulation of the right- of-way, and; Whereas, a comprehensive Right-of-Way Use ordinance which consolidates and updates existing ordinances is desirable; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Repeal and Replace. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 11.02 Standard Specifications for Pubfic Works is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced with the following: Chapter 11.02 RIGHT-OF-WAY USE Sections: 11.02.010 11.02.020 11.02.030 11.02.040 11.02.050 11.02.060 11.02.070 11.02.080 11.02.090 11.02.100 11.02.110 11.02.120 11.02.130 11.02.140 11.02.150 11.02.160 11.02.170 11.02.180 11.02.190 11.02.200 Purpose. Territorial application. Construction - Intent. Definitions. Powers of the Director. Permit required. Additional permits. Right-of-way use permits. Applications and processing of permits. Renewal of permits. Permit exception. Permit fees and charges. Specifications. Notice of intent to start work. Inspections. Completion of work. Shared use of excavations. Underground utility location required. Warning and safety devices. Temporary parking restriction notification RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 1 1.02.210 1 .O2.220 1.02.230 1.02.240 1.02.250 11 .O2.26O 11.02.270 11.02.280 11.02.29O 11.02.300 11.02.310 11.02.320 Materials testing. Performance and warranty deposits. Insurance. Hold harmless. Correction and discontinuance of unsafe, nonconforming, or unauthorized conditions. Debris and spilled loads in the right-of-way. Nuisance in the right-of-way Revocation of permits. Stop Work Orders Adoption of policies. Appeals. Violation - Penalty. 11.02.010 Purpose. It is the purpose of this chapter to provide for the issuance of right-of-way use permits in order to regulate activities within the rights-of-way in the City of Bremerton in the interest of public health, safety and welfare; and to provide for the fees, charges, performance and warranty deposits, warranties, and procedures required to administer the permit process. 11.02.020 Territorial application. This chapter and the procedures adopted hereunder shall be in effect throughout the City of Bremerton. 11.02.030 Construction - Intent. A. This chapter is enacted to protect and preserve the public health, safety and welfare. Its provisions shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of these purposes. B. It is expressly the purpose of this chapter and any procedures adopted hereunder to provide for and promote the health, safety and welfare of the general public, and not to create or otherwise establish or designate any particular class or group of persons who will or should be especially protected or benefited by the terms of this chapter or any procedures adopted hereunder. C. It is the specific intent of this chapter and any procedures adopted hereunder to place the obligation of complying with the requirements of this chapter upon the permittee, and no provision is intended to impose any duty upon the City of Bremerton, or any of its officers, employees or agents. Nothing contained in this chapter or any procedures adopted hereunder is intended to be or shall be construed to create or form the basis for liability on the part of the City of Bremerton, or its officers, employees or agents, for any injury or damage resulting from the failure of the permittee to comply with the provisions hereof, or by reason or in consequence of any act or omission in connection with the implementation or enforcement of this chapter or any procedures adopted hereunder by the City of Bremerton, its officers, employees or agents. RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 2 11.02.040 Definitions. The following words and phrases when used in this chapter shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: A. "Citation and notice" means a written document initiating a proceeding pursuant to Chapter 1.12 BMC. B. "City inspector" means the designated employee(s) of the Department assigned to inspecting the permitted work. C. "City" means the City of Bremerton, Washington. D. "Complaint" means a written document initiating a procedure pursuant to Chapter 1.12 BMC. E. "Department" means the Public Works and Utilities Department or other Department designated by the Mayor. F. "Director" means the Director of Public Works and Utilities or his/her designated representative. G. "Emergency" means a condition of imminent danger to the health, safety, and welfare of property or persons located within the City including, but not limited to, damage to persons or property from natural or manmade consequences, such as storms. earthquakes, riots or wars. H. "Enforcement Officer" means the Director or his/her designated representative. I. "Engineering Division" means the Engineering Division of the Department. J. "Franchised utilities" means utilities that have City approval to use City rights-of-way for the purpose of providing their services within or beyond the City, whether by written franchise granted by the City, State tariff or other similar City authoriaztion. K. "Notice of violation" means a document mailed to a permittee or unauthorized user and posted at the site of a nonconforming or unsafe condition. L. "Oral directive" means a directive given orally by City personnel designated by the Director to correct or discontinue a specific condition. M. "Permit" means a document issued by the City granting permission to engage in an activity not allowed without a permit. N. "Permit Center" means the location for applying for permits. O. "Permittee" means the person so designated on the permit application, or designee. P. "Person" means and includes corporations, companies, associations, joint stock RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 3 companies or associations, firms, partnerships, limited liability companies and individuals and includes their lessors, trustees and receivers. Q. "Private use" means use of the public right-of-way for the benefit of a person, partnership, group, organization, company, or corporation, other than as a thoroughfare for any type of vehicles, pedestrians or equestrians. R. "Policy" means a policy adopted by the Director to implement this chapter, or to carry out other responsibilities as may be required by this chapter or by other codes, ordinances, or resolutions of the City or other agencies. S. "Revocation" means the cancellation of a permit. T. "Right-of-way" means all public streets and property granted or reserved for, or dedicated to, public use for street purposes, together with public property granted or reserved for, or dedicated to, public use for walkways, sidewalks, bikeways, parking, and horse trails, whether improved or unimproved, including the air rights, sub-surface rights and easements related thereto. U. "Stop work order" means an oral directive or a written notice posted at the site of activity that requires all work to be stopped until the City approves continuation of work. V. "Suspension" means the temporary stay of a permit. W. "Underground location service" means the underground utilities location center that will locate all underground utilities prior to an excavation. X. "Unsafe condition" means any condition which the Director determines is a hazard to health, or endangers'the safe use of the right-of-way by the public, or does or may impair or impede the operation or functioning of any portion of the right-of-way, or which may cause damage thereto. 11.02.050 Powers of the Director. The Director shall have the power to: A. Administer the provisions of this chapter including but not limited to interpreting the chapter and issuing rules and procedures necessary for its administration. B. Issue permits relating to use of the rights-of-way in accordance with this chapter. C. Administer and coordinate the enforcement of this chapter and all policies adopted hereunder relating to the use of rights-of-way. D. Advise the City Council, Mayor and other City Departments on matters relating to use of the rights-of-way. E. Carry out such other responsibilities as required by this chapter or other codes, RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 4 ordinances, policies or procedures of the City. F. Adjust the amount of fees required by this chapter to be proportional to any increased scope of work for which the permit is required. G. Request the assistance of other City Departments to administer and enforce this chapter. H. Assign the responsibility for interpretation, application and enforcement of specified procedures to Department staff. 11.02.060 Permit required. A. It is unlawful for anyone to make private use of any public right-of-way without first having obtained a right-of-way use permit issued by the City or to use any right-of-way without complying with all the provisions of such right-of-way use permit issued by the City. B. The City does not waive its right to use the right-of-way by issuance of any permit. 11.02.070 Additional permits. Additional permits for any use of the right-of-way may be required by other City codes. 11.02.080 Right-of-way use permits. The following types of right-of-way use permits are established: A. Type A- Short-Term Use. 1, Type A permits may be issued for use of right-of-way for up to four weeks for purposes which do not involve the physical disturbance of the right-of-way. 2. This type of use may involve disruption of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and may require inspections, cleanup and traffic control. For periods longer than four weeks these uses will be considered Type C, long-term use. 3. Type A permits include but are not limited to the following: a. Temporary street and sidewalk closures. b. Temporary blockage of streets and sidewalks, for uses such as dumpsters and scaffolding. B. Type B- Disturbance of the Right-of-Way. 1. Type B permits may be issued for activities that alter the appearance of or disturb the surface, sub-surface of the right-of-way on a temporary or permanent basis. Type B permits are also required for the initial construction of improvements within rights-of-way and private streets required to conform to City standards. Type B RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 5 permits may be issued for up to 120 days. 2. Type B permits include but are not limited to construction activities associated with; a. Boring, jacking or pushing; b. Construction adjacent to the right-of-way that may physically impact the right-of- way; c. Culverts; d. Curb cuts, handicap ramps and driveway approaches; e. Curbs, gutters and sidewalks; f. Drainage facilities; g. Installation of landscaping; h. Painting; i. Paving; j. Street trenching; k. Utility installation. C. Type C- Long-Term Use. !. Type C permits may be issued for right-of-way use for activities for extended periods of time which will not further physically disturb the right-of-way once in place. This may include structures, facilities, and uses that involve capital expenditures and a long-term commitment of use. Type C permits may be issued for a term of up to five years. 2. A Type B permit may be required for construction activities in conjunction with the Type C use. 3. Type C permits include but are not limited to: a. Accessory business activity such as: parking, displays, and signage; b. Air rights; c. Bus shelters/stops; d. Construction site/haul roads; e. Fences; RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 6 f. Recycle receptacles, dumpsters and facilities; g. Special and unique structures such as; fountains, clocks, flagpoles, benches, kiosks, banners, street furniture, decorations etc.; h. Underground rights; i. Utility facilities; j. Waste facilities. Utility facilities placed in the right-of-way under the authority of a franchised utility as defined in this chapter are exempt from the requirement to obtain a Type C permit. 5. Type A uses that exceed four weeks duration will be treated as Type C uses. Upon termination of a Type C permit, for which the permittee does not obtain a new permit, any improvements constructed in the right-of-way must be improved by the permittee and the area restored to its original condition or better. D. Type D-Franchised Utility Routine Maintenance Permit. Type D permits may be issued for franchised utilities as defined in this chapter to perform routine maintenance on existing overhead lines and for entry into existing underground facilities. The permit will be valid for this work within the city boundaries. Type D permits may be issued for up to one year. 2. Type D permits will not involve disturbance of the right-of-way. Type D permits may be revoked if the permittee does not adequately and consistently comply with the permit conditions or requirements of this chapter. In the event that the Type D permit is revoked, the permittee must obtain a Type A permit for each work site. E. Assignment of permit. Permits can not be assigned or transferred, subleased or used for any purpose not specified in the permit without prior written permission of the City. Any attempt to assign or transfer an interest in a permit shall be cause for immediate termination. 11.02.090 Applications and processing of permits. A. To obtain a right-of-way use permit the applicant shall file an application with the Department. B. Every application shall include the following information appropriate to the proposed use: 1. A scale drawing showing the location of the proposed right of way use, the location RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 7 of the existing and proposed improvements, surface features such as curbs and gutters, underground features such as the location of utilities, and the limits of the work area; 2. A description of the use; 3. The planned duration of the use; 4. Applicant contact information; 5. All other information which may be required as specified in policies adopted hereunder; 6. An estimate of construction costs; and 7. Payment of the required fees. C. The Director shall examine each application submitted for review and approval to determine if adequate information is provided and if it complies with the applicable provisions of this chapter and procedures adopted hereunder. Other departments that have authority over the proposed use activity will review and recommend approval or disapproval of the application. If the Director finds that the application conforms to the requirements of this chapter, he may approve the permit, and may impose such conditions thereon as are reasonably necessary to protect the public health, welfare and safety, to mitigate any impacts resulting from the use and to coordinate activities or address potential conflicts with future improvements in the area. D. All applications for permits must be submitted 10 working days or more prior to the start of work or as required to obtain other City permits. E. Upon submittal of a completed application the applicant shall provide the application fee per the fee schedule adopted by the City. Permittees who have an approved monthly billing status shall be billed accordingly. 11.02.100 Renewal of permits. Each Type A and Type B permit shall be of the duration specified on the permit and may be renewed without payment of an additional fee for up to the length of the original permit. at the discretion of the Director. If continued use of the right-of-way is desired by the permittee after expiration of a renewed permit, he/she must apply for a new permit. Type C and D permits can not be renewed and the permittee must apply for and receive a new permit prior to expiration or remove the permitted improvements. 11.02.110 Permit exception. A. A right-of-way use permit shall not be required of franchised utilities when responding to emergencies that require disturbance of the right-of-way typical of a Type B permit provided, that the Department shall be notified by the responding utility or contractor RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 8 verbally or in writing, as soon as practicable following onset of an emergency. Nothing herein shall relieve a responding utility or contractor from the requirement to apply for a right-of-way use permit as provided in this chapter within 48 hours after beginning emergency work in the right-of-way. B. Permits shall not be required for routine maintenance and construction work performed by the City. C. Permits are not required for City Public Works and Utility Department construction projects. D. Permits are not required for the ordinary maintenance of landscaping in the right-of- way. Blockage of the right-of-way associated with ordinary maintenance of landscaping requires the appropriate permit. 11.02.120 Permit fees and charges. A. The fee for each permit shall be set forth in a fee schedule to be adopted by the City Council. Fees and charges adopted pursuant to this section may be increased or decreased by the Council on the Mayor's recommendation in accordance with changes in the costs incurred by the City. B. Fees and charges. 1. Type A, Short-Term Use Permit. Fees for Type A permits shall be established for the following categories: a. Regular. A fee shall be charged for each regular Type A Permit accepted for processing. This fee shall cover the administrative cost of the permit. 2. Type B, Disturbance of Right-of-Way Permit. Fees for Type B Permits shall be established for the following categories: a. Sidewalk repairs. Repair of existing sidewalks, not associated with other development activity. Driveway approach, transverse street patches and spot patches. A driveway approach, transverse street patch or spot patches or other localized work activities not exceeding more than 250 square feet of disturbed area. Longitudinal street patches and new curb and sidewalk installation. Longitudinal street patch or construction of new curb gutter and sidewalk on one side of a street, street lighting, or other work activities which generally progress longitudinally down a street. d. New street construction. Construction of a new street, extension of an existing RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 9 street, construction of a private street, frontage improvements on an existing street and construction of a new pavement surface. e. Water and sewer mains and laterals. Water and sewer mains and laterals permitted in accordance with Chapter 15. The Director will assign Type B permit work to the most appropriate category, or will establish a fixed fee or charge for City costs at an hourly rate for special work not covered in these categories. 3. Type C, Long Term Use Permit. Fees for Type C Long Term Use Permits shall include the following categories: a. Application and processing. A non-refundable application and processing fee will be charged for each Type C Permit application accepted for processing. b. Use Fee. A use fee will be established which incorporates the value of the land used and the length of the use. c. The Director may modify or wave fees for Type C permits for government agencies or improvements which provide a benefit to the City. 4. Type D, Franchised Utility Routine Maintenance Permit. a. Regular. A fee shall be charged for each regular Type D Permit accepted for processing. This fee shall cover the administrative cost of the permit. 5. Plan Reviews. A fee will be established for reviewing plans for the construction of improvements of the right-of-way including new curbs and gutters, sidewalks, new streets, street lighting and other activities designated by the Director. The Plan Review fee allows for two reviews. 6. Additional work. A fee will be established for activities beyond normal and customary services. These may include, but not be limited to; repeated plan reviews and site inspections, special work, response to citizen complaints, inspection of re-worked areas, calls for inspection when the site is not ready and construction site emergencies. C. Waiver of fees for City initiated projects. Utilities in the right-of-way under the authority of a franchise agreement, State Tariff or other similar City authorization which must apply for permits because of City-initiated construction projects, may be granted a waiver of normal permit fees by the Director. This RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 10 provision only applies to work that would not otherwise have been done by the utility. D. Exemption from fees for City projects. City projects are exempt from fees for right-of-way use permits. 11.02.130 Specifications. All work to be performed under any permit issued under this chapter shall conform to all other City codes, the current development and construction standards of the Department and all other standards used by the City in the administration of this chapter. Such standards include, but are not limited to, the current version of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices as amended or superceded, published by the Federal Highway Administration and the Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction as amended or superceded, published by the Washington State Department of Transportation and the American Public Works Association. 11.02.140 Notice of intent to start work. Permittee shall provide a minimum of one working day notice of the intent to start work in the right-of-way. 11.02.150 Inspections. As a condition of issuance of any permit or authorization that requires approval of the Department, each applicant shall consent to inspections by the Department or any other appropriate City representative. Permittee shall provide a minimum of one working day notice prior to a requested or required inspection. 11.02.160 Completion of Work. At completion of the work, the permittee shall: A. Provide notice that the work is complete and request a final inspection. B. Provide record drawings of the improvements made in the right-of-way when required. Record drawings of improvements to be maintained by the City shall meet the format requirements of the City. All record drawings shall show at a minimum the actual location, depth and profile of the improvements in the right-of-way. Record drawings acceptable to the Department must be provided prior to release of the Performance Deposit. 11.02.170 Shared use of excavations. If at any time, or from time to time, a utility company submits a permit request to excavate for installation of its facilities, the City may request in writing that such utility company provide an opportunity to install City facilities within the excavation; provided, that: A. Such joint use shall not unreasonably delay the work of the utility company; and RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 11 B. Such joint use shall be arranged and accomplished on terms and conditions satisfactory to both parties and in accordance with the applicable codes, rules and regulations. C. To the extent reasonably possible, the utility company shall, at the direction of the City, cooperate with the City and provide other private utility companies with the opportunity to utilize joint or shared excavations in order to minimize disruption and damage to the right-of-way as well as to minimize traffic-related impacts. 11.02.180 Underground utility location required. All permittees shall, before commencing any construction in City right-of-way, comply with all requirements of Chapter 19.122 RCW, the one number Iocator service. 11.02.190 Warning and safety devices. A. The permittee is responsible for the safety of the work area and shall provide and maintain warning lights, safety devices, signs and barricades shall be provided by the permittee on all rights-of-way when at any time there might be an obstruction or hazard to vehicular or pedestrian traffic in accordance with the Specifications. Warning and safety devices may be removed when the work for which the right-of-way use permit has been granted is complete and the right-of-way restored to the conditions directed by the Department. B. The Director may require an applicant to submit a traffic plan showing the proposed shoulder closures, lane closures, detour routing, parking removal and location and type of warning lights, safety devices, signs and barricades intended to protect vehicular or pedestrian traffic at the site for which the right-of-way use permit is requested. If a traffic plan is required, no right-of-way use permit will be issued until the traffic plan is approved. C. The Director may require that the permittee provide a person certified as a Washington State Traffic Control Flagger be on site during construction activities to monitor the setup and maintenance of the warning and safety devices. D. On right-of-way use permits that require a flagger for the purpose of traffic control during the construction, the flagger will be either a propedy attired and certified Washington State Traffic Control Flagger, or an off-duty law enforcement officer. E. All decisions of the City inspector shall be final in all matters pertaining to the number, type, location, installation, and maintenance of warning and safety devices in the public right-of-way during any actual work or activity for which a duly authorized right-of-way use permit has been issued. Lack of notice or comment by the City on the warning and safety devices does not relieve the permittee of responsibility for the safety fo the work area. 11.02.200 Temporary parking restriction notification. A. Where the Director determines that parking is a hazard to through traffic, or to the construction work or other right-of-way activity, parking may be restricted either entirely or during the time when it creates a hazard. RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 12 B. Parking restriction signs shall be placed at least 72 hours in advance of parking removal, with the start date of the "no parking" clearly shown. The area to be restricted shall be clearly marked with Type I barricades carrying signs that give the specific period (dates and times) that the area is to be free of vehicles. Signs shall be large enough to be easily read from a distance of 50 feet and shall advise where impounded vehicles will be stored or indicate a 24-hour telephone number for obtaining that information. C. The permittee shall be responsible for placement and maintenance of the signs. Placement of the signs shall be as approved by the Director. The permittee shall notify the City by telephone or otherwise when the signs are placed. No towing of vehicles shall occur unless the signs are placed at least 72 hours prior to the beginning of the restricted parking. D. All signs must be approved by the Director prior to placement, and must conform generally to the following wording: WARNING! TOW AWAY ZONE NO PARKING FROM: DATE & TIME TO: DATE & TIME FOR CONSTRUCTION WORK ALL VEHICLES REMAINING WILL BE TOWED (IMPOUND INFORMATION) 11.02.210 Material testing. Material tests may be ordered by the Director to assure conformity with the specifications. Material tests may include, but are not limited to; gradation analysis, compaction testing, concrete strength, asphalt content analysis and pipe strength. When ordered by the Director, the permittee shall have the material test performed by a certified laboratory and the results provided to the City. Location and timing of material testing shall be coordinated with the Director. 11.02.220 Performance and warranty deposits. A. Performance Deposit. A performance deposit may be required to ensure conformance with the plans, specifications, standards, permit requirements, development guidelines and other requirements. The minimum amount of the performance deposit shall be 150% of the estimated value of the work or the estimated cost to repair damage to existing RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 13 improvements as determined by the Director. Performance deposits shall not be released until a warranty deposit, if required, is received. B. Warranty Deposit. A warranty deposit may be required to warrant the workmanship and material of constructed improvements in the right-of-way for a period of two years. The minimum amount of the warranty deposit shall be 20% of the value of the actual construction costs. C. Deposit Instruments. The deposit instrument for the performance or warranty deposit shall be cash, a non-revocable letter of credit, an assignment of funds, bond or other readily accessible source of funds approved by the City Risk Manager. The deposit instruments shall be on a form acceptable to the City Risk Manager. Any issuer of a deposit instrument shall pay invoices presented by the City pursuant to this chapter within 45 days. A bond will be accepted only for amounts over $1,000.00 or when State Law requires a bond. Interest on deposited funds will accrue to the benefit of the depositor, except that any interest earned on a cash deposit will be retained by the City for account administration. D. Notice of incomplete or defective work. If the permitted work is determined to be incomplete or defective, damage of existing improvements is observed, a defect is observed during the warranty period or other activities which do not comply with the permit and require corrective action by the permittee as determined by the Director, the Director shall notify the applicant in writing prior to applying proceeds of the deposit to correct the work. The notice must state: 1. The work that must be done or the improvement that must be made to comply with the requirements of the permit or deposit; and 2. The amount of time that the applicant has to commence and complete the required work or improvements; and That, if the work or improvements are not commenced and completed within the time specified, the City will use the proceeds of the deposit to have the required work or improvements completed. E. Default on deposit. If the work or improvements covered by the deposit are not completed within the time specified in the notice given under this chapter, the City shall obtain the proceeds of the deposit and do the work or make the improvements covered by the deposit. The City may either have employees of the City do the work or make the improvements or have a contractor do the work or make the improvements. If at any time the Director determines that actions or inaction associated with any permit work has created an emergency situation endangering the public health, safety, or welfare, creating a potential liability for the City, or endangering City streets, utilities, or property; and if the nature or timing of such an emergency RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 14 precludes the notification of applicants as provided in this chapter while still minimizing or avoiding the effects of the emergency, the City may use the deposit to cover costs incurred by the City to correct the emergency situation. The City may either have employees of the City do the work or make the improvements, or have a contractor do the work or make the improvements. If the City uses the deposit as provided by this section, the applicant shall be notified in writing within four working days of the commencement of emergency work. The notice must state the work that was completed and the nature or timing of the emergency that necessitated the use of the deposit without prior notification. The permittee is responsible for all costs incurred by the City in doing the work and making the improvements covered by the deposit. The City shall release or refund any proceeds of a deposit remaining after subtracting all costs for doing the work covered by the deposit. The permittee shall reimburse the City for any amount expended by the City that exceeds the deposit. In each case where the City uses any of the proceeds of the deposit, it shall, within 30 days, provide the owner of the permit an itemized statement of all proceeds and funds used. 11.02.230 Insurance. A. General Provision. Before any permit is granted to any person, firm or corporation, for the work within or use of the right-of-way, such person, firm or corporation shall secure and deliver to the City and file with the City Engineer a copy of comprehensive general liability insurance in the sum of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) for bodily damage and property. The City shall be listed as an additional insured on the policy. Alternate methods of meeting these insurance requirements must be approved by the City Risk Manager. B. Limited Exception. A homeowner or tenant who repairs the sidewalk fronting his/her residence and who performs all the labor him/herself shall not be required to obtain insurance as set forth in subsection A. Prior to the issuance of such a permit, the homeowner or tenant shall be required to provide proof of homeowners or renters insurance in the amount of at least $100,000.00 for bodily damage and property damage. 11.02.240 Hold harmless. As a condition to the issuance of any permit under this chapter, the permittee shall agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees and agents, for any and all suits, claims or liabilities caused by, or arising out of any work or use authorized by any such permit. 11.02.250 Correction and discontinuance of unsafe, nonconforming, or unauthorized conditions. A. Whenever the Director determines that any condition on any right-of-way is in violation of, or any right-of"way is being used contrary to any provision of this chapter or policies RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 15 adopted hereunder or other applicable codes or standards, or without a right-of-way use permit, the Director may order the correction or discontinuance of such condition or any activity causing such condition. B The Director is authorized to use any or all of the following methods in ordering correction or discontinuance of any such conditions or activities as the Director determines appropriate: 1. Serving of oral directives to the permittee or other responsible person requesting immediate correction or discontinuance of the specified condition; Service of a written notice of violation, ordering correction or discontinuance of a specific condition or activity within a reasonable period as the Director may determine; 3. Issuance of an order to immediately stop work until authorization is received from the City to proceed with such work; 4. Revocation or suspension of previously granted permits pursuant to this chapter; 5. Issuance of a citation upon the permittee or other responsible person who is in violation of this chapter; 6. Seek to impose penalties pursuant to BMC Chapter 1.12. 11.02.260 Debris and spilled loads in the right-of-way. A. The owner or operator of any vehicle that has spilled, dropped, dumped or in any manner whatsoever deposited any matter upon the right-of-way shall cause the right-of- way to be cleaned using suitable methods to the satisfaction of the Department. Upon failure to do so the Department may cause to have cleaned the right-of-way and the costs thereof shall be charged to the person or persons so responsible. The Department has the authority to designate haul routes and time of day for operations involving hauling over public right-of-way. B. Earth-hauling contractors, builders, or anyone else utilizing vehicles upon rights-of-way shall provide persons or equipment to keep the right-of-way clean at all times to the satisfaction of the Department. Upon failure to do so, the Department may issue an immediate stop work order, revoke City permits, and the responsible person or persons may be directed to immediately clean the right-of-way to the satisfaction of the Department. Upon failure to do so the Department may cause to have cleaned the right-of-way and charge the costs thereof to the person or persons so responsible. 11.02.270 Nuisance in the right-of-way. A. Any object or thing which occupies any right-of-way without the legal authorization required by this chapter is declared a nuisance. The Department may attach a notice to any such object or thing stating that if it is not removed from the right-of-way within 24 RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 16 hours of the date and time stated on the notice, the object or thing may be taken into custody and stored at the owner's expense. The notice shall provide an address and phone number where additional information may be obtained. If the object or thing is a hazard to public safety, it may be removed summarily by the City. Notice of such removal shall be thereafter given to the owner, if known. B. All expenses incurred by the City in abating the nuisance condition or any portion thereof, or to repair any damage to the right-of-way, shall constitute a civil debt owing to the City jointly and severally by such persons who have been given notice or who own the object or thing or placed it in the right-of-way, which debt shall be collectable in the same manner as any other civil debt. 11.02.280 Revocation of permits. A. The Director may revoke any permit issued under this chapter whenever in the Director's sole determination: 1. The work or activity does not proceed in accordance with the plans as approved, or conditions of approval, or is not in compliance with the requirements of this chapter or procedures, or other City ordinances, state law or federal law; 2. The City has been denied access to investigate and perform inspection; 3. The permittee has made a misrepresentation of a material fact in applying for a permit; 4. The progress or condition of the approved work or activity indicates that it is or will be inadequate to protect the public and adjoining property, the street or utilities in the street, or any excavation or fill endangers or will endanger the public, the adjoining property, street or utilities in the street. B. Upon suspension or revocation of a permit, all use of the right-of-way shall cease, except as authorized or directed by the Director. C~ Notice of revocation. Notice of revocation shall be by letter. D. Appeal of revocation. A revocation may be appealed pursuant to this chapter. 11.02.290 Stop work orders. Work in the right-of-way may be suspended by the issuance of an oral or written stop work order by the City inspector. 11.02.300 Adoption of policies. The Director may prepare and adopt policies and procedures for the purpose of implementing this chapter. Such policies do not require approval by the City Council. RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 17 11.02.310 Appeals. An applicant whose application has been denied or a permittee whose permit has been revoked pursuant to this chapter must first request the Director to reconsider or reverse the decision. If the Director denies the request, the applicant or permittee may appeal the decision to the City Hearing Examiner pursuant to BMC 2.62.045. 11.02.320 Violation - Penalty. A. Failure to comply with any provision of this chapter is declared unlawful, and a violation. B. Any violation of this chapter may be enforced pursuant to BMC Chapter 1.12. For a violation to constitute criminal contact, the violation must be intentional. Section 2. Repeal. Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 11.12, Breaking Pavement is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 3. Repeal. Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 17.24, Construction on Pubfic Property is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 4. Repeal. The name of Bremerton Municipal Code, Title 11, Streets and Sidewalks is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced with the name Streets and Rights- of-Way. Section 5. Effective date. This ordinance shall become effective ten days after passage and publication as provided. of APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this , 1999. day of PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this , 1999. day MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President APPROVED this day of ,1999. ATTEST: LYNN HORTON, Mayor KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk RIGHT OF WAY USE ORDINANCE Page 18 ORDINANCE NO. z~ ~ ~ I AN ORDINANCE setting fees and charges for Right-of-Way Use Permits. Whereas, Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 11.02, requires that a fee schedule be adopted by the City Council for fees and changes associated with Right-of-Way Use Permits, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Establishment. PURPOSE. This ordinance establishes fees and charges for Right-of-Way Use Permits. I. RIGHT-OF-WAY USE PERMITS FEES AND CHARGES. The following fees are established for Right-of-Way Use Permits: PERMIT TYPE CATEGORY FEE TYPE A A. Regular $65.00 (Short Term Use) TYPE B A. Sidewalk Repairs $15.00 (Disturbance of ROW) B. Driveway, Transverse Street $65.00 Patch & Spot Patches C. New Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Longitudinal Street Patch $1.00/Ft with a $100.00 min. D. New Street $3.00/Ft with a $300.00 min. E. Water & Sewer Mains & Laterals ROW Permit $15.00 1 TYPE C (Long Term Use) TYPE D (Franchised Utility Routine Maintenance) PLAN REVIEWS ADDITIONAL WORK A. Application & Processing B. Use 1. Longer than 1 year 2. Shorter than 1 year $100.00 1/10 adjoining land value set in the County Assessor's records per square foot of impacted ROW annually with a $100.00 min. 1/50 adjoining land value set in the County Assessor's records per square foot of impacted ROW monthly with a $100.00 min. A. Regular $100.00 $0.10/Ft of improvement with $100.00 minimum $40.00 per hour plus equipment charges Ii. ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT The fees set forth in the ordinance shall be adjusted on February 1$~ of each year based upon the Seattle Area Consumer Price Index, for all permits for the year ended December of the preceding year unless otherwise adjusted by the City Council. The new fees will be rounded down to the nearest dollar. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective ten days after passage and publication. day of day of APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this ,1999. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this ,1999. 2 MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President APPROVED this day of ,1999. LYNN HORTON, Mayor ATTEST: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk RIGHT-OF-WAY USE ORDINANCE SUMMARY OF MAJOR FEATURES Combines three sections of the BMC that address right-of-way use into one comprehensive chapter. This will eliminate conflicts and redundancy in the existing ordinances and clarify and simplify the process to use the right-of-way. Provides for three permit categories (11.02.090). Type A Short term uses; scaffolding, dumpsters, etc. Term: 4 weeks maximum, renewable once Type B Disturbance of the right-of-way; construction of curb, gutter, sidewalks, utilities, etc. Term: 120 day maximum, renewable once Type C Long term use; accessory business activities, special and unique structures, bus shelters, etc. Term: 5 year maximum, not renewable, new permit must be issued Type D For franchised utilities routine maintenance of their existing overhead and underground facilities which do not require disturbance of the right-of-way Term: 1 year maximum Type A and B permits can be renewed one time. Type C and D permits can not be renewed (11.02.110), but must be reapplied for. All permits are approved administratively, no separate council action is required. Application requirements are clearly defined (11.02.100). Permit fees and charges; categories are clearly identified (11.02.130). The fee and charge schedule is set out in a separate ordinance with an automatic increase tied to the Seattle CPI. Performance and warranty deposit requirements and acceptable deposit instruments are clearly defined (11.02.220). Insurance requirements allow limited exception sidewalk in front of their property themselves. homeowner's insurance. for homeowners who repair the In this case we will accept their Summary of Right-of-Way Use Ordinance Page ! Business activities in the right-of-way such as parking, storage and signage will be allowed in the right-of-way under the Type C permit. However, before a Type C permit is issued, appropriate review and permits must be obtained from the Department of Economic and Community Development (ECD). Because the use of the right-of-way under a Type C permit can be revoked by the City, the permittee will need to assure that the project can meet ECD requirements without relying on the use of right-of-way. Enforcement will focus on using civil penalties rather than criminal penalties, with citations issued by Engineering staff. This is expected to be more effective and efficient. Criminal penalties will remain available if necessary. Revisions to BMC 1.12 will facilitate this change. RW:ab 99148 Summary of Right-of-Way Use Ordinance Page 2 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SIIBJECT: Ordinance No. regarding Prosecution for Violations and replacing BMC 1.12. FOR AGENDA OF: May 26, 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: Legal ORIGINATOR: Glenna Malanca, City Attorney DATE SUBMITTED: May 20, 1999 2~CLEARANCES~ (Comment on back if necessary) '~e~'na"Malanca, City Attorney 3. EXHIBITS: - Executive Sumraary - Ordinance No. Discussed at May 3, 1999 Study Session With Assistant City Attorney Rife ENDORSEMENT [] INFORNLATION [] APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESID~/,. FOR SUB~TTAL ou ciL ...~.-.- - 4. SDI~ STATF~4ENT ~ REQUIRE~NT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: An Ordinance repealing and replacing the Prosecution for Violations. This ordinance has clarified the expectations and penalties therein for violations of the Bremerton Municipal Code. Chapter 1.12 will be repealed in its entirety is~ the City Council adopts the attached Ordinance as its replacement. 8. RECO~R~ENDATION: Record Motion: Motion to Approve Ordinance on 1s~ reading: Motion to Pass Ordinance No. on 2~d reading. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICI~tL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIA/~: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED [] TABLED [] APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [] DATE: COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: (OVER) 2. C~EAR~C~ CONMit~S: 5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: None. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: CHAPTER 1.12 - 5/20/99 ~q. OF ~ mmm~mm~ OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY 229 4th Street · Bremerton, Washington 98337 · (360) 478-5345 - FAX (360) 478-516[ · E-mail: legal@ci.brernerton.x~a.us EXECUTIVE SUMMARY From: To: Re: Date: Knute Rife Council BMC Chapter 1.12 amendment proposal 11 May 1999 The purpose of this ordinance is: 3. 4. 5. To provide a more flexible and more streamlined system for enforcing the Municipal Code; To provide uniform enforcement procedures for all parts of the Municipal Code; To allow the appointment of specialized enforcement officials as needed; To expressly provide for a civil infraction procedure; To make the City's ticketing and court procedures conform to State law. Equal Opportunity Employer ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE revising the Prosecution for Violations; repealing and replacing Chapter 1.12 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: PROSECUTION OF VIOLATIONS SECTION 1. Repeal, New Chapter, Chapter 1.12 of the Bremerton Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and a new chapter adopted to read as follows: 1.12.010 TYPES OF VIOLATIONS 1. Every act, or failure to act, that is contrary to this Code shall be a Code violation. Code violations shall be civil infractions or cdminal misdemeanors and gross misdemeanors, as established by the respective Code provisions. If a Code provision so provides, a violation may be cited as either cdminai or civil at the discretion of the enforcement officer. 2. Criminal violations shall be charged by the City Prosecutor and processed in the Municipal Court pursuant to the Criminal Rules for Courts of Limited Jurisdiction (CrRLJ). 3. Civil violation cases shall be initiated either: (a) by a Notice of Infraction issued, served, and filed by either the enforcement officer or the City Prosecutor or City Attorney, or (b) by a Complaint filed by either the City Prosecutor or City Attorney. Civil violations shall be processed in the Municipal Court pursuant to RCW Chapter 7.80, so far as it is not inconsistent with this Chapter, and pursuant to the Infraction Rules for Courts of Limited Jurisdiction (IRLJ), so far as they are not inconsistent with this Chapter and with RCW Chapter 7.80. 4. Each day a violation continues shall be a separate violation and may be cited, complained of, or charged as such. 5. The Municipal Court shall have the authority to adopt such local rules it deems necessary to process cases pursuant to this Chapter. 1.12.020 PENALTIES 1. Gross Misdemeanor. Every person convicted of a gross misdemeanor shall, un[ess otherwise specified, be punished by a fine not to exceed $5,000.00 or by confinement in jail for a term not to exceed one year or by both such fine and confinement. 2. Misdemeanor. Every person convicted of a misdemeanor shall, unless otherwise specified, be punished by a fine not to exceed $1,000.00 or by confinement in jail for a term not to exceed ninety days or by both such fine and confinement. 3. Civil Infraction. A Civil infraction is punishable by a maximum penalty of $250.00 unless otherwise specified. 1.12.030 ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS 1. General authority law enforcement officers of the Bremerton Police Department are enforcement officers with respect to all provisions of this Code. 2. Additional enforcement officers may be designated by Code provision. 1.12.040 FAILURE TO APPEAR, CRIMINAL CASES If the Municipal Court issues a bench warrant pursuant to CrRLJ 2.5, the act or failure to act that caused such issuance shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable pursuant to this Chapter. 1.12.050 OTHER REMEDIES Nothing in this Chapter shall preclude the City from pursuing other forms of enforcement and relief, including civil damages, abatement, and injunction. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect ten (10) days from passage and publication. APPROVED by the City Council on the first reading this ~ day of ,1999. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this ~ day of ,1999. MIKE SHEPHERD Council President APPROVED this ~ day of ,1999. ATTEST: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk LYNN S. HORTON Mayor AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: RESOLUTION # PROPOSING THE VACATION OF FIVE CITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND SETTING A HEARING DATE OF JULY 7, 1999 2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back Dire"~i6{of-Public ~ Utilities .~erk., ~ ..2 Coun~cil ~'our~cil Operi~ionk'C'orr~nittee ' FOR AGENDA OF: May 26, 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & Utils ORIGINATOR: R. Witt, City, Engineer. DATE SUBMITTED: May 18, 1999 3. EXHIBITS: 1. Resolution ENDORSEMENT'~INFORMATION [ ] APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT F~O'R~dBMITTAL: 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council is being requested to vacate rights of way in five different locations of the City. These rights of way have been identified by City staff as unneeded for right of way pu~oses. Most of these ROWs are undeveloped with no foreseeable need for improvements. The vacations inc4ude Harlow Drive at the intersection of Kitsap Way, ~-Lafayette Avenue south of 6th St. and north of Burwell St., Terrel ~venue south of 6th St. and north of Burwell St.. and 4 6th 20"' St.. Meade Avenue between St. and Burwell St., and 6th Street between Cambrian Ave. and Wycoff Ave. The City will retain easements for all utilities in these ROWs. The hearing for these ROW vacations is proposed to be Jul ¥ 7, 1 bsa. Posting of the hearing notices and mailings to adjacent land owners will occur as required by the Bremerton Municipal Code. 8. RECOMMENDATION: City Council adopt proposed Resolutions to initiate vacation and to set a date for public hearing on Jul ¥ 7, 1999 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED 11 TABLED [] COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. APPROVED [] NOTICE OF ACTION DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [l (OVER) 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION - Continuation 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EOUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES: Staffing: Additional time to process the application. Budget: No impact Facilities/Equipment: No impact. o RESEARCH SOURCES: BMC 11.20 Street and Alley Vacation Procedure RCW 35.79 Streets - Vacation RESOLUTION NO. a~7C~5 A RESOLUTION proposing the vacation of the west triangular portion of Harlow Drive at the intersection with Kitsap Way, and that portion of Lafayette Avenue south of 6th Street and north of Burwell Street, and that portion of Terrel Avenue south of 6th Street and north of Burwell Street, and that portion of Meade Avenue between 6th Street and Burwell Street, and that portion of 6th Street between Cambrian Ave. and Wycoff Ave. and setting a hearing date for these vacations. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL THAT: 1. The City hereby proposes the vacation of the following rights-of-way within the City, one-half of each right-of-way as originally platted to each abutting property: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" 2. A public heating will be held on July 7, 1999 at 6:00 PM or later at the Bremerton City Hall, 239 Fourth Street, Bremerton, Washington to take public comment or consider written objections to the vacation. 3. If fifty percent or more of property owners abutting said right-of-way file written objections to this action prior to the time set for public hearing herein, the hearing shall be canceled and there shall be no further proceedings under this resolution. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ 1999. day of__ Mike Shepherd Council President a~I.I.VOVA ~1] 01 ~V;ItW ;l.l.¥OlaNI SY;ltlV G;tQVHS dVlN A.LINIDIA Exhibit "A" Legal Description: That portion of Harlow Drive south of Kitsap Way, situated in the southeast quarter of Section 8, Township 24 N., W.M. in Kitsap County, WA. Described as follows: A triangular portion of Harlow Drive lying south of Kitsap Way having a 130 foot leng~ah along the westerly fight-of-way pf Harlow Drive and 100 foot length along Kitsap Way right of way, lying in Kitsap County, Washington. ~.- 054 O J? I $I01040~24-1 '92 055 05J 0'71 056 07J 074 005 .TS P Exhibit "A" Legal Description: That portion of Lafayette Avenue between 6t~ Street and Burwell Street, situated in the Southeast quarter of Section 15, Township 24 N., W.M. in Kitsap Count', WA. Described as follows: That portion of Lafayette Avenue lying north of 6m Street having a 373 foot len_~h and 36 foot width and lying in the Plat of Charleston 1x Addition, recorded in vol. 4 page 57, records of Kitsap County, Washington. --'6TH. -- EUF? WELL e e e Exhibit "A" Legal Description: That portion of Tenel Avenue between 6th Street and Burwetl Street, situated in the Southeast quarter of Section 15, Township 24 N., W.M. in Kitsap Coun¢', WA. Described as follows: That portion of Terrel Avenue lying north of 6th Street having a 390 foot lengxh and 36 foot width and lying in the Plat of Charleston 1st Addition, recorded in vol. 4 page 57, records of Kitsap County, Washington. Exhibit "A" Legal Description: That portion of Meade Avenue berween 6~ Street and Burwell Street, situated in r. he Southeast quarter of Section 15, Township 24 N., W.M. in K.ksap County, WA. Described as follows: That portion of Meade Avenue lying north of 6~a Street~having a 300 foot [eh_o-dx and 36 foot width and lying in the Plat of Charleston..1st Addition, recorded in'vol. 4 page 57, records of Kitzap County, Washin~on. Exhibit "A" Legal Description: A portion of 6~' Street. situated in r. he Southeast quarter of Section 15, Township 24 N.. W.M. in Kirsap County, WA. Described as follows: .~', ~.~. T-nar portion of 6m Street lying east of Cambrian Avenue and west of venue, being 60 foot in width and lying between the Plat of Charleston Second Addition, Block 13 recorded in vol. 4, pg. 62 and the Plat of Charleston First Addition, Block 4 recorded in vol. 4, pg. 57 records of Kitsap County, AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: RESOLUTION # PROPOSING THE VACATION OF FIVE CITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND SETTING A HEARING DATE OF JIJL¥ 7, 2. CLEARA~CF,,~ (Comment on back ,-B4X~ ,t~~/~~~Uti liti e s City Attorney _C_,~. Clerk: (-'---', ,,~..ci! Ei~al & B.ud~gctfffommi~ /Council Operat~6n~ Committee 1999 FOR AGENDA OF: May 26, 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & Utiff ORIGINATOR: R. Witt, City Engineer. ~,~-~ DATE SUBMITTED: May 18, 1999 3. EXHIBITS: 1. Resolution # ~. -7 ~; {c? 2. V,c,.,,,,'~l ,~e ENDORSEMENT~'~ INFORMATION [ ] APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRES~IDENT. FQR SUBMITTAL: 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION' The City Council is being requested to vacate rights of way in five different locations of the City. These rights of way have been identified by City staff as unneeded for right of way purposes. Most of these ROWs are undeveloped with no foreseeable need for improvements. The vacations include lYh Street east of Corbet Dr., 19th Street east of N. Wycoff Ave. and west of Callow Ave., Taft Avenue between 19a St. and 20th St., an alley north of 1 yh St and south of 15a St. and bordering Ivy Green Cemetew, and Ford Avenue between Kitsap Wa), and 13th St. The City will retain easements for all utilities in these ROWs. The hearing for these ROW vacations is proposed to be July 7, 1999 Posting of the hearing notices and mailings to adjacent land owners will occur as required by the Bremerton Municipal Code. 8. RECOMMENDATION: City Council adopt proposed Resolutions to initiate vacation and to set a date for public hearing on 3u 1 y 7, 1595 PULLED Il TABLED [1 COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. APPROVED [] EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: NOTICE OF ACTION DISAPPROVED I1 AMENDED [] (OVER) RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: 1113 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION - Continuation 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: o IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES: Staffing: Additional time to process the application. Budget: No impact Facilities/Equipment: No impact. RESEARCH SOURCES: BMC 11.20 Street and Alley Vacation Procedure RCW 35.79 Streets - Vacation RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION proposing the vacations of the west portion of 13th Street east of Corbet Drive, and that portion of 19th Street east of N. Wyeoff Avenue and west of Callow Avenue, and that portion of Taft Avenue between 19th Street and 20th Street, and that portion of an Alley north of 13th and south of 15th Street and west of the Ivy Green Cemctery~ and that portion of Ford Avenue between Kitsap Way and 13th and setting a hearing date for these vacations. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL THAT: 1. The City hereby proposes the vacation of the following rights-of-way within the City, one-half of each right-of-way as originally platted to each abutting property: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" 2. A public heating will be held on July 7, 1999 at 6:00 PM or later at the Bremerton City Hall, 239 Fourth Street, Bremerton, Washington to take public comment or consider written objections to the vacation. 3. If fifty percent or more of property owners abutting said right-of-way file written objections to this action prior to the time set for public hearing herein, the hearing shall be canceled and there shall be no further proceedings under this resolution. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ 1999. day of Mike Shepherd Council President Exhibit "A" Legal Description: A portion of 13m Street. situated in the Northeast quarter of Section 15, Tow-nship 24 N., W.M. in Kitsap County, WA. Described as follows: That portion of 13th Street lying west of Corbet Drive having a 60 foot len__mt,_, being 40 foot in width and lying in the Plat of Phinney One and Half Acre Tracts, being a portion of lots 12 and 13 recorded in vol. 5, pg. 1, AFN 272795 vol. 206 pg. 313 and AFN 272796 vol. 206 pg. 314, records of Kitsap County, KiTSA? Exhibit "A' Legal Description: That portion of 19m Street situated in the southeast quarter of Section 10, Township 24 N., W.M. in Kitsap County, WA. Described as follows: The westerly portion of 194 Street lying east of North Wycoff and west of Callow Avenue, being 25 feet in width and 50 in length located in Section 10, Township 24 N., W.M. in Kitsap County., WA ;/ i 'l " Exhibit "A" Legal Description: That portion of Taft Avenue bet-ween 19th Street and 20th Street. situated in the Southwest quarter of Section 11, Township 24 N., W.M. in Kirsap CounD-, WA. Described as follows: That portion of Taf~ Avenue lying north of 19m Street having a 820 foot leng-da along easterly right-of-way, being 6 foot width, lying in KJ. tsap Count, Washin~on. 028. 042 043 040 044 03~ 05J 054 0~0 0 70 082 08~'078 ,~',l.q t h 725 46 ,! O J4 o55 056 ~: 057 ~. '0 7'J'-~ 076 ' I I ........ t-9 ?'ii ! //\\ / \ / \ / \ / / / / / / -/ / / / x / / .~.. / / / // ,.~%~' / / ~ / / / ~1,41. 2Jt! / / / O~ZY' \ \ \ \ / Exhibit "A" Legal Description: The Alley bew,-een 13m Street and 15th Street, situated in the Northwest auarter of Section 14, Tov,-nship 24 N.. W.M. in Kitsap CounW, WA. Described as follows: The Alley located between 17 Street and 15m Street lying west of Ivy Green Cemere:7 having a 625 foot leng~, being 7.5 foot in width and lying in the Plat of Berry H. Hursr Addition to the CitT.' of Bremerton recorded in Deeds vol. 46 page 400. records of Kitsap County, Washin~on. 011-00. , OJi J'lo OOJ-02 Exhibit "A" Legal Description: That portion of Ford Avenue between Kitsap Way and 13th Street, situated in the Northeast quarter of Section 15, Township 24 N., W.M. in Kdtsap Count', WA. Described as follows: That portion of Ford Avenue lying north of K/tsap Way having a 255 foot lengzh along the westerly right-of-way, being 20 foot width and lying in the Plat ofPhinney 2 ½ Acre Tracts recorded in vol. 5 page 1, records ofKitsap Counry, Washin~on. TH AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: Public Hearing Resolution # ~.?'07 ., regarding recovery offees for the abatement of garbage and debris on the property located at 2764 Maple Street. FOR AGENDA OF: May 26, 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT.: Economic and Community Development Dept. ORIGINATOR: Judy Johnson /~ DATE SUBMITTED: : 2. CLEARANCES: .(Comment on back if $. EXHIBITS: necessary) Comm. Dev. Dir.: 1. Resolution # CityAttorney~~/--~/'-~~ 3. Photos (Available at DCD) ENDORSEMENTX INFORMATION__APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOx, SUBMITTAl: 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: On March 12, 1999, the City of Bremerton removed garbage and debris from the property located at 2'764 Maple Street after the owner~ of record, Richard and Deidre Finley, failed to do so as ordered by the Building Official. The costs incurred for this action totaled $1,018.85, which includes the standard $584.00 administrative charge for garbage abatements. Council must now decide if the fees are just and reasonable and how they should be collected. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council, by Resolution # ,~'~C.' 7', order that the fees incurred for the abatement of garbage and debris on the property located at 2764 Maple Street be collected as reasonable abatement costs and become a lien against the property. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Judy Johnson ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Judy Johnson EXPIRATION DATE: N/A REVIEW DATE: N/A 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMENDED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: e e IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: The City would forfeit the costs incurred for this action. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: The City's revolving abatement fund would suffer the deficit of not collecting these funds. RESEARCH SOURCES: N/A RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION reviewing charges for the abatement of garbage and debris on the property at 2764 Maple Street and determining means of collection. WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton incurred costs for removal of garbage and debris on the property located at 2764 Maple Street; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton Municipal Code, allows the City to recoup these costs either by personal judgment against the property owner or as a lien against the property; and WHEREAS, the City Council is charged with determining whether the fees are just, and how they should be collected; and has considered the report of charges filed by the Building Official and any protests or objection filed; and WHEREAS, the Building Official of the City of Bremerton recommends the fees be collected as a lien against the property located at 2764 Maple Street, nov', therefore, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the Citv of Bremerton: 1. That the abatement charges included in the report of the Building Official in the amount of $1,018.85 for the property located at 2764 Maple Street, Bremerton, attached hereto, are just and reasonable. 2. That the City of Bremerton will exercise its right to recapture abatement fees by filing a lien against the property. PASSED, by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this 19 day of MIKE SHEPHERD Council President ~ OF B$~ CITY OF BREMERTON · 239 4th Street · Bremerton, WA 98337 Memorandum DATE: April 19, 1999 TO: FROM: RE: Paula Johnston, Deputy City Clerk Janet Lunceford, BDS II ~ Public Hearing, 2764 Maple Street CC: Judy Johnson Paula--The Public Works Department removed garbage and debris from the property located at 2764 Maple Street, after the owners, R/chard and Deidre Finley, failed to do so as ordered by the Building Official. The attached interfund transfer shows that the Public Works fees for the work amounted to $434.85. The administrative fees for this abatement are $584.00, making the total cost of the abatement $1,018.85. I have scheduled a public hearing for March 26, 1999 for Council to decide how to collect the fees. Equal Opportunity Employer CITY OF BREMERTON INTERFUND TRANSFER CITY DEPARTMENTS ONLY DATE 4/2/99 TRANSFER# 10007 TO COMPLETE THIS FORM IN DUPLICATE AND RETURN TO ACCOCNTS PAYABLE Building Department PWO-STREET DMSION FROM Abatements (REVENUE DEPARTMENT) (EXPEN-DITU'RE DEPARTMENT) DESCRIPTION TOTAL Charges per attached summary for: March 1999 LABOR EQUIPMEN'r MATERIALS SALES TAX TOTAL BLAB $545.13 $153.50 $222.60 50.00 $921.23 ACCOUNT AMOUNT 42-349.3900 5921.23 ACCOUNT AMOUNT REVENU ~P ARTMENT~L~PE~VISOR (Sign Here) EXPENDITURE DEPARTMENT SUPERVISOR Billing Details 4/2/99 1.'40.'02 PM CITY OF BREMERTON Page 1 PWO-STREET DIVISION Customer: BLAB Date ID Numbers 3/12/99 sm~o3~ 990575 0524 3013 1712 0136 3078 3/12/99 SD990032 990576 0524 3039 1712 3065 0t36 3078 DUMPOU DUMPAP 3/15/99 smooo3~ 9~o59o 1712 3065 DUMPOU Building Department - Abatements Description BLAB Clean-up 2106 7th street Colen Corey '92 GMC I-TON P/U John Corey IV Dean Smith '95 1-TON CHEVY BLAB clean up 2764 Maple Colen Corey '94 J-D410 BACKHOE John Corey IV '90 INT. 5 YARD DUMP TRUCK Dean Smith '95 1-TON CHEVY Dump Fees - Oly. View Sanitary Landfill Dump appliances at Oly. View San. Landfill BLAB Clean-up 2106 7th street John Corey IV '90 INT. 5 YARD DUMP TRUCK Dump Fees - Oly. View Sanitary Landfill 3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 5.00 hr hr hr hr hr hr yd hr hr yd Overtime Costs 593.45 $9.00 $93.45 593.45 527.00 531.I5 S32.00 593.45 S39.00 S93.45 S27.00 S103.80 $15.00 546.,'o 519.50 $103.$0 5921.23 A. pr-06-99 03:07P -- 360 dB 5360 P.03 Work Order His-t~J~ .............. 4'd/99 4:04.44 pl~.f CITY OF BKEMERTCN Work Order #: SD990031 l'ille: BLAB Clean 'ap 2 t06 7:5 street .~mcillary Operations Building Departmcnt Ab,~lem~nrs ANCILLARY O?ERA I'IO.N'S Rdey Thompson Colen Cor~y Project #: N4014250 Customer: BLAB Work Type: AO Supervisor: 0061 Lead Emplnyee: 0524 Priorily: 1 Loeatio,, ID: 1 History. #: ] Unspezified Location Unspezified Eqmpmem Clean up debris and garbage tn 5ack yard Work Description Status: S PWO-STREET DIV!SION Labor Hours Estimate: ,; Mater/als Estimate: Equipment Estimate: Date Entered: Date Updaiech ~.2,'99 ','):4" 50 .~M Date Targeted: 5 Date .assigned: 3. ', 2.99 Date Started: Date Finished: 5, 15;9 0524 3013 1712 0136 3078 1712 3065 DUMPOU BLAB Cl~n-~ap 2!06 ~'t),, Colen Corey '92 GMC i-TON P/U John Corey IV Dean Sm/th '95 I-TON CHEX:Y BLAB Clean-up 2106 7ih :oi'm Curry IV '90 INT. 5 YARD DL:M? Dump Fees - Oly.',.'iew Suni:a:-; Landfill 3.00 hi 593.45 1.00 bs 39.0-3 5.00 hr 593 45 3.00 ~ S93 45 300 kr 527 00 1.50 .k: S46'3 I150 hi 519 50 _~.O0 yd S:3530 i0 50 ?,r O.~0 :tr !at6 3~ £ ahor: Benefits: Equipment: Materials: Sales Tax: Total: SLLMMARY FOR WOILKORDER: S0990031 5327.08 Total Regular Labor Hours: lC.50 $0.00 Total Overtime Labor Hours: COg S.._ .~0 Total Labor Hour~: 10.50 5:03.~0 Total Regular Equipment Hours: SO.O0 Total Overtime Equipmenl l:!ours: Total Equipment Hours: 5.50 SD990037 Pa,;a ? Apr-06-gg 03:07P '-- 360 ~8 5360 P.02 ~v:0rk Order Histo~'' 4.'~/99 4 05.5 t Work Order #: SD990032 Title: Project #: N4014280 Ancillary Operanons Customer: BLAB Bui'.ding Depa.,q~nent Work 'Type: ^O ANCILLARY OPERATIONS Supervimr: 0061 Riley Thompson Lead Employee: 0524 ColOr Corey Priori~': 1 Location ID: ) Umpccified Locanon Histo~ #: t Unspezifiea Equipment CI'FY OF BILEMERTCN BLAB c'..ean ~p 276.1 Maple A balc~rnents Work Description Kerrvoval or' Fu:nira~e from Carport. may be possible boarfl up later use same work order Status: S PWO-STILEET DI".'iSiON Labor Hours Estimate: ,) Materials Estimate: SC, Equipment Estimate: Date Entered: 2.. Date Updated: Date Targeted: Date Assigned: Date Started: Date Finished: 42:90 1.3:47:50 5 2.99 2 ~ 2.'99 0524 3039 1712 5065 0136 3078 DUMPOU DUMPAP BLAB clean up 2764 Staple Colon Corey '9.4 JD410 BACKHOE ,rolm Corey IV '90 INT. 5 YARD DUMP TRUCK Dean Smith '95 1-TON CHEVY Dump Fees - Oly.Vizw Sanitary' Lar. dfi!l Dump appliances al Oly. VL,~w San. Laud:ill 100 hr iO0 3.00 hr 3.00 hr 5.0:3 Xr 3100 5 0< yd i 00 in Labor: Benefits: Eqmpmenl: Materials: Sales Tax: Total: SUMMARY FOR WORKORDER: 5218 o.~ 50,06 $98,0O S118.~0 $434.85 SDggO032 l'otai R,gutar Labor Hours: Total Overtime Labor Hours: Total Labor Hours: 7oral Regular Equipment Hours: Total O~'erttme Equipment Hours: l'otal gqutpmem Hour~: O, 0:3 00g SD9;603£ P~ge ~ AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: Public Hearing Resolution # ~,~.-~C-(~ , regarding recovery of fees for the abatement of garbage and debris on the property located at 2106 - 7m Street. FOR AGENDA OF: May 26, 1999 ORIGINATING DEPT.: Economic and Community Development Dept. ORIGINATOR: Judy Johnson !(v~,l. DATE SUBMITTED: ~ 2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back if 3. necessary) ~/)/~/? Comm. Dev. Dir.: City Clerk: ENDORSE~NT~ ~FO~ON EXHIBITS: 1. Resolution # ;~-] a~ ~ 2. Clerk Report 3. Photos (Available at DCD) APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FO//~: C O U N C ILP RES ID E N T ~ ~/~~~/~ 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: On March 12, 1999, the City of Bremerton removed garbage and debris from the property located at 2106 - 7ta Street after the owner, Rudy Pineau, failed to do so as ordered by the Department of Economic and Community Development. The cost incurred for this action totaled $1,305.38, which includes the standard administrative fee of $819.00 for this type of abatement action. Council must now decide if the fees are just and reasonable and how they should be collected. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council, by Resolution # ~?C~i' , order that the fees incurred for the abatement of garbage and debris located at 2016 - 7ta Street be collected as reasonable abatement costs and become a lien against the property. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Judy Johnson ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Judy Johnson '~,':' EXPIRATION DATE: N/A REVIEW DATE: N/A 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMENDED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: e IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: The City would forfeit the costs incurred for this action. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES.' The City's revolving abatement fund would suffer the deficit of not collecting these funds. RESEARCH SOURCES: N/A RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION reviewing charges for the abatement of garbage and debris on the property at 2106- 7tn Street and determining means of collection. WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton incurred costs for removal of garbage and debris on the property located at 2106 - 7th Street; and WHEREAS, the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, as adopted by the Bremerton Municipal Code, allows the City to recoup these costs either by personal judgment against the property owner or as a lien against the property; and WHEREAS, the City Council is charged with determining whether the fees are just, and how they should be collected; and has considered the report of charges filed by the Building Official and any protests or objection filed; and WHEREAS, the Building Official of the City of Bremerton recommends the fees be collected as a lien against the property located at 2106 - 7th Street, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Bremerton: 1. That the abatement charges included in the report of the Building Official in the amount of $1,305.38 for the property located at 2106 - 7th Street, Bremerton, attached hereto, are just and reasonable. 2. That the City of Bremerton will exercise its right to recapture abatement fees by filing a lien against the property. PASSED, by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this 19 day of MIKE SHEPHERD Council President CITY OF BREMERTON · 239 4th Street · Bremerton, WA 98337 Memorandum DATE: TO: FROM: RE: CC: April 19, 1999 Paula Johnston, Deputy City Clerk Janet Lunceford, BDS II Public Hearing, 2106 - 7t~' Street Judy Johnson Paula--The Public Works Department removed garbage and debris from the property located at 2106 - 7th Street, after the owner, Rudy Pineau, failed to do so as ordered by the Building Official. The attached interfund transfer shows that the Public Works fees for the work amounted to $486.38. The administrative fees for this abatement are $819.00, making the total cost of the abatement $1,305.38. I have scheduled a public hearing for March 26, 1999 for Council to decide how to collect the fees. Equal Opportunity Employer CITY OF BREMERTON INTERFUND TRANSFER CITY DEPARTMENTS ONLY DATE 4/2/99 TRANSFERs- 10007 TO COMPLETE THIS FORaM IN' DUPLICATE AND RETURN TO ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Building Department PWO-STREET DMSION FROM Abatements (REVENUE DEPARTMENT) (EXPENDITURE DEPARTMENT~ DESCRIPTION TOTAL Charges per attached summary for: March 1999 LABOR EQUIPMENT MATERIALS SALES TAX TOTAL BLAB $545.13 5153.50 5222.60 S0.00 5921.23 ACCOUNT 42-349.3900 AMOUNT S921.23 ACCOUNT AMOUNT (Sign Her'e) REVEN U E~PARTM ENT~St.5 P E~VISOR (Sign Here) EXPENDITURE DEPARTMENT SUPERVISOR Billing Details 4/2/99 1:40:02 PM CITY OF BREMERTON Page ~ PWO-STiLEET DIVISION Customer: BLAB Date ID Numbers 3/12/99 0524 3013 1712 0136 3078 3/12/99 0524 3039 1712 3065 0136 3078 DUMPOU DUMPAP 3/15/99 1712 3065 DUMPOU Building Department - Abatements Description BLAB Clean-up 2106 7th street Colen Corey '92 GMC I-TON P/U John Corey IV Dean Smith '95 I-TON CHEVY BLAB clean up 2764 Maple Colen Corey '94 JD410 BACKHOE John Corey IV '90 INT. 5 YARD DU~'MP TRUCK Dean Smith '95 1-TON CHEVY Dump Fees - Oly. View Sanitary Landfill Dump appliances at Oly.View San. Landfill BLAB Clean-up 2106 7th street John Corey IV '90 INT. 5 YAJLD DU2MP TRUCK Dump Fees - Oly. View Samtary Landfill Regular 3.00 hr 1.00 hr 3.00 hr 3.00 hr 3.00 hr 1.00 hr 1.00 hr 3.00 hr 3.00 hr 3.00 hr 3.00 hr 5.00 yd 1.00 in 1.50 hr 1.50 hr 5.00 yd Qvertime Costs $93.45 59.00 593.45 593.45 S27.00 531.15 532.00 $93.45 S39.00 $93.45 $27.00 $103.80 S15.00 $46.73 $19.50 $103.80 $921.23 Apr-06-99 03:07P -' 360 ~-TB 5360 P.03 Work Order H-is-tc~'~ 4/~.,99 4.-04'44 Work Order #: SD3900_31 Project #: N4014280 Customer: BLAB Work Type: AO Supervisor: 0061 Lead Employee: 0514 Priority: 1 Location ID: History, #: CITY OF BILEMERTCN BLAB Clean. ap 2 t06 7:h street .,Lncfllary Oper--t:ons Building Deparnnent Aba:em~nts ANCII.LARY OPERAFIO\'S Riley Thompson Colen Cerey U nspe~fied. Lacar, on Unspezified Eqmpmem Clean up debns and garsage tn :ack yard Work Description Status: S PWO-STREET DIVISION Labor Hours Estirrmce: Materials Estimale: Equipment Estimate: 30 Date Entered: 3:1299, Date Updated: -~.2.'99 '.0:4~:50 ALt Date Targeted: 5:2..gq Date Assigned: 3.12.<99 Date Starled: 5, ! 2. 9c Date Finished: 5.15,,-39 ~52~ 3013 1712 0136 3078 1:12 3065 DUM~U BLAB Clean-up 2!06 "tF. street Colen Core7 '92 OMC I-TON John Corey IV Dean S.,mth '~;5 1-TON CHEVY BLAB Clean-up 2!06 7tk /oho Core? IV '90 INT. 5 YARD DL'M? 2 R.L'CK Dump ~ecs - ©ly.',.'!ew 5am:a:-~' Landfill 3.00 hi S93.45 1.00 I-$ $9.C~3 300 hr S93.45 3.00 hi S93.45 3.00 }zr 527 O0 1.50 t~r S46 73 1.50 bc S19.5,) 5.00 Yd S i.33.$0 10.50 hr 0.S0 ~ 5a~63~ iabor: lleuefit~: Equipment: Materials: Sales Tax: Total: SL.'34MARY FOR WOILKORDER: ~327.08 S0.0'-; 5_~5 .~e SO,g0 $D990031 Total Regular Labor Hours: tC.50 Total Overtime Labor Hm]rs: C Total Labor Hours: i 0.~0 Total Re~,ular Equipment Hours: ~ ~" Fotad. Overtime Equipment Hours: Total Equipment Hours: $D990037 Page Apr-06-99 03:07P '-- 360 .-/8 5360 P.02 Work Order #: Project #: Customer: V~'ork l'ype: AL) Supervisor: 0061 Lead Employee: 0524 Priori~': 1 ~eafioulD: 1 Hi~to~ ~: 1 WOrk Order Histo~ 4/t~/99 4.05.5 t PM SD990032 Tille: BLAB clean ap 2764 Maple N40142g0 Armfllary Operanons BLAB B ui[ding Depa.,~ment ANCILLARY OPERATIONS Riley Thompson Colen Corey Umpecified Locat;on Unspecifiect Equ:.~ment CI'['Y OF BILEMERTON Abatements PWO-STR.EET DIVIS;ON Status: S Labor Hours Estimate: Materials Estimate: Equipment Estimate: :~O Date Entered: 3:12.:99 Date U@daled: 4 2/9q 10:4"50 Date Targeted: 5:'2:'99 Dale Assigned: 3:12:99 Date Slatted: ]' i 2/9o Date Finished: 3:1290 %'ork Description .Kc.n'roval of Fumiraxe from Carp~m may be possible board 'ap later use same work order 0524 3039 1712 2065 0136 3078 DUMPCU DUMPAP BLAB clean up 2764 .Ma=le Colen Corey '9.4 JD41O BAC:,~'IOE Joia Corey IV '90 INT. 5 YAR. D DUMP TRUCK Dean Smith '95 1-TON Dump Fees - Oly.Vizw Sanitary' L~r. dtill Dump aFphances at Oly.Vi~w San. Land:iH 1 00 hr 531 15 1.0O h.r $2200 3.00 h~ $93 4S 3.00 hr $39 OC 3.00 Xr $93 45 3.00 hz $2" O0 500 yd $133 §0 ! 0O in $15 00 7.00 hr 000 [-j $424.85 L abort Benefits: Equipmenl: Materials: Sales Tax: Total: SUMMARY FOR WORKORDER: $218o5 500C, $95.00 $1 ISA(* $D090032 Iotal R~guiar Labor Hours: Total Overtime Labor Hours: Iotal Labor Hours: Total Regular Equipment Hours: Total Overt!m, Equipment Hours: rotal Equipmem Hour~: 0.03 7.00 0.00 - O0 SD99¢032 Page AGENDA BILL  BREM2ERTON CITY COUNCIL and Ordinance (First Reading) 1. SUBJECT:~Public Hearing on Zoning Text FOR AGENDA OF: Amendment ZTA 98-0001 ORIGINATING DEPT.: DCED/ ORIGINATOR: Jori ltolan DATE SUBMITTED: April 6,2''1999 2. CLEARANCES: (Com~n~on back if .~ 3. EXHIBITS: C_omm. Dev. D~yf~;,~.Z/~/~ 1. Ordinance # City Clerk: ~~ .'], ~ 2. Memo dated 4/14/99 98-07 with exhibits; 6. WAC 197-11, SEPA Rules ENDO~E~NT ~ ~O~TION ~ ~PRO~D BY CO~C~ P~SIDENT FOR S~TT~: 3~c) 4. SU~U~IARY STATEMENT AND REQUXREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: City. Council is requested to conduct a public hearing on ZTA 98-0001 and at the completion of the hearing, take the appropriate action. ZTA 98-0001 is the adoption of a new Chapter 21.03, Land Use and Development Procedures, amendment of portions of Chapter 21.02, Zoning Code, Repeal of Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development, and amendment of Chapter 21.12, State Environmental Policy Act. These proposed changes would adopt new' permit process program for the City., eliminate shoreline requirements which have been superceded by the Shoreline Master Program, and revise the City's SEPA requirements to be consistent with state requirements and establish higher level of categorical exemptions in urban areas for minor construction. The proposed amendment is categorically exempt from SEPA requirements since it is the adoption of new procedures. RECOM~IENDATION: -Morion to approve ordinance on firs~ reading. Ordinance No. on second readincI. I I II 10. NOTICE OF ACTION -Motion to pass APPROVED DISAPPROVED PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: AMENDED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: CLEARANCE COM1V~NTS: See attachments. 5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: Will continue to process under unclear rules and procedures and, in the case of the revised City SEPA requirements, inconsistent with the State Administrative Code. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITI~ES. EQUIPMENT OR OTFI'ER RESOURCES: The proposed amendment would result in 5omc budget saving~ since thc cost of legal publications would be the responsibility of the applicant. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: Date: April 14, 1999 To: CiW Council From: Jon Holan, Planning Manager Subject: Zoning Text Amendment ZTA 98-0001 Attached is the proposed ordinance which would amend the City's land use and SEPA review procedures. The land use procedures are based on the Kitsap County procedures ordinance. The attached staff report to the Commission explains the proposed amendments. Thc Plannin~ Commission adopted Resolution 98-07 recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed amendment. The Council then reviewed the proposed procedures at study sessions held on December 7, 1998 and January 6, 1999. At the study sessions, one issue for certain Council members is to avoid having an applicant being inappropriately "hung-up" in attempting to submit a complete application. As a result, staffproposes a new subsection 21.03.080 (b) on page 14 of the ordinance to require the Director to indicate ail reasons for an incomplete application and the information needed to resolve the incomplete status. While the Councilmembers' concern cannot be totally addressed and allow some flexibility, the proposed addition is intended to provide certainty as to all the reasons of an incomplete application and the methods to help assure the application can proceed in the process once the informational issues are resolved. In addition to this change, staffhas included some minor changes to Section 21.03.050, Application Submittal (page 11) for distinquishing special needs for building permits. This includes defering the filing of mechanical,, plumbing and fire suppression permits until a later date as well as the signatures required for a building permit. The deferal is because in many instances, the subcontractors who would obtain these permits are not known at the time the building permit is filed. The signature requirements for a land use permit needs the property owner, whereas a building permit application can be signed by an architect, engineer or contractor. Recommendation: Pursuant to Section 21.02.925 (d), the criteria for approval is as follows: (1) Is the proposed change consistent and compatible with the Comprehensive Plan? (2) Will the proposed change be consistent with all other provisions of the affected code and avoid conflicts with other codes? The proposal is consistent with these two findings. The revisions, with the exception of the change in categoricai exemption threshold, is only procedural and does not amend or change any current development standards or requirements. The amendment is intended to clarify and consolidate the permit process as well as bring the code in compliance with state requirements. The categorical exemptions are consistent with the State's administrative code and the changed thresholds would not apply where there are critical lands. As a result, the proposal promotes plan policies to streamline the permitting process. Further, the amendments would promote plan policies addressing environmental protection since the current exemption levels would be maintained in critical ares. The amendment also includes deletion of sections in the current code which could conflict with the proposed amendment. Further, the deletion of Chapter 21.04, Shorelines would eliminate any potential conflicts with the City's Shoreline Master Program. As a result, the proposed amendments would not conflict with all other provisions of the affected code and avoid conflicts with other codes. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE amending Chapter 21.02, Bremerton Development Code, adding new Chapter 21.03, Land Use and Development Procedures, repealing Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development, and repealing and replacing Chapter 21.12, State Environmental Policy Act WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton has submitted Zone Text Amendment ZTA 98-1 which include revisions to Title 21, Land Use to consolidate and revise the procedures to process development applications, to delete Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development, and to revise Chapter 21.1 2, State Environmental Policy Act, to comply with recent revisions to the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11; and WHEREAS, the consolidation of the procedures to process development applications are necessary to provide consistent administration of permits, integrate environmental review in compliance pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) with the permit review process and to be in compliance with the permit review process requirements of RCW 36.70B; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70B.140 allows local govemments to exempt from the permit review requirements of RCW 36.70B street vacations, other approvals relating to the use of public facilities and other project permits provided that special circumstances exist; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to require permits related to home occupations, signs, and use of recreational vehicles for up to 90 days to be exempted from the permit process consistent with RCW 36.70B since permits for these activities are minor in nature and adhereance to the proposed permit review process would lead to unnecessary delays; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to exempt street vacations and sale or surplus of other public property from the permit process required by RCW 36.70B since these actions are subject to a separate process which is in conflict of RCW 36.70B, this separate process requires public notification and adhereance to the permit process would result in unnecessary delays; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan since it is procedural and does not change any development or performance requirements required by the City; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment allows a higher level of categorical exemptions for minor construction as provided for by WAC 197-11-800 (1)(c) since such activity is contemplated in urban areas and maintains current level of exemptions in areas of environmental sensitivity; and WHEREAS, Chapter 21.04 was adopted as an interim measure and has been superceded by the adoption of the City of Bremerton's Shoreline Master Program in 1977; and WHEREAS, Chapter 21.12 is not consistent with recent amendments to WAC 197- 11 and there is a need for revising the chapter to comply with state regulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are procedural and are categorically exempt pursuant to WAS 197-11-800 (20), Procedural Actions, and the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) are met; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton Planning Commission held a worksession on the matter on October 29, 1998, held a public hearing on November 17, 1998, and adopted Commission Resolution 98-07 recommending to the City Council approval of ZTA 98-1; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton City Council conducted study sessions on December 7, 1998 and January 6, 1999; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the proposed amendments, conducted a public hearing on April 28, 1999 to accept public comments, and approved the amendments for inclusion in Title 21 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Bremerton does hereby find: That the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan since it is intended to streamline and clarify the permit process, and maintain current categorical exemption standards in critical land areas; and That the proposed amendment would avoid conflicts with all other provisions of Chapter 21.02 and other codes since relevant portions of Chapter 21.02 are proposed to be deleted and replaced by new Chapter 21.03 and that Chapter 21.04 would be deleted to avoid any conflicts with the City's adopted Shoreline Master Program. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Bremerton does hereby ordain: Section 1. Repeal. Bremerton Municipal Code Sections 21.02.840, Type I Administrative Decisions; 21.02.845, Type II Administrative Decisions with Notice, 21.02.850; Type III, City Council Decisions; 21.02.855, Type IV Legislative Decisions; and 21.02.860 Shoreline Decisions are hereby repealed in their entirety. Section 2. Amendment. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.865 is hereby amended as follows: 21.02.865 PLANNED ACTIONS. , ,~,~ ~,o~,voo, :, :~ ,,,i:i~:~o ~, environmental= .... , ............. ~. . . C~i~ .......~:--' -'--- -: '~- ~:"' --~'-' '- - ': ..... :-~ :~--':':-~ ' th~ CIS plan (d ~) Project review of a planned action shall not address its appropriateness nor question the basis of its proposal in a comprehensive plan or other adopted document. Project review shall be used to identify specific project design and conditions relating to the character of development, such as the details of site plans, related public facilities and services, payment of impact or other fees, or other measures that may be needed to mitigate probable adverse environmental impacts. Section 3. Repeal. Bremerton Municipal Code Sections 21.02.870, General Processing Procedures; 21.02.875, Project Permit Application; 21.02.880, Public Hearings; 21.02.885, Decisions; 21.02.890 Time Limits on Decisons; 21.02.895, Notice are hereby repealed in their entirety. Section 4. Amendment. Bremerton Municipal Code Subsections 21.02.900(e), 21.02.905(c), 21.02.910(c), 21.02.915(c), 21.02.920(c), 21.02.925(c) and 21.02.930(c) are hereby amended as follows: 3 Section 21.02.900(e) - Development Agreements (e) (Form and Processing) (1) Development agreements shall be in a form provided by the City Attorney's office. The City Attorney shall review and approve all proposed agreements prior to consideration by the City Council. (2) A development agreement shall be approved as a Type Ht ~ decision by the City Council following an open record public hearing. (3) The agreement shall be recorded with the real property records of Kitsap County and shall be binding on the parties and their successors during its term. Section 21.02.905 - Special Use Permit (c) (Procedure) A Special Use Permit is processed in accordance with the " -' ' -- "-- 21 02 880 ---' th- -- =-- r~qu~rements -' --- =~- 21 "'" "'"'~ procedures ,~,,,,,,~,~ in o~ct,,~,,. . o,,,, ~ ,,,.,,,.~ ,.,, o~,.,,,,.,,, .,.,,.. ~I!~i~~i~i~. An Administrative SUP does not require a public hearing and is processed as a Type II application. A SUP that may have significant impacts beyond the immediate site, that is of neighborhood- or community-wide interest, or that may be of a sensitive or controversial nature, may be classified a Non-administrative SUP by the Director and processed as a Type application. Section 21.02.910(c) - Variance (c) (Procedure) A Variance is processed in accordance with the procedures uu,,i ,~u iii $6ctlon 21 '"" °°"' '~ '~ ' .,.,~.,.,,.,,., c~, ,u ,, ,~ i'iotic.~ rc--qu~re,~ent$ ,.,, o~,,.,,,.,.,....~,.,.., administratively. Section 21.02.915(c) - Special Exception (c) (Procedure) A Special Exception is processed in accordance with the procedures ,.,,.,,,,,,~,, in -' -- -, -,~ ~,,, ~,,,c o~,.,,,,.,,, .,.,:.~,~,~, ,=, ,~, tho not~ce requlrem~nts ,.,, s~ct;on ,. ,.~,,...;,,.,,~ administratively as a Type II decision. Section 21.02.920(c) - Rezone (c) (Procedure) (-1-) A single-parcel or small area rezone is a quasi-judicial action that is processed in accordance with the procedures,.,.,,,,,-' "':---',~-,., in' o~Ct,,,,-- :--, 21 .,.,,.."'"' . ,.,,.,,.,°°"'o,---',,., "--,, ,~, notlc~' I ~,~MII ~;;~1 I I~:1 ILO ~JI O~Ll%.;I I x' I . ~,,,~,~-... ~,,~,.~d .:.'.: :.',:,:,:,:-:,'-:,., '-:.-','.:.:-.-~:*:-:.:.~:..:-:r4,:.:-r-:,.~.:-:.:-:..,.,:....:.:-:.: ,:,:,.:,:.:.'.~:.:-:.:.:,.. ,.: :...:. .:.: ..... 158 t-..J Tho,.,,,=,,-, Report, o, ,,:,,, include o, o,.,,,,,,,,~, ,dot,,.,,, f~,, ~ctJon. "~' The Pl~nnin,.3 Co,mmisslon , ~,.~,,,,, ,o, ,d,:,t,,~,, ot ~. ~,,.,,.,,,,. ,m¢¢ting ~.,'~d ',,.,, ...... ,.,o, ,.,-' ,,o:' ......... own, ~.,~,, ,,,,o, ,,.,.-.,,,.,,"'-':--, '--,,.,, "' :" ·,~,,.,,"' ..... ,,.,1: '~' The "':" · '" ~-r) vIty lUl lUYl¢ll o, ,,~ o,,~, ,.~,l ,o,,,o, ,, ,u th~, ~,.,~,,,li,o, ,d=t,~,, of the Piann;ng Com,'~;s~;on,=,,-" oral Section 21.02.925(c) - Development Regulation Amendment Procedure Commission will conduct an open record public hearing for all amendments that are proposed to land use, environmental, or other related regulations and shall make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council, following its own open record public hearing, may approve, approve with modifications, deny, or remand the proposal for additional study. Amend 21.02.930(c) - Site Plan Review Procedures as follows: (c) (Review Procedures) i:' !::"'i";:!~ii'"::~ ! ?~;~E:i:::iii~::~i:i2ii:!:i:!!!:~:::~:::~:i:~:~:~i:::~:i:i:i:i:!:ii:i:i:i:~i:i:i:~:~:~: ======================================================================== ::::::::::::::.':: :::: :::;::::::~:~: ::: :::::.'- :: .'.: ;,5; ::>': : :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ......................................................................... (-1:~) A Site Plan shall be submitted as part of the application for a proposal that involves a new or modified structure, or other physical improvements or changes to its site. Site Plan Review shall be included as one step in the processing of the requested permit(s) --" - separate :-- :- not ..... :'~" (~) A request to review a conceptual, speculative, or other Site Plan that is not part of a development application shall be treated as an independent application and shall be accompanied by a Site Plan Review fee. (~) A cursory review of a conceptual or sketch plan during a pre-application conference shall be provided at no charge to assist the potential applicant. Such review shall not be an official review for decision-making purposes. (4~) The Site Plan shall be reviewed for consistency with applicable regulations and development standards. Based on the size and complexity of the project, the Director shall determine whether the review is done by~ ,., ,.,"' "' "' ......... ~i.~~i~.ii~i~~ staff or by the Technical Review Committee consisting of representatives from all affected departments and agencies. Section 5. Repeal. Bremerton Municipal Code Section 21.02.935, Appeal; and Figures 21.02.840, Permit Processing Summary; Figure 21.02.895(a), Notice Requirements; and Figure 21.02.895(b), Contents of Notice Applications are hereby repealed in their entirety. Section 6. New Chapter. Chapter 21.03, Land Use and Development Procedures is hereby added as follows: Chapter 21.03 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES Sections: 21.03.010 PURPOSE, APPLICABILITY, AND GENERAL PROCESS 21.03.020 DEFINITIONS 21.03.030 TYPE CLASSIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES, PERMITS AND REGULATIONS 21.03.040 21.03.050 21.03.060 21.03.070 21.03.080 21.03.090 21.03.100 21.03.110 21.03.120 21.03.130 21.03.140 21.03.150 21.03.160 21.03.200 PREAPPLICATION MEETING APPLICATION SUBMITTAL TECHNICAL REVIEW DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION COMPLETENESS INCOMPLETE APPLICATION NOTICE OF APPLICATION TYPE I - MINISTERIAL DECISION TYPE II -ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION TYPE III- QUASI JUDICIAL DECISION TYPE IV - LEGISLATIVE DECISION PUBLIC NOTICE TIMELINES AND DURATION OF APPROVAL APPEALS TABLE A - CLASSIFICATION OF PERMITS AND ACTIVITIES 21.03.010 PURPOSE, APPLICABILITY, AND GENERAL PROCESS (a) Purpose and Applicability. The purpose of this Chapter is to provide timely and predictable procedures and an integrated project review process for applications for development under the Bremerton Municipal Code and other applicable City Ordinances. (b) Conflicts. In the event of conflicts between any provision of this Chapter and other Chapters of the Bremerton Municipal Code or other ordinances, the procedures contained in this Chapter shall govern. (c) Process. Generally, the process for review of project applications shall consist of the following stages: (1) Preapplication Meeting (2) Summary of Requirements for Processing (3) Application (4) Application Type Classification (5) Completeness Determination(s) (6) Initiation of Appropriate Public Involvement Process (7) Decision by Appropriate Official or Body (8) Appeal Period 21.03.020 DEFINITIONS (a) "Council" or "City Council" means the City Council of the City of Bremerton. (b) "Closed record appeal" means an administrative appeal on the record to the City Council following an open record hearing on a project permit application on the record with no or limited new evidence or information allowed to be submitted and only appeal argument allowed. (c) "Day(s)" means calendar days. (d) "Director" means the Director of the City of Bremerton Department of Economic and Community Development, or the Director's designee. (e) "Open record hearing" means a hearing, conducted by a single hearing body or officer authorized by City of Bremerton to conduct such hearings, that creates City of Bremerton's public record through testimony and submission of evidence and information, under procedures prescribed by City of Bremerton by ordinance or resolution. On appeal, an open record hearing may only be held only if no open record predecision hearing was held on a project permit. All other appeals will be closed record appeals. (f) "Open record predecision hearing" means a hearing held prior to City of Bremerton's decision on a project permit. (g) "Prejudice" means injury or damage resulting from a judgement or action on aland use decision. (h) "Project permit" or "project permit application" means any land use or environmental permit or license required from City of Bremerton for a project action, including, but not limited to, building permits, subdivisions, binding site plans, planned unit developments, conditional uses, shoreline substantial development permits, site plan review, permits or approvals required by critical area ordinances, site-specific rezones authorized by the City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan (Plan) or a subarea plan, but excluding the adoption or amendment of the Plan, a subarea plan, or development regulations except as otherwise specifically included in this Ordinance. (i) "Public meeting" means an information meeting, hearing, workshop, or other gathering of people to obtain comments from the public or other agencies on a proposed project permit prior to City of Bremerton's decision. A public meeting may include a scoping meeting on a draft environmental impact statement. A public meeting does not include an open record hearing. Unless a requirement of the body conducting the meeting, the proceedings at a public meeting are not required to be recorded. A report or recommendation may be included in the City of Bremerton project permit application file. (j) "Review authority" means the Director, or other City official or their designee, processing and making land use and development decisions. 21.03.030 TYPE CLASSIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES, PERMITS AND REGULATIONS (a) Upon presentation, all development applications shall be classified by the City as either Type I, Type II, Type Iil or Type IV. The classification shall be in accordance with Table A - Classification of Permits and Activities pursuant to Section 21.03.200 and shall determine the process which will govern the review of the application for approval. (b) If this Ordinance expressly provides that an application is subject to one of the four types of procedures or another procedure, then the application shall be processed accordingly. If this Ordinance does not expressly provide for review using one of the four types of procedures, and another specific procedure is not required by law, the Director shall classify the application as one of the four procedural types and it will be processed accordingly. (1) The act of classifying an application shall be a Type I action. Classification of an application shall be subject to reconsideration and appeal at the same time and in the same way as the merits of the application in question. (2) Where a project requires more than one application type, then all applications may follow the process of the highest application type. As an option, the applicant can request to process each application individually. (c) Where applicable, all substantive and procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and BMC Chapter 21.12, Environmental Review Procedures, shall be met through the application review process established by this Chapter. (1) To the greatest extent possible, all notification requirements as required by Chapter 21.12, shall be combined with the notification requirements of this Chapter. (2) Where a Determination of Significance, Determination of Non- Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance has been made pursuant to Chapter 21.12 for an application but said application is identified as exempt on Table A or does not require any public notification, then the review process of Chapter 21.12 shall be followed. 21.03.040 PREAPPLICATION MEETING. (a) The purposes of preapplication meeting and review are: (1) To provide the City with sufficient information about a proposed project to enable City staff to classify the project and inform the applicant of approval requirements; (2) To acquaint the applicant with the requirements of this Chapter and other applicable law. The ability of City staff to inform applicants of all requirements is dependent upon the specificity of the information and description of the project provided by the applicant. While it is the intent of the City to inform the applicant of all applicable requirements, failure to identify all requirements through the preapplication review shall not prevent the City from applying all relevant laws to the application; and (3) To provide an opportunity for other City staff and the public to become acquainted with the proposed application and applicable law. Members of the public may attend a preapplication meeting, but it is not a public hearing, and there is no obligation to receive public input. (b) A preapplication meeting is required for Type II, III or IV applications. (c) To initiate preapplication review, an applicant shall submit a completed form provided by the Department of Economic and Community Development for that purpose and all information required by the relevant section(s) of this Chapter. Information not provided on the form shall be provided on attachments such as drawings, required checklists or other documents. (d) A preapplication review meeting shall be held within fourteen (14) days after receipt of an application for preapplication review, unless it is determined by staff that the project is complex. For a complex project, the preapplication review shall be held within twenty-one (21) days after receipt of an application. Where possible, the applicant shall be notified of the meeting's time and location at the time of submitting a presubmittal application, otherwise, the applicant shall be notified of the meeting within seven (7) days of application submittal. 9 (e) The Director shall designate a staff member who shall coordinate the involvement of City staff responsible for planning, development and environmental review, roads, drainage, parks and other subjects, as appropriate, in the preapplication review process. Responsible staff shall either attend the preapplication meeting or take other steps to fulfill the purposes of pre-application review. (f) Within seven (7) days after the date of the preapplication meeting, the review authority shall provide to the applicant a written summary of the Preapplication Review. To the extent possible, utilizing the information provided by the applicant, the written summary shall: (1) Briefly describe the proposed project including any phasing; including: (2) Identify all relevant City applications required for the proposed project (A) Submittal requirements for each application; and (B) Applicable approval criteria for said applications; (3) Preliminary determination if the proposed project is categorically exempt from SEPA requirements, or if not exempt, preliminary determination of the lead agency for environmental review; (4) VVhere known, identify applications required by other local, state and/or federal agencies; (5) Identify relevant development and environmental issues associated with the proposed project including but not limited to critical areas and shoreline environments; (6) Evaluate any information the applicant has offered to comply with the relevant criteria and standards, and identify additional information that is needed to comply with the relevant criteria and standards or is recommended to respond to other issues; (7) Identify applicable City fees in effect at the time of the meeting and a statement that fees may change; (8) Identify other information relevant to the application which is in the possession of the City or other agencies of which the City is aware, such as: (A) Comprehensive plan map designation and zoning on and in the vicinity of the property which is the subject of the application; 10 (B) Applicable comprehensive plan and neighborhood plan policies and relevant development standards and regulations; (C) Physical development limitations, such as steep or unstable slopes, wetlands, well head protection areas, or water bodies, that exist on and in the vicinity of the property subject to the application; (D) Public facilities that will serve the subject property, including fire services, roads, storm drainage, and, if residential, parks and schools. Also, related service considerations, such as minimum access and fire flow requirements or other minimum service levels; and (E) Other applications that have been approved or are being processed for projects in the vicinity of the proposed application that may affect or be affected by the proposal in the application. 21.03.050 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL (a) The applicant shall submit applications for all relevant permits. For building permits, the Director may defer related permits for mechanical, plumbing and fire suppression to a later date. The following information shall be provided for all applications. The Director may waive any portion of the following information requirements if it is found to be unnecessary: (1) A completed original application form(s) signed by (a) the owner(s) of the property which is the subject of the application; (b) a representative authorized to do so by written instrument executed by the owner(s) and filed with the application, or (c), for a building permit, by an architect, engineer or contractor. An application subject to Type IV review may be filed by the Director, the Planning Commission or the City Council without the signature or consent of the property owner(s); (2) A legal description supplied by a title company, surveyor licensed in the state of Washington, or other party approved by the review authority; (3) A current County Assessor map(s) showing the property(les) subject to the application; (4) Vicinity Map showing the location of the subject property and including surrounding major streets, shorelines and other reference points; (5) A site plan of the subject property that shall be drawn to scale and shall provide sufficient information that clearly describes the proposal. At a minimum, the site plan shall show the location of all existing and proposed buildings, structures and property lines as well as any other physical changes to the subject property; 11 (6) Mailing labels with names and addresses of all owners of record of parcels within the notification radius for the type permit requested. Such labels shall not be required for Type I applications; (7) A copy of the Preapplication Meeting Summary as required by 21.03.040 (f), unless waived by the Director or if the application is submitted within the seven day timeline allowed to prepare the Summary; (8) The applicable fee(s) adopted by the City Council for the application(s) in question; (9) All of the information required in the relevant sections of this Chapter; (10) If not categorically exempt, a completed and signed environmental checklist and any other supporting documentation provided by the applicant or identified in the presubmittal meeting; and (11) Any additional information found necessary by the Director to provide sufficient information about the proposed project as a result of the preapplication meeting, provided said additional information is identified within seven (7) days after the preapplication meeting. (b) The Department shall establish an official file containing all applications, correspondence and other materials related to the application(s). The file is public record and available for inspection at the Department during normal working hours. 21.03.060 TECHNICAL REVIEW (a) Upon their receipt, Type II, III and IV applications will be distributed to other City departments, agencies and interested organizations for their review and comment during a specified comment period of 14 days from receipt of application(s). (b) The technical review process shall address both project and environmental impact analysis. (c) The technical review shall: regulations. areas: (1) Determine consistency of the project with applicable plans and At a minimum, this consistency determination shall address the following (A) Type of land uses allowed; 12 (B) Level (density or intensity) of development allowed; (C) Compliance with applicable development standards, regulations and/or guidelines; and (D) Adequacy of needed infrastructure; (2) Evaluate potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures, and assist in the threshold determination pursuant to Section 21.12.050. 2'1.03.070 DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION COMPLETENESS (a) Upon completion of the Technical Review and within twenty-eight (28) days of application submittal, the City shall determine whether each application is complete or incomplete. A written Notice of Completeness or Incompleteness shall be mailed to the applicant within the prescribed time period. (b) The decision determining an application complete and imposition of any requirements for engineering, traffic or other studies shall be based on the criteria set forth in this Chapter, other applicable laws and relevant implementing measures timely adopted by the review authority. An application is deemed complete if it includes the information provided in Section 21.03.050 (a) and 21.12.050 (d), or if additional information identified through the Technical Review process pursuant to 21.03.060 is provided to the satisfaction of the City. The requirement to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (ELS) pursuant to Chapter 21.12 shall not apply in the determination of completeness. (c) In determining application completeness, the Director may, if appropriate because of the nature of the site, the proposed development or other factors, waive or modify, in writing with supporting reasons, application requirements that are clearly not necessary to show a proposal complies with relevant criteria and standards of this Chapter. (d) At the sole discretion of the Director, an application may be deemed sufficiently complete for continued processing and a Notice of Completeness may be issued even though additional information is required or project modifications may be undertaken subsequently. In such circumstances, the determination of completeness shall not preclude the reviewing authority from requesting additional information or studies either at the time of the Notice of Completeness or subsequently if new information is required or substantial changes in the proposed action occur. (e) A Type II or III application shall be deemed complete if a written determination has not been mailed to the applicant within twenty-eight (28) days of the date the application is submitted. 13 21.03.080 INCOMPLETE APPLICATION (a) The application shall be deemed incomplete, if the Director finds: (1) That additional information is needed to: (A) Meet the informational requirements of Section 21.03.050 notwithstanding any waivers granted pursuant to Sections 21.03.050 (a) or 21.03.070 (c) or (d); (B) Clarify the information submitted at the time of application; (c); (C) Make the evaluations and determinations required by Section 21.03.060 (2) That the application has been substantially revised as a result of the technical review process and that the information provided at the time of application submittal is found by the Director to be inadequate; (b) In making his/her finding that an application is incomplete pursuant to Section 21.03.080 (a), the Director shall identify all items where the application is incomplete and shall indicate the manner in which the incomplete status can be resolved. (c) If the City determines an application is not complete, the review authority shall send the applicant a written statement rejecting the application and specify what is required to complete the application, including any recommendations for any additional information that, although not necessary to make the application complete, would be recommended to address relevant issues. (d) The applicant shall have 90 days upon the mailing of the Notice of Incompleteness to submit the information requested in the notice. (e) If the applicant does not provide the necessary information within 90 days or refuses in writing to do so, the application shall lapse and shall not be resubmitted for one full year. An application shall only be resubmitted as a new application with full fees. (f) Within the 90 day period as specified within subsection (b), the applicant may request in writing the processing of an application be postponed, in which event, the City will take no further action until the application is reactivated by the applicant, all applicable timelines and deadlines will be stayed in the interim. Applications which have not been reactivated at the end of 180 days after the date of postponement shall be returned to the applicant and deemed to have been voluntarily withdrawn. Withdrawn applications must be resubmitted as new applications with full fees after one full year of the date of postponement. 14 (g) If the application has lapsed for any reason prior to becoming a complete application, fifty (50) percent of the application fees shall be refunded. 21.03.090 NOTICE OF APPLICATION (a) The Notice of Application shall be issued fourteen (14) days after the application has been determined complete pursuant to Section 21.03.070. The contents and distribution of the notice shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 21.03.140. (b) Upon issuance of a Notice of Application, decisions and public hearings shall comply with the following timelines: Program,: (1) For applications other than those required by the Shoreline Master (A) The decisions for Type I and II shall be made not less than fifteen (15) days after the issuance of the notice; (B) The public hearing for Type III applications shall be held at least fifteen (15) days after issuance of the notice; (2) For applications required by the Shoreline Master Program,: (A) For Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, the City's decision shall be made at least thirty (30) days after the issuance of the notice; (B) For Shoreline Variance and Conditional Use Permit, the public hearing shall occur not less than fifteen (15) days after the issuance of the notice and the Notice of Decision pursuant to Section 21.03.080(g) shall be made not less than thirty (30) days after the issuance of the Notice of Application. (3) All decisions involving SEPA shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 21.12, Environmental Review Procedures and WAC 197-11. 21.03.100 TYPE I - MINISTERIAL DECISION (a) Approvals for Type I applications shall meet the following requirements: (1) Where a Type I application is not categorically exempt from the requirements of Chapter 21.12, the review authority shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application within seventy-eight (78) days after the date the application was accepted as complete subject to the provisions of Section 21.03.150. 15 (2) Where a Type I application is exempt from the requirements of Chapter 21.12, the review authority shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application within twenty-eight (28) days after the date the application was accepted as complete; provided, an applicant may agree in writing to extend the time in which the review authority shall issue a decision. The review authority may consider new information the applicant submits with or after such a written agreement. (b) For a Type I application, public notices including Notice of Completeness as identified in Section 21.03.070 and Notice of Application as identified in Section 21.03.090 and 21.03.140 are not required. Any notice requirements pursuant to Chapter 21.12 shall be met. (c) During the review of the application, the Director may initiate a public meeting to be conducted by the City staff, the Planning Commission, neighborhood organization or other appropriate body. The purpose of the meeting is to explain the proposal, discuss its characteristics and alternatives, and receive questions and comments from citizens or other interested parties. Notice no later than ten (10) days prior to the meeting shall be mailed to interested parties and property owners within one hundred (100) feet of the boundaries of the project site. (d) Written notice of a Type I application decision shall be mailed to the applicant, applicant's representative, any party who has commented on the application or other parties as determined by the Director. (1) The applicant or party of record may appeal the decision within fourteen (14) days of the mailing of the decision in accordance with Section 21.03.160. (2) The notice shall identify the applicant's name, a description of the proposal or determination request, the decision on proposal and request, any applicable SEPA determinations, and a statement concerning the right of appeal of the decision or if applicable, SEPA determination. 21.03.110 TYPE II -ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION (a) Within fourteen (14) days after the date a Type II application is deemed complete, the City issue a public Notice of Application pending review in accordance with the requirements of Section 21.03.140. (b) The review authority shall mail the applicant a copy of comments timely received in response to the notice together with a statement that the applicant may respond to the comments within fourteen (14) days from the date the comments are mailed. The review authority shall consider the comments and the applicant's reply, so 16 long as timely received. The review authority may consider comments and responses received after the deadline for filing. (c) For those applications not exempt from the requirements of Chapter 21.12, the Director shall conduct the threshold determination and issue the appropriate determination pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 21.12. (d) During the review of the application, the Director may initiate a public meeting to be conducted by the City staff, the Planning Commission, neighborhood organization or other appropriate body. The purpose of the meeting is to explain the proposal, discuss its characteristics and alternatives, and receive questions and comments from citizens or other interested parties. Notice no later than ten (10) days prior to the meeting shall be mailed to interested parties and property owners within one hundred (100) feet of the boundaries of the project site. (e) A decision shall be made within seventy-eight (78) days from the time the application is deemed complete pursuant to Section 21.03.150, and shall include: (1) A statement of the applicable criteria and standards in this Chapter and other applicable law; (2) A statement of the facts relevant to the decision; (3) The basis for a conclusion to approve or deny; and (4) The decision to deny or approve the application and, if approved, any conditions of approval necessary to ensure that the proposed development will comply with applicable law. (f) Within seven (7) days of the decision, the review authority shall mail a Notice of Decision to the applicant, the applicant's representative, any known neighborhood association in whose area the property in question is situated, and all parties who have requested such notice regarding the application. The Notice of Decision shall include the following information: (1) A statement that the decision and SEPA determination are final, but may be appealed as provided in Section 21.03.180 to the City of Bremerton Planning Commission within fourteen (14) days after the Notice of Decision, with the appeal closing date in boldface type. The statement shall describe basic appeal requirements, including applicable fees and the elements of an appeal statement; (2) A statement that the complete case file, including findings, conclusions and any conditions of approval is available for review. The notice shall list the place, days 17 1t'( and times when the case file is available and the name and telephone number of the City representative to contact about reviewing the file; and (3) If applicable, a statement that the application qualifies as a planned action project pursuant to Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions. 21.03.120 TYPE III - QUASI JUDICIAL DECISION (a) The Notice of Application pursuant to Section 21.03.140 for Type III applications shall be within fourteen (14) days after the day the application is deemed complete; (b) A Type III review process requires one (1) public meeting before the Planning Commission and one (1) open record public hearing before the City Council, with the exception of Shoreline permits. (1) VVhere public headngs are required by the City of Bremerton's Shoreline Master Program, the Planning Commission shall conduct the public hearing, meet the public hearing requirements of this section and shall render the decision. (2) The public hearing must be held within seventy-eight (78) days after the date the review authority issues the determination that the application is complete, and not less than fifteen (15) days after a Notice of Application has been issued and any SEPA threshold determination has been made. (c) At least ten (10) days before the date of a hearing for a Type III application, the review authority shall issue a public notice of the hearing in accordance with the requirements in Section 21.03.140 of this chapter. (d) At least seven (7) days before the date of the hearing, the Director shall issue a written staff report and recommendation regarding the application(s). The Director shall make the staff report and recommendation available for public review and inspection and shall mail a copy without charge to the applicant and applicant's representative. The Director shall mail or provide a copy of the staff report at reasonable charge, as determined by the review authority, to all other parties who request it. (e) Public hearings shall be conducted in accordance with applicable rules of procedure, except to the extent waived by the review authority, and recorded on audio or audiovisual tape. (f) At the conclusion of the hearing on each application, the City Council shall announce one of the following: 18 (1) That the hearing is continued. If the hearing is continued to a place, date and time certain, additional notice of the continued hearing is not required to be mailed, published or posted. If the hearing is not continued to a place, date and time certain, notice of the continued hearing shall be given as though it was the initial hearing; or (2) That the application(s) is/are denied, approved or approved with conditions, together with a brief summary of the basis for the decision, and that a final order will be issued as provided in subsection (g) of this section. (g) The City Council shall issue a written decision regarding the application(s) within fourteen (14) days after the date the record closes. The decision shall include: (1) A statement of the applicable criteria and standards in this Chapter and other applicable law; (2) A statement of the facts that the review authority found showed the application does or does not comply with each applicable approval criterion and standards; (3) The basis for conclusions to approve, deny or impose conditions; and (4) The decision to deny or approve the application and, if approved, any conditions of approval necessary to ensure that the proposed .development will comply with applicable criteria and standards. (h) Within seven (7) days from the date of the decision, the Director shall mail the Notice of Decision to the applicant and applicant's representative, all parties of record and any other parties requesting the Notice of Decision. The mailing shall include a notice which includes the following information: (1) A statement that the decision and SEPA determination are final, but may be appealed as provided in Section 21.03.160 of this chapter to Superior Court within fourteen (14) days after the date the notice is mailed. The appeal closing date shall be listed in boldface type. The statement shall describe how a party must appeal the decision, including the basic elements of a petition for review; (2) A statement that the complete case file is available for review, listing the place, days and times where the case file is available and the name and telephone number of the City representative to contact for information about the case; and (3) If applicable, a statement that the application qualifies as a planned action project pursuant to Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions. 19 21.03.130 TYPE IV - LEGISLATIVE DECISION (a) A Type IV procedure may require one (1) or more hearings before the City of Bremerton Planning Commission and does require one (1) or more hearings before the City of Bremerton City Council. All Comprehensive Plan Amendments shall be considered concurrently and cumulatively, not more than once per year, with the exceptions of the Capital Facilities Element, subarea plans, and Shoreline Master Program. (b) At least ten (10) days before the date of the first Planning Commission hearing for an application subject to Type IV review, the Director shall publish a public hearing notice pursuant to the requirements of Section 21.03.140. Said notice shall also be mailed to any applicants, interested parties who request it in writing and any known neighborhood associations known to the Director and in whose area the property in question is situated. (c) At least seven (7) days before the date of the first hearing on a Type IV application(s), the Director shall issue a written staff report and a SEPA evaluation and recommendation regarding the application(s). The Director shall make a copy of the staff report and SEPA evaluation available to the public for review and inspection, mail a copy of the consolidated report and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and mail or provide copies at reasonable charge to other parties who request it. (d) Public hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the rules of procedure as determined by the review authority and except to the extent waived by the review authority. A public hearing shall be recorded on audio or audiovisual tape. (e) At the conclusion of a Planning Commission hearing on a Type IV application, the Planning Commission shall announce one of the following actions, which may not be appealed: (1) That the hearing is continued. If the hearing is continued to a place, date and time certain, then additional notice of the continued hearing is not required to be mailed, published or posted. If the hearing is not continued to a place, date and time certain, then notice of the continued hearing shall be given as though it was the initial hearing before the Planning Commission; or (2) That the Planning Commission recommends against or in favor of approval of the application(s) with or without specified changes, or that the Planning Commission will recommend neither against nor for approval of the application(s), together with a brief summary of the basis for the recommendation. (f) At least ten (10) days before the date of the first City Council hearing for an application subject to Type IV review, the Director shall: 20 (1) Prepare a public hearing notice that includes the information listed in subsection (b) of this section except the notice may be modified as needed to: (A) Reflect any changes made in the application(s) during the Planning Commission review; (B) Reflect that the City Council will conduct the hearing and the place, date and time of the Council hearing; or (C) State that the Planning Commission recommendation, staff report, and SEPA evaluation are available for inspection at no cost and copies will be provided at reasonable cost; section; (2) Mail a copy of that notice to the parties identified in subsection (b) of this (3) Publish in a newspaper of general circulation a summary of the notice, including the date, time and place of the hearing and a summary of the subject of the Type IV process; and (4) Provide additional notice deemed appropriate and necessary by the Director based on the subject of the Type IV process. (g) At the conclusion of its hearing regarding a Type IV application, the City Council may continue the hearing or may adopt, modify or give further consideration to the application or recommendations. If the hearing is continued to a place, date and time certain, then additional notice of the continued hearing is not required to be provided. If the hearing is not continued to a place, date and time certain, then notice of the continued hearing shall be given as though it was the initial hearing before the City Council. (h) Within seven (7) days from the date of the decision, the Director shall mail the Notice of Decision to the applicant and applicant's representative, all parties of record and any other party who have requested the Notice of Decision. The mailing shall include a notice which includes the following information: (1) A statement that the decision and SEPA determination are final, but may be appealed as provided in Section 21.03.160 of this chapter to Superior Court within fourteen (14) days after the date the notice is mailed. The appeal closing date shall be listed in boldface type. The statement shall describe how a party must appeal the decision, including the basic elements of a petition for review; (2) A statement that the complete case file is available for review, listing the place, days and times where the case file is available and the name and telephone number of the City representative to contact for information about the case; and 21 (3) If applicable, a statement that the application qualifies as a planned action project pursuant to Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions. 21.03.140 PUBLIC NOTICE (a) Notice of Application. For Type II and Type III applications, a Notice of Application shall include the following information, to the extent known. (1) The case file number(s), the date of application(s), the date the application(s) was deemed complete, and the date of the Notice of Completeness; (2) A description of the proposal with a list of any project permit requests included with the application(s) and, if applicable, a list of any further studies requi~red by the review authority; (3) Identification of other necessary permits not included in the application, to the extent known by City staff; (4) Identification of existing environmental documents evaluating the proposal; (5) Specific dates for the public comment period, a statement that the public has the right to comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, and request a copy of the decision once made. The statement shall describe any appeal rights and make it clear that only written comments received by the City within fifteen (15) days from the date of the notice will be considered; (6) If applicable: (A) The information required by Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Section 197-11-355(2) where a Determination of Non-Significance is anticipated; (B) A statement that the application qualifies as a planned action project pursuant to Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions. (7) The deadline for submitting a SEPA appeal; (8) The date, time, place and type of hearing, if applicable, provided that any necessary threshold determination has been made under SEPA. If a necessary threshold determination has not yet been made at the time the Notice of Application is sent, the hearing date shall be set later, for a date no sooner than fifteen (15) days following the SEPA determination, and a separate Notice of Hearing shall be mailed to the applicant, the applicant's representative and all other parties who have requested such notice; 22 tti, (9) If one has been made, a statement of the preliminary determination of what development regulations will be used for project mitigation. The statement shall indicate which regulations the application appears to comply with; (10) The name of the applicant or applicant's representative and the name, address and telephone number of the contact person for the applicant, if any; (11) A description of the site which is reasonably sufficient to inform the reader of its location; (12) The date, place and times where information about the application may be examined and the name and telephone number of the City representative to contact about the application; (13) The designation of the review authority, and a statement that public hearings, if applicable, will be conducted in accordance with the rules of procedure adopted by the review authority; and authority. (14) Any additional information determined appropriate by the reviewing (b) Separate Notice of Public Hearing. For Type III applications, where the Notice of Application under subsection (a) does not include a Notice of Hearing, a separate Notice of the Hearing date shall be distributed in accordance with subsection (d) of this section. The contents of a notice of public hearing shall include: (1) Name of the applicant or appellant or representative; (2) Description of the location of the site; (3) Nature of the proposed use or development and requested permits or, for appeals, the nature of and relief sought; (4) Date, time and place of the schedule public hearing and the name of the reviewing authority conducting the public hearing; testimony; (5) A statement that all interested persons may appear and provide (6) The time and place written comments or other exhibits can be submitted; review; (7) VVhen and where the staff report and related materials are available for 23 (8) If applicable, a statement that the application qualifies as a planned action project pursuant to Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions; (9) Name and phone number of a staff contact person. (c) Notice of Decision. The contents and distribution of the Notice of Decision for Type I, II, III and IV are provided in Sections 21.03.100(d), 21.03.110 (f), 21.03.120 (h) and 21.03.130 (h). (d) Distribution of Notices. (1) Within the time period specified in this chapter, the Director shall mail a copy of Notice of Application and, if applicable, notice of public hearing to: (A) The applicant and the applicant's representative; (B) Any neighborhood association known to the Director and in whose area the property in question is situated; (C) Owners of property within a radius of three hundred (300) feet of the property which is the subject of the application. The records of the Kitsap County Assessor shall be used to determine the property owner of record. The failure of a property owner to receive notice shall not affect the decision if the notice was sent in accordance with this subsection. A sworn certificate of mailing executed by the person who did the mailing shall be evidence that notice was properly mailed to parties listed or referenced in the certificate; (D) Agencies with jurisdiction; and (E) Other people and organizations who, in writing, request such notice. (2) For Type III review, the City shall publish in a newspaper of general circulation a summary of the Notice of Application, including the nature and location of the proposal, type of permit(s), comment period date and instructions for obtaining further information. For shoreline permits, Notice of Application shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation and comply with the requirements of Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Section 173-27-110. (3) The City shall publish a summary notice of public hearings in a newspaper of general circulation, including date, time and place of the hearing; the nature and location of the proposal and instructions for obtaining further information. 24 (4) The applicant shall post the Notice of Application and notice of public hearing in a conspicuous place visible to the public consistent with the prescribed times as established by this Chapter. Failure to post notice in a timely manner shall be considered a request for a time extension by the applicant pursuant to Section 21.03.150 (3) (C). The applicant shall remove and properly dispose of the notices within seven (7) days after the hearing. (A) The contents of the Notice of Application shall include that required in subsection (2). The contents for a notice of public hearing shall include that required in subsection (3). (B) The applicant shall execute an affidavit certifying where and when the notices were posted. (e) Cost of Notices. The City may collect a fee from the applicant to cover the cost of publishing in a newspaper for any notices required by this Chapter or Chapter 21.12. 21.03.150 TIMELINES AND DURATION OF APPROVAL (a) Decisions. Decisions on Type I, II, and III applications shall be issued not more than seventy-eight (78) days after the date of the determination of completeness. (1) If a Determination of Significance (DS) is issued, the decision shall not issue sooner than seven (7) days after a final environmental impact statement is issued. (2) An applicant may agree in writing to extend the time in which the review authority shall issue a decision. The review authority may consider new evidence the applicant introduces with or after such a written request. (3) In determining the number of days that have elapsed after City of Bremerton has notified the applicant that the application is complete, the following periods shall be excluded: (A) Any period during which the applicant has been required by the City to correct plans, perform studies, or provide additional information. The period shall be calculated from the date the City notifies the applicant of the need for additional information to the earlier of either: the date the City determines whether the additional information provided satisfies the request for information; or fourteen (14) days after the date the information has been provided to the City; (B) Any period of time during which an environmental impact statement is being prepared, which shall not exceed one (1) year from the issuance of the 25 determination of significance, or scoping notice if a determination of significance is not issued, unless the City and applicant have otherwise agreed in writing to a longer period of time. If no mutual written agreement is completed, then the application shall become null and void after the one (1) year period unless the Director determines that delay in completion is due to factors beyond the control of the applicant; (C) Any period during which the Applicant has requested additional time to supplement the application or has otherwise requested that processing be delayed. The City shall consider the applicant having requested additional time in the event the processing of the application is delayed due to a failure to post a notice or pay the cost of a newspaper notice in a timely manner. The additional time shall be the amount of time due to the delay; and (D) Any period during which the application has been postponed at the request of the applicant in accordance with subsection 21.03.080(d) of this Chapter. (b) A Type I or II approval shall become void if not acted upon within one (1) year unless stated otherwise at the time of approval or within a related development agreement. A six (6) month extension may be granted by the Director if requested in writing prior to the expiration date. (c) An applicant may not submit an application that is substantially the same as an application that was denied until at least one (1) full year has passed since the denial. 21.03.160 APPEALS (a) Final decisions regarding applications subject to a Type I, II, III or IV procedure may be appealed only if, within fourteen (14) days after written notice of the decision is mailed, a written appeal of the decision is filed with the following bodies: (1) Type I: Planning Commission (2) Type II and SEPA determinations on Type III and IV: City Council (3) Type III and IV: Superior Court, with the exception of Shoreline Master Program amendments where the appeal of a decision shall be submitted to the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 36.70A.250 through .320; (4) Shoreline Substantial Development Permits, Variances and Conditional Use Permits: City Council 26 (5) As an alternative to subsection (4) decisions on Shoreline Substantial Development Permits, Variances and Conditional Use Permits may be appealed to the Shorelines Hearings Board within twenty-one (21) days of the decision of Department of Ecology decision. (b) Only parties of record may initiate an appeal to the Planning Commission or City Council. Parties of record shall include: (1) The applicant; or (2) Anyone who submitted written comments concerning the application excluding persons who have only signed petitions or mechanically produced form letters; or (3) A person aggrieved or adversely affected by the land use decision, or who would be aggrieved or adversely affected by a reversal or modification of the land use decision. A person is aggrieved or adversely affected within the meaning of this section only when all of the following conditions are present: (A) The land use decision has prejudiced or is likely to prejudice that person; (B) That person's asserted interests are among those that the City was required to consider when it made the land use decision; (C) A judgement in favor of that person would substantially eliminate or redress the prejudice to that person caused or likely to be caused by the land use decision; and (D) That person has participated in the public hearing or public meeting on the application by speaking or submitting written comments, excluding those persons who have only signed petitions or mechanically reproduced form letters. (c) The appeal shall contain the following information: (1) The case number designated by the City and the name of the applicant; (2) The name and signature of each appellant. If multiple parties file a single appeal, the appeal document shall designate one party as the contact representative for all contact with the Director. All contact with the Director regarding the appeal, including notice, shall be with this contact representative; 27 (3) The specific aspect(s) of the decision and/or SEPA determination being appealed, the reasons why each is in error as a matter of fact or law, and the evidence relied upon to prove the error; (4) A statement demonstrating compliance with Section 21.03.160 (b); and (5) The appeal fee adopted by the City Council. (d) Where a predecision public hearing has been conducted on the application or an open record public hearing held on an appeal of the application, the appeal in question shall be a closed record appeal. Where a public hearing has not been held on the application, an open record public hearing on the appeal shall be held. (e) For appeals of SEP^ procedural and substantive determinations: (1) The appeal shall be consolidated and considered at the time the decision-making body conducts the public hearing for Type III and IV applications; (2) The appeal shall be made after a final threshold determination pursuant to WAC 197-11-390 or a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) has been issued pursuant to WAC 197-11-560 for Type I and II applications. Said appeals shall be reviewed by the decision-making body responsible for hearing appeals on the underlying application. (3) The City shall provide for a record that shall consist of the following: (A) Findings and conclusions; (B) Testimony under oath; and (C) A taped or written transcript. (f) The procedural determination by the city's responsible official shall carry substantial weight in any appeal proceeding. (g) The Planning Commission shall hear appeals of Type I decisions on the established record, including all materials received in evidence at any previous stage of the review, the final order being appealed, and argument by the parties. Notice of an appeal hearing shall be mailed to parties entitled to notice of the decision, but need not be posted or published. A staff report shall be prepared, a hearing shall be conducted, and a decision shall be made and noticed and can be appealed as a Type II process. (h) The City Council shall hear appeals of Type II and shoreline permit decisions on the established record, including all materials received in evidence at any previous stage of the review, the final order being appealed, and argument by the parties. 28 (1) City Council consideration of an appeal shall be noticed in the same manner as a public hearing notice as provided for in Section 21.03.140 of this Ordinance. The Council may either decide the appeal at the designated meeting or continue the matter to a limited headng for receipt of oral argument. If so continued, the Council shall: (A) Designate the parties or their representatives to present argument, and the permissible length thereof, in a manner calculated to afford a fair hearing of the issues specified by the Council; and (B) At least fifteen (15) days before such hearing, provide notice to all parties entitled under this chapter to such notice. The notice shall indicate that the limited hearing is not a new public hearing and that only legal argument from designated parties will be heard. (2) At the conclusion of an appeal hearing, the City Council may affirm, reverse, modify or remand an appealed decision. (A) A decision to remand a matter is not appealable. Appeal from a new staff decision made on remand shall be treated as any other decision. (B) If the Council affirms an appealed decision, the Council shall adopt a final order that contains the conclusions the Council reached regarding the specific grounds for appeal and the reasons for those conclusions. The Council may adopt the decision of the lower review authority as its decision to the extent that the decision addresses the merits of the appeal or the Council may alter that decision. (C) If the Council reverses or modifies an appealed decision, the Council shall adopt a final order that contains: (i) A statement of the applicable criteria and standards in this Ordinance and other applicable law relevant to the appeal; (ii) A statement of the facts that the Council finds which show that the appealed decision does not comply with applicable approval criteria or development standards; and (iii) The reasons for a conclusion to modify or reverse the decision; (iv) The decision to modify or reverse the appealed decision and, if approved, any conditions of approval necessary to ensure that the proposed development will comply with applicable criteria and standards. 29 (3) The City Council office shall mail notice of a Council decision on the merits of an appeal to parties entitled to notice as provided in this chapter and other parties who appeared orally or in writing before the Council regarding the appeal. The notice shall include identification of the case by number, the applicant's name and a summary of the Council's decision. The notice shall also include a statement that the Council's decision can be appealed to Superior Court within twenty-one (21) days and, where applicable, shall comply with the official notice provisions of RCW 43.21 C.075. (i) Decisions on appeals shall be made in the following timeframe: (1) An open record appeal shall be decided within ninety days (90) from the date the appeal was filed; (2) Where a closed record appeal is required, such appeal shall be decided within sixty (60) days when the appeal was filed. 30 21.03.170 - CLASSIFICATION OF PERMITS AND ACTIVITIES Table A identifies the appropriate classification type for the identified permit or activity. The classification type determines the appropriate review process as identified in this Chapter 21.03 for the various identified permits and activities. TABLE A CLASSIFICATION PERMIT/ACTIVITY Review Authority Exempt Type I Type Type Type II III IV Amendments of CC X Comprehensive Plan Amendments of CC X Regulations Annexations CC X Appeal of Type I PC X Decision Appeal of Type II CC X Decision Building Code BO X Interpretation Building Permit BO X~ X2 Comp and D X Neighborhood Plan Interpretations Construction Standards, CC X Amendment Design Review where D X required by Special Area Plan Determination of Zone D X Boundaries Development CC X A.qreement 31 CLASSIFICATION PERMIT/ACTIVITY Review Authority Exempt Type I Type Type Type II III IV District, community, CC neighborhood or other X special area plans Final Planned Unit D X Development Home Occupations D X Landscape Plan D X Approval Lot Line Adjustment D X~ X2 Major Amendment to CC X Type III decision Minor Amendment to D X land use permit Preliminary Planned CC X Unit Development Urban Renewal Plan CC X Recreational Vehicle D X 90-day permit Rezone for specific CC X properties or small area Sign Permit D X Shoreline PC X Conditional Use Permit and Variance Shoreline Permit D X Revision Shoreline Substantial D X Development Permit Short Subdivision D X Site Development CE X Activity Permit (grading, clearing, drainage) 32 CLASSIFICATION PERMIT/ACTIVITY Review Authority Exempt Type I Type Type Type II III IV Site Plan Review not D X associated with another land use permit Special Exception D X Special Use Permit- D Administrative X Special Use Permit- CC Non-Administrative X Surplus or sale of other CC X public property Vacation of Street CC X Right-of-Way Variance X Temporary Emergency D Wetland or Stream X Permit Wetland or Stream D Assessment X Wetland or Stream D Permit X Zoning Interpretations D X Zoning Map Amendment CC (other than single lot or X small area rezones) ~Where proposal in either categorically exempt from environmental review or where an environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits. 2For those projects not meeting the requirements identified in footnote 1 above. D - Director CE-City Engineer BO-Building Official PC-Planning Commission CC-City Council 33 Section 7. Repeal. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 8. Repeal and Replace. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 21.12, State Environmental Policy Act, is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced by the following: Chapter 21.12 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURES Sections: 21.12.010 STATUTORY AUTHORITY. 21.12.020 PURPOSE OF ARTICLE II ADOPTION OF WAC PROVISIONS BY REFERENCE. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL - DESIGNATION AND RESPONSIBILITY. PROCEDURES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PHASED REVIEW PLANNED ACTIONS. CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS. SUBSTANTIVE AUTHORITY. APPEALS. FEES. 21.12.040 21.12.050 21.12.060 21.12.070 21.12.080 21.12.090 21.12.100 21.12.110 21.12.120 21.12.010 STATUTORY AUTHORITY. The city adopts the ordinance codified in this chapter under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C.110, and the SEPA Rules, WAC 197-11-904. This chapter contains the city's SEPA procedures and policies. 21.12.020 PURPOSE OF ARTICLE II - ADOPTION OF WAC PROVISIONS BY REFERENCE. This article contains the basic requirements that apply to the SEPA process. The city adopts Chapter 197-11 of the Washington Administrative Code by reference. 21.12.040 RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL - DESIGNATION AND RESPONSIBILITY. (a) For the proposals for which the city is the lead agency, the responsible official shall be the Director of Economic and Community Development, or the Director's appointed designee. (b) For all proposals for which the city is the lead agency, the responsible official shall make the threshold determination, supervise scoping and preparation of any required 34 · environmental impact statement (ELS), and perform any other functions assigned to the "lead agency" or "responsible official" by those sections of the SEPA rules that were adopted by reference ~r~ S~,.t,,.,,," ~° ~'"'" (c) The city shall retain all documents required by the SEPA rules (Chapter 197-11 WAC) and make them available in accordance with Chapter 42.17 RCW. 21.12.050 PROCEDURES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. (a) General Provisions. The City of Bremerton has prescribed the following SEPA procedures for the environmental review for land use projects and agency proposals. The environmental review is considered integral with the land use review of private project and agency proposals. The environmental review process for a project will be integrated with and become part of the appropriate review process for the applicable permit type as prescribed by Chapter 21.03 Land Use and Development Procedures. (b) Preapplication Submittal. The preapplication submittal may include a preliminary Environmental Checklist for review and assistance in the discussion of the likely SEPA determination. The level of environmental detail does not need to exceed the general concept of the proposal. Where a checklist is submitted, the applicant shall identify as many of the general environmental elements associated with the proposal by using the environmental checklist. (c) Preapplication Conference. (1) The preliminary environmental aspects of a project or proposal will be discussed at the Pre-Application Conference. The applicant, or department initiating an agency proposal, shall attend a preapplication conference with the Department of Economic and Community Development (DECD) to preview the proposal, discuss potential environmental impacts and examine the likely environmental review steps, including a preliminary determination if the project would be categorically exempt. A series of environmental informational meetings may be conducted by the applicant in preparation for the preapplication conference. (2) The written summary of the preapplication conference as required by Section 21.03.040 (h) shall address applicable issues related to environmental review including but not necessarily limited to: (A) Determining if the project is categorically exempt; (B) Phasing of the project as it relates to environmental review; (C) Critical areas and shoreline environments; (D) Any relevant comprehensive and neighborhood plan policies and development standards and regulations which may mitigate potential adverse impacts; 35 process; (E) Determining the lead agency for conducting the environmental review (F) Any relevant studies needed to address potential environmental issues; (d) Application Submittal. Unless it has been determined by the SEPA official either prior to or at the time of submission that the application is categorically exempt, application for the SEPA review shall include: (1) Completed Environmental Checklist for the proposal; (2) Any required studies or documents identified at the Pre-Application Conference; and (3) Required fees. (e) Technical Review. During the technical review pursuant to Section 21.03.055, the SEPA Official will evaluate the project, Environmental Checklist and any supporting documents to: (1) Determine that the application and environmental documents are internally consistent; (2) Determine that the information submitted is adequate to make a threshold determination; and (3) If subsections (1) and (2) are satisfied, identify potential adverse impact(s) and mitigation measure(s) including but not limited to any applicable plan policies or regulatory requirements which would reduce the impact(s) to acceptable levels as allowed by WAC 197-11-158; (f) SEPA Determination of Completeness. The environmental analysis associated with a project/proposal is subject to the permit processing requirements for each Type Classification as prescribed within Chapter 21.03, Land Use and Development Procedures Ordinance. The process to determine a complete or incomplete application pursuant to Sections 21.03.057 and 21.03.058 is partly predicated upon the adequacy of information provided by the applicant to make a SEPA Determination. (g) Threshold Determination. (1) If the application is deemed complete, the SEPA official shall make one of the following threshold determinations consistent with the requirements of RCW 43.21 C, WAC 197-11 and this chapter within twenty-eight (28) days of the issuance of the Notice of Application pursuant to Section 21.03.059: 36 (A) That the application is categorically exempt from any threshold determinations if such a determination was not made at the time of application submittal pursuant to Section 21.12.050(d); (B) That the application would not likely have a significant adverse environmental impact and a Determination of Nonsignificance is appropriate; (C) That the application would likely have a significant adverse environmental impact(s) on the environment but the application has been modified or mitigation measures will be imposed to reduce the impact(s) to a less than significant level, and a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance is appropriate; or (D) That the application would likely have a significant adverse environmental impact and a Determination of Significance is appropriate; (2) The Threshold Determination can be issued: (A) As a stand alone action; or (B) Incorporated with Notice of Application. 21.12.060 PHASED REVIEW. The SEPA Rules allow a project/proposal to be phased so that SEPA compliance can be done for each phase. This approach allows the City, the proponent, and the public to focus discussion on issues that are ready for decision and excludes from considerations issues already decided or not yet ready. The criteria for using an environmental phase review associated with a phased development proposal are: (a) The sequence is from a non-project document to a narrower site specific analysis; (b) The phase review format must be stated in the original and subsequent environmental public notices; (c) A phased environmental checklist for the narrower site analysis will be associated with the review process for subsequent and associated Type Classification reviews. 21.12.070 PLANNED ACTIONS. (a) A Planned Action is only allowed in those areas or for those land uses where the City has adopted a planned action ordinance or resolution consistent with the 37 requirements of RCW 43.21C.031(2), WAC 197-11-164 and 197-11-168. A Planned Action does not require a threshold determination nor the preparation of an environmental impact statement under State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). However, an environmental checklist may be requested as part of the initial application to help disclose, review and mitigate environmental impacts through the Site Plan Review process. (b) To qualify as a "Planned Action~, a project action must: (1) Be a clearly designated or proposed action within an ordinance or resolution that was adopted by the City, and be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; (2) Have had the significant impacts adequately addressed in an environmental impact statement prepared in conjunction with the City's Comprehensive Plan or related neighborhood, subarea, urban renewal, other special area plan, master planned development or a phased project; (3) Be a subsequent or implementing project for proposals contained in Subsection (2); (4) Be located within the City limits or Urban Growth Area; and (5) Not be an essential public facility, as defined in RCW 36.70A.200. (c) The process to review projects to determine if said project qualifies under a planned action ordinance or resolution shall follow the requirements of WAC 197-11-172 subject to the following: (1) Verification of the project and mitigation as provided in WAC 197-11-172 (1) (a) and (b) shall occur as part of the Technical Review pursuant to Section 21.12.050 (e); (2) All notices for projects as required pursuant to Chapter 21.03, Land Use and Development Procedures shall state that the project has qualified as a planned action; 21.12.080 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS. (a) All categorical exemptions as identified in WAC 197-11-800 are adopted by reference except as provided in Subsection (b). (b) The City of Bremerton is an urban area and is intended to accommodate urban levels and types of development. Certain new construction in urban areas have less environmental impacts in urban areas than in nonurban areas since comprehensive plan and development standards are intended to address impacts created by urban levels of development and the areas where the construction would occur are intended for urban 38 form of development. Therefore, the following activities are categorically exempt, except when undertaken wholly or partly on lands covered by water: (1) The construction or location of any residential structures of twenty (20) dwelling units; (2) The construction of an office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage building with 12,000 square feet of gross floor area, and with associated parking facilities designed for forty (40) automobiles; (3) The construction of a parking lot designed for forty (40) automobiles; (4) Any landfill or excavation of five hundred (500) cubic yards throughout the total lifetime of the fill or excavation; Where said activities are subject to the provisions of Chapter 21.22, Critical Lands Ordinance, then the maximum exempt level for minor new construction is that authorized by WAC 197-11-800 (1) (b). 21.12.090 PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS. (a) Where feasible, notices required by SEPA shall be incorporated with those Notice of Application and Notice of Decision for the project application as provided by Chapter 21.03, Land Use and Procedures Ordinance; (b) Where a threshold determination is made pursuant to 21.12.050 (g)(2)(A), or where other notices are required and cannot be integrated with notices identified in subsection (a): (1) A notice shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in City, posted on the property, for site specific proposals, and mailed to those parties who would receive a Notice of Application pursuant to Section 21.03.100 (d). The applicant shall be responsible for posting the site as required in Section 21.03.100 (d) (4) and payment of any fee for the cost of any newspaper notice imposed by the City pursuant to Section 21.03.100 (e). (2) Said notice shall identify the name of the project, name of the applicant, case file number(s), brief description of the project and the purpose of the notice. 21.12.100 SUBSTANTIVE AUTHORITY. (a) The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to those in the existing SEPA authorization of the city. (b) The city may attach conditions to a permit or approval for a proposal so long as: 39 (1) Such conditions are necessary to mitigate specific probable adverse environmental impacts identified in environmental documents prepared pursuant to this chapter; and (2) Such conditions are in writing; and (3) The mitigation measures included in such conditions are reasonable and capable of being accomplished; and (4) The city has considered whether other local, state or federal mitigation measures applied to the proposal are sufficient to mitigate the identified impacts; and (5) Such conditions are based on one or more policies in subsection (d) below and cited in the license or other decision document. (c) The city may deny a permit or approval for a proposal on the basis of SEPA so long as: (1) A finding is made that approving the proposal would result in probable significant' adverse environmental impacts that are identified in a final ElS or final supplemental ElS prepared pursuant to this Ordinance; and (2) A finding is made that there are no reasonable mitigation measures capable of being accomplished that are sufficient to mitigate the identified impact; and (3) The denial is based on one or more policies identified in subsection (d) below, and identified in writing in the decision document. (d) The city designates and adopts by reference the following policies as the basis for the city's exercise of authority pursuant to this section: (1) The city shall use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of state policy, to improve and coordinate plans, functions, programs and resources to the end that the state and its citizens may: (A) Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations; (B) Assure for all people of Washington safe, healthful, productive and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings; (C) Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences; (D) Preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage; (E) Maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice; (F) Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's amenities; and (G) Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources. (2) The city recognizes that each person has a fundamental and inalienable right to a healthful environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment. (e) Except for permits and variances issued pursuant to Chapter 21.04 of the Bremerton Municipal Code, action not requiring a decision of the planning commission/city council is conditioned or denied on the basis of SEPA by a nonelected official, the decision shall be appealable to the planning commission. Such appeal may be perfected by the 40 proponent or any aggrieved party by giving notice to the responsible official within ten days of the decision being appealed. Review by the planning commission shall be on a de novo basis. 21.12.110 APPEALS. Appeals of SEPA procedural or substantive determinations shall follow the requirements of Section 21.03.120, Appeals. 21.12.120 FEES. The city shall require fees for its activities in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. Those fees shall be established, from time to time, by city council resolution. Section 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective ten (10) days from passage and publication. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of 1999. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ 1999. day of APPROVED this day of MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President ,1999. LYNN HORTON, Mayor ATTEST: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk 41 AGENDA ITEM BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION FOR AGENDA OF: November 17, 1998 NEW BUSINESS ITEM: Public Hearing on Zoning Text Amendment ZTA 98-1 APPLICANT: City of Bremerton DECD FII,F~ NO. ZTA 98-1 ORIGINATOR: ,Ion Holan, Planning Manager, Department of Economic and Community Development COMMITTEE CHAIR: Bill Robinson SUBJECT: Amendment of the Bremerton Municipal Code Title 21, Land Use to amend Chapter 21.02, Zoning Code, establish a new Chapter 21.03, Land Use and Development Procedures Ordinance, delete Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development and amend Chapter 21.12, State Environmental Policy Act. SUMMARY STATEMENT & REQUIREMENT FOR COMMISSION ACTION: This proposed zone text amendment is classified as a Type IV application which has been forwarded to the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the City Council under BMC 21.02.925. The decision on the application will be made by the City Council aider holding a public hearing. EXHIB~S: Staff'Report Proposed Zoning Text Amendment ZTA 98-1 with Attachment A (proposed Chapter 21.03, Land Use and Development Procedures) and Attachment B (proposed amendments to Chapter 21.12, State Environmental Policy Act). RECOMMENDATION: The Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct the public hearing and adopt Resolution 98-07 recommending to the City Council the adoption of Zoning Text Amendment ZTA 98-1. MODEL MOTION: I move that the Planning adopt Resolution 98-07 recommending to the City Council the approval of Zoning Text Amendment ZTA-98-1. ZTA 98-1 Planning Commi_ssion Staff Report November 11, 1998 Page -2- STAFF ANALYSIS: Summary of Proposal: The proposal is as follows: To consolidate the permit procedural requirements currently contained in various portions of BMC 21.02, Zoning by the establishment of a new Chapter 21.03, Land Use and Development Procedures; To amend Chapter 21.12, State Environmental Policy Act to incorporate recent changes made in the Washington Administrative Code (WAC), to relate the environmental review process with the permit review process and to increase the exemption levels for minor new construction as allowed by WAC 197-11-800 (1)(c); To delete Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development since this chapter was superseded by the adoption of the City's Shoreline Master Program and the procedural requirements of shoreline permits are addressed in new Chapter 21.03. Environmental Analysis: The proposed amendments are procedural are categorically exempt pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (20), Procedural Actions. As a result, the proposal complies with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Chapter 21.03, Land Use and Development Procedures: The process to review various permits and activities for the City of Bremerton must meet the requirements of chapter 36.70A RCW, Local Project Review. While there may be several approaches to meet these requirements, staff is proposing the same general approach currently in Chapter 21.02 of the B remerton Municipal Code (BMC), which is the use of the Type I to IV categories. However, there is a need to clarify and consolidate the processing requirements since the current ordinance lacks detail and is scattered in several different sections of Chapter 21.02.. As a result, staff has prepared a new Chapter 21.03 which would establish the process of reviewing various permits and decisions. It consolidates various processing requirements currently included in Chapter 21.02. While much of the same processing requirements are brought forth from Chapter 21.02, there are some notable proposed changes. Timing - Section 36.70B.090 RCW has required that a permit must be acted upon within 120 days from the time the application is determined complete. (It should be noted that section expired as of June 30, 1998 and is replaced by section .080 which requires ordinances to provide timely and predictable procedures. Staff is not proposing any changes in the overall timing.) This 120 day review period is contained in both the current and proposed ordinance requirements. However, the proposed ordinance segments this timing into the different steps of the review process where the current ordinance does not. That is, the proposed ordinance divides the 120 days into 14 days for the Notice of Application, 78 days for processing the permit, 14 days for the notice of decision for Type III applications and 14 days for filing an appeal. This means that under the proposed ordinance any savings of time in one pan of the process cannot be transferred to another ZTA 98-1 Planning Commission Staff Report November 11, 1998 Page -3- part and would remit in an overall time reduction in the review of an application. The current ordinance would allow this "transfer' which may result in no reduction in the overall processing time. Shoreline and SEPA - The current process under Chapter 21.02 does not address SEPA review and has a separate section for shorelines. The proposed amendments by the creation of Chapter 21.03 and the proposed changes to Chapter 21.12 integrates the shoreline and SEPA review into the overall permit review process. In addition, the proposed amendments would begin this integration at the pre, application review stage which is the initial review of a proposal by the City. This early integration is one of the underpinnings of the recent amendments in the SEPA Guidelines. Further, the shoreline process in Chapter 21.03 is consistent with current state noticing requirements. It should be noted that the City's Shoreline Master Program is out of date with current noticing requirements and staff will be preparing amendments to the program to address this issue. Permit Exemptions - Table A in Section 21.03.030 includes several activities and permits which are exempt. This is based on the authority provided in section 36.70B. 140 RCW which allows local government to exempt landmark designations, street vacations or other approvals relating to the use of public areas that present special circumstances that wan'ant a different review process other than that required under the growth management laws (RCW 36.70B). Under this provision, staff is recommending that home occupations, recreational vehicle 90 day permits, sign permits, surplus or sale of public property and street vacations be exempt from the growth management laws. These permit requests are relatively minor permits, have a review process which is less than the 120 day requirement of the state growth management law and the extensive public review required by RCW 36.70B would add an unnecessary burden for these type of activities. Section 36.70B. 140 RCW also allows local government to exclude lot line adjustments, building and other construction permits or similar administrative approvals that are either categorically exempt from environmental review or for which environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits (normally land use permits approved prior to building permits). This is also being proposed by staff for several reasons. It is the same approach which has been adopted by Kitsap County and without such a provision would put Bremerton in a competitive disadvantage with the County. Further, numerous other communities statewide have also exempted building permits from the regulatory reform requirements. According to a representative of the Municipal Research Services Center of Washington, over 33 out of 60 jurisdictions surveyed exempt building permits. Besides Kitsap County, some other communities include Vancouver, Redmond, Edmonds, East Wenatchee, Battle Gound and Bainbridge Island. The exemption also enhances economic development by providing greater predictability. Building permits exposed to appeals to the Planning Commission and subsequently to the City Council can result in exposure to lengthy delays in the development process which is costly and discourages development in the community. Further, it should be noted that only buildings that are either categorically exempt or where an environmental document was prepared on a previous permit would be exempt from the ordinance. Thus, exempt projects would either have been reviewed through a previous permit or are minor in nature. ZTA 98-1 Planning Commission Staff Report November 11, 1998 Page -4- The exempting of building permits also does away with a current conflict. The Uniform Building Code provides for an appeal process in which an appeals board for Bremerton has already been established. The current appeal process in Chapter 21.02 would have any building permit appeal reviewed by the Planning Commission. With the exception of a larger building which had no prior permit review, the proposed amendment would resolve this issue and allow building permit appeals reviewed by the more technically oriented appeals board. Preapplication Meeting - Section 21.03.040 establishes the preapplication review process for Type H to IV permits. This provision generally reflects the City's current requirements. However, the proposed amendment provides more detail of the process, would establish a time frame (14 days) to conduct the preapplication meeting and specifies the contents of a required written response. Technical Review - Proposed Section 21.03.060, Technical Review maintains the technical review process established by the current ordinance. However, the proposed amendment identifies the technical review in the context of the overall permit review process. Further, the technical review is also expanded to address environmental issues related to SEPA. Application Completeness and Incompleteness - The current ordinance provides for the determination of application completeness and incompleteness. These basic provisions have been incorporated into the proposed revisions, including the 28 day determination period and the 90 day time period to provide information. However, additional concepts are provided in the amendment including: Relating the determination through the technical review process; Allowing the Director to determine an application complete with information either waive or postponed; Specifying the factors to consider in make a completeness determination; Allowing the applicant to postpone the review process for up to 180 days; and Limiting the amount of refund to 50 percent of the application fees. These additional provisions are included to provide more flexibility and clarity of the requirements over that provided in the current ordinance. Notice of Application - Section 21.03.090 establishes the timing and sequence of the Notice of Application in the permit review process. The notice is not intended to be required for Type I or IV applications. Thus, subsection 21.03.090 Co)(1)(A) needs to be modified to delete the reference to Type I permits. In addition, a new subsection 21.03.090 (b) (3) should be added to indicate that all decisions involving SEPA review must also comply with the provisions of Chapter 21.12, Environmental Review Procedures and WAC 197-11. Staff will be submitting specific amendments at the hearing. Section 21.03.140 identifies tli'e content and distribution of the notices. Staff has proposed some modifications to the notice content and responsibilities which will be discussed below. ZTA 98-1 Planning Commi-*sion Staff Report November 11, 1998 Page -5- Application Types - Section 21.03.100 to .130 establishes the application types (Types I to IV), review process and notice of decision requirements. The most notable change from the ex/sting procedures is that approval of Type I applications where no SEPA review is involved has to be made within 28 days rather than 78 days. Further, these sections identifies the timing, distribution and contents ora Notice of Decision. The distribution includes the applicant, any known neighborhood association and other parties of interest. The current ordinance does not provide any distribution requirements although admini-~tiatively staff does distribute notices to the applicant and other parties of interest as well as other agencies. The Commission may consider adding agencies with jurisdiction as part of the distribution requirements. Public Notice - As previously mentioned, Section 21.03.140 establishes the content and distribution for the Notice of Application and Public Hearing notice. As proposed, the most notable changes are: Notice of Application for Type II projects is not required to be published in the newspaper but would be mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project; Newspaper notices have been simplified to match the requirements of state law (RCW 36.70B.110 (4); Require the applicant to pay for the cost of all newspaper publications; and Require the applicant to post notices on the subject property. RCW 36.70B. 110 (4) allows local jurisdictions by ordinance to determine the appropriate method of public notification for Notice of Applications. Thus, staff is proposing that those applications not requiring public heating review would also not require the application notice be published. To balance the elimination of the published notice, staff included that notices be mailed to property owners within 300 feet. For Type III applications, legal notices must be mailed to property owners within 300 feet and thus, the 300 foot mailing for application notices would maintain consistency with the legal notices. Staff's main concern about the newspaper publication is financial. The cost of public notices are averaging over $40 per ad. The Department's overall expenditure on legal notices to date is about twice as much that budgeted (approximately $4,000 budgeted versus $8,000 spent). Further, the cost of legal ads cannot be absorbed by the City's relatively low permit fees. It is for this reason that a provision (21.03.140 (e)) is being proposed to charge the applicant the cost of the legal notice. However, the cost to mail notices to property owners within 300 feet may be expensive in highly developed areas. Thus, the Commission may wish to consider whether to require newspaper ads for application notices with the applicant paying the cost or eliminate the newspaper ad with a mailing or some other method of notification. ZTA 98-1 Planning Commission Staff Report November 11, 1998 Page -6- The application posting is another provision staff is proposing to reduce City costs. It places the burden on the applicant which can be verified by staff during their site inspection. If the applicant fails to post in a timely manner, the required review period is extended (Section 21.03.150 (a)(3)(C)). Timelines and Duration of Approval - Section 21.03.150 establishes the timeline to approve a project and the duration the approval is valid. The current ordinance exempts from the approval timeline, the time required to process an appeal. Staff proposes a new subsection 21.03.150 (a)(3)(E) to include such a provision. The proposed wording will be distributed at the hearing. Appeals - Section 21.03.160 addresses the appeal process. This section brings together various appeal provisions for permits which are in several sections of the existing ordinance as well as addressing any SEPA appeals. The timing and review body are consistent with the City's current requirements. The proposed ordinance (21.03.160 (c)(4)) establishes a standard that any decision, "is in error as a matter of fact or law." This standard does not exist in the current ordinance and would provide more guidance as to an appropriate appeal. Chapter 21.02, Zoning Ordinance: Most of the proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance is to either repeal the general procedural requirements of the chapter or to reference the proposed Chapter 21.03 in the various permit procedures. However, staff is also proposing two amendments pertaining to Planned Actions and Site Development Review. Planned actions is a process to reduce the SEPA review process for projects which qualify under a "planned action" ordinance. Section 21.02.865, Planned Actions is proposed to be amended to eliminate the planned action determination process for a permit since this is a SEPA related issue. As a result, these provisions are incorporated into Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions. The standard for project review once the determination is made remains unchanged. Section 21.02.930 (c) pertaining to site plan review procedures proposes the deletion of a separate fee when a site plan review is required as part of another permit. The current fee is $65 for any project except one single-family house which there is no fee. Staffis proposing this amendment to not encourage the concurrent review of planning and building applications. Such a concurrent process may result in high and unnecessary costs to the applicant. Further, it may be a waste of staff time to review the building plans which may change as a result of the planning review. This is particularly critical if building permits are not exempt fi'om the permit review process since only 28 days is required to determine an application complete. Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development: As a result of the adoption of the State Shoreline Management Act in 1971, this section was set into place in 1972 to address the review of shoreline development applications. Since that time, the City's Shoreline Master Program was adopted in 1977 and Section 21.02.860, Shore~ne Decisions, as added to the City's Zoning Ordinance. Since the master program is now adopted and proposed Chapter 21.03 addresses shoreline permit process requirements, staff is proposing the deletion of Chapter 21.04. ZTA 98-1 Planning Commission Staff Report November 11, 1998 Page -7- Chapter 21.12, State Environmental Policy Act (to be renamed Environmental Review Procedures): Overall, staff is redirecting the function of this chapter. As it currently exists, the various sections restate and make reference to various provisions in WAC 197-11. This creates two problems. Amendments in the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) would require amendments to the City's codes. In addition, the current chapter does not indicate how the SEPA review relates to the permit review process. To address these issues, staff is proposing the referencing of the administrative codes (21.12.020) and the establishment of a new procedures for environmental review (21.12.050). It is staff' s intent that the procedures and requirements under the state code requirements must be met to comply with the City's requirements. This reference will allow the City to "automatically" update its requirements as a result of changes in WAC's. The procedures clarifies the relationship between the underlying permit and SEPA review process, and where possible, brings those processes together. As previously mentioned, this approach is taken to implement the intent of the most recent changes in the WAC's to better integrate SEPA and project review under the growth management requirements. Chapter 21.12 also would increase the maximum exemption level for minor new construction, except where the project covers water or is subject to Chapter 21.22, Critical Lands. WAC 197-11-800 (1)(c) allows a jurisdiction to increase the exemption level where supported by local conditions. As indicated in Section 21.12.080 (b), these higher exemption levels are justified since the City of Bremerton is an urban area, intended to accommodate urban levels and type of development, and such development would have less environmental impacts in urban areas than in nonurban areas. The proposed increase in the exemption level would be as follows: Number of dwelling units from 4 to 20 units; Size of a nonresidential building from 4,000 square feet to 12,000 square feet with associated parking increased from 20 to 40 automobiles; Size of parking lot from 20 to 40 automobiles; and The amount of excavation from 100 to 500 cubic yards. Staff did not propose any changes to the size of agricultural buildings which remain unchanged at 10,000 square feet. JON HOLAN Planning Manager interoffice MEMORANDUM to: from: subject: date: Planning Commission Jon Holan Minor Amendments for ZTA 98-1 November 17, 1998 As mentioned in the staff report distributed with the Commission's packet, staff is submitting proposed minor revisions to Chapter 21.03 of the proposed zoning text amendment as well as the proposed resolution. Both the proposed amendments and the resolution are attached. Concerning the amendments, staff has made further review since the preparation of the staff report and proposes several changes as follows: Item 1 is a proposed change to Subsection 21.03.040 to change the timing of the pre- application review meeting. In scheduling pre-application meetings, staff waits until after the cutoff date to determine the time for a pre-application meeting. This allows staffto group various pre-applications by the departments needed to participate in the meeting. For example, all applications requiring Fire Department participation can be grouped in one time block so that the Department representative can make better use of his or her time. Staff was also concerned about providing some additional time for larger, more complex projects. Such projects may likely require some additional time to research issues. Thus, staff is proposing an amendment to allow three weeks after submittal to hold meeting rather than two weeks. Item 2 is included as staffindicated in the previous report. Item 3 is a different approach than that indicated in the prior staff' report. As previously indicated, Type I projects were not intended to have any notice requirements which is consistent with the current ordinance. This requirement creates the situation that there would be no notice on decisions such as zoning and plan interpretations, landscape plan approvals, minor amendments to land use permits, etc.. The proposed amendment would allow concerned parties to be informed of the decision. The tradeoff is that it would increase staff and processing time to administer Type I applications or determinations, which is the bulk of the activities staff processes. As an alternative, site plan review could become a Type II rather than Type I process. This would apply to all proposed projects which would result in new development or expansion of existing structures or other exterior improvements that will change the physical condition of the site. This alternative would require the review process to be more formalized with all the notice requirements. This formalized process would support staff's objective of separating the planning.review from building review. Item 4 identifies miscellaneous amendments. PROPOSED MINOR A~fE~~S TO CHAPTER 21.03 (ATTACHMENT A) 1. On page 6, amend Subsection 21.03.040 (d) as follows: (d) A pre, application review mee~...,..S...h..~!...~?...)~!.d .~i.[..h!.'.[!.~~..(;.~) days after receip_,.t..~,~f an a~o~ for pr~e~pplic.:.a.,~on ii~. '.-'~ '.. ...:.: .... ~!~ ~,:.:.. ~. "ii>... ~;~i :¢:.. ': ':' '~ ............ :'-' -:~'.'? .... :-..,*..&:~: ..~'.:.-':'--'::----'--:..:,:.--:¢!: .-..:-.-.-:-:---.:g...*::i-~ ..... ::~:~:~ ...:..& '~.!.:!.::".:!;:....:..~ ~~i~..~.~..~L~P... ..................... ~ Where possible, the applicant shall be notified of the meeting's time hha~. ibC pcoj¢¢~ is ¢.o,,,plex, the applicant shall be notified of the meeting within seven ..... days of application submittal. 2. On page 12, add new Subsection 21.03.090 (b)(3) as follows: 3. On page 12, modify Subsection 21.03.100 (b) as follows: Co) For a Type I application, public notices including Notice of Completeness as identified in Section 21.03.070, ~ Notice of Application as identified in Section 21.03.090 and21 0-2~::~":~ ~ ~,,-,~}~:0~ ,,^7~::-'-~ ...... ~,,u ,,,~u,.~ m ~,,,~,u, are not required. Any notice requirements pursuant to Chapter 21.12 shall be met. 4. Miscellaneous amendments as follows: ge On page 3, revise "(I)" to "(i)"; On page 5, Zoning Map Amendment review authority be changed from "D" to "CC"; On page 9, Subsection 21.03.0~0 (a)(5) should be amended as follows: (5) A site plan of the subject property that shall be drawn to scale and shall provide sufficient information the ~ clearly describe the proposal. At a minimum, the site plan shall show the location of all existing and proposed buildings and structures as well as any other physical changes to the subject property; On page 9, change reference in Subsection 21.03.050 (a)(7) from "21.03.040 (h)" to "21.03.040 (O"; On page 10, change references in Subsection 21.03.070 (b) from "Section 21.03.500 (a)" and "21.12.050 (d)(3)" to "Section 21.03.050 (a)" and "Section 21.12.050 (d)";' On page 11, under Section 21.03.080, there are two subsection (b). second subsection (b) to (c) and renumber the remaining accordingly; Change the subsections G. On page 14, renumber Subsection 21.03.110 (d) to (f); On page 20, renumber the reference in Subsection 21.03.140 (c) from "21.03.110 (d)' to "21.03.110 (f)"; and I. On page 25, change Subsection 21.03.160 (h)(2)(C)(I) to 21.03.160 (h)(2)(C)(i) and Subsection 21.03.160 (h) to 21.03.160 (i). BREM~J~TON PLANNING ~OMMISSION RKSOLUTION NUMBER 9g-07 Wg[l;~_,AS,the City of Bremerton has submitted Zone Text Amendment ZTA 98-1 which include revisions to Title 21, Land Use to consolidate and revise the procedures to process development applications, to delete Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development, and to revise Chapter 21.12, State Environmental Policy Act to comply with recent revisions to the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11; and W~REAS, the Planning Commission held a worksession on the matter on October 20, 1998 and held a public hearing on November 17, 1998; and W3:I~,~S~e proposed amendments are procedural and are categorically exempt pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (20), Procedural Actions and the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) are met. NOW, TI~REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Bremerton Planning Commission makes the following findings in support of Zoning Text Amendment ZTA 98-1: The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the Comprehensive Plan since it is procedural,, does not change any development or performance requirements required by the City, allows higher level of categorical exemptions in urban areas where such activity is contemplated, and maintains the current level of categorical exemptions in areas of environmental sensitivity; and The proposed amendment consolidates current requirements with appropriate revisions which do not conflict with the affected code, as amended, by deleting certain existing portions of Chapter 21.02 pertaining to permit processing, by deleting Chapter 21.04 which has been superseded by the City of Bremerton's Shoreline Master Program, and by revising Chapter 21.12 to be consistent with WAC 197-11 and integrated with the City's permit process. BE IT FURTItER RESOLVED, that the Bremerton Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the Bremerton City Council the adoption of Zoning Text Amendment ZTA 98-1 as set forth in Exhibit A. APPROVED: Bill Robinson, Chairperson Date ATTEST: / , ~/~ '~[0LAN; ~E CRETARY BREM~RTON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NUM2BER 98-07 WlrW~S~e City of Bremerton has submitted Zone Text Amendment ZTA 98-1 which include revisions to Title 21, Land Use to consolidate and revise the procedures to process development applications, to delete Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development, and to revise Chapter 21.12, State Environmental Policy Act to comply with recent revisions to the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11; and WItEREAS, the Planning Commission held a worksession on the matter on October 20, 1998 and held a public hearing on November 17, 1998; and WFIE~REAS,the proposed amendments are procedural and are categorically exempt pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (20), Procedural Actions and the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) are met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Bremerton Planning Commission makes the following findings in support of Zoning Text Amendment ZTA 98-1: The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the Comprehensive Plan since it is proceduraL,, does not change any development or performance requirements required by the City, allows higher level of categorical exemptions in urban areas where such activity is contemplated, and maintains the current level of categorical exemptions in areas of environmental sensitivity; and The proposed amendment consolidates current requirements with appropriate revisions which do not conflict with the affected code, as amended, by deleting certain existing portions of Chapter 21.02 pertaining to permit processing, by deleting Chapter 21.04 which has been superseded by the City of Bremerton's Shoreline Master Program, and by revising Chapter 21.12 to be consistent with WAC 197-11 and integrated with the City's permit process. BE IT FURTtlER RESOLVED, that the Bremerton Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the Bremerton City Council the adoption of Zoning Text Amendment ZTA 98-1 as set forth in Exhibit A. APPROVED: Bill Robinson, Chairperson Date ATTEST: /0~ ~IOLAN, SECRETARY EXHIBIT A ZONING TEXT AMbieNT ZTA 98-1 The following are proposed deletions and amendments to Chapters 21.02 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. Delete Section 21.02.840 TYPE I ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS. Delete Section 21.02.845 TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS WITII NOTICE. Delete Section 21.02.850 TYPE III CITY COUNCIL DECISIONS. Delete Section 21.02.855 TYPE IV I.EGISLATIVE DECISIONS. Delete Section 21.02.860 SHORELINE DECISIONS. Amend Section 21.02.865 PLANNED ACTIONS. 21.02.865 PLANNED ACTIONS. (d ~ Project review of a planned action shall not address its appropriateness nor question the basis of its proposal in a comprehensive plan or other adopted document. Project review shall be used to identify specific project design and conditions relating to the character of development, such as the details of site plans, related public facilities and services, payment of impact or other fees, or other measures that may be needed to mitigate probable adverse environmental impacts. (Ord. 4567, Amended, 09/19/1996) Delete Section 21.02.870 GENERAL PROCESSING PROCEDURES. Delete Section 21.02.875 PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATION. Delete Section 21.02.880 PUBLIC I:I~ARINGS. Delete Section 21.02.885 DECISIONS. Delete Section 21.02.890 TIME LIMITS ON DECISIONS. Delete Section 21.02.895 NOTICE Amend Section 21.02.900(e) - Development Agreements Form and Processing (e) Form and Processing: (1) Development agreements shall be in a form provided by the City Attorney's office. The City Attorney shall review and approve all proposed agreements prior to consideration by the City Council. (2) A development agreement shall be approved as a Type ~ ~ decision by the City Council following an open record public hearing. (3) The agreement shall be recorded with the real property records of Kitsap County and shall be binding on the parties and their successors during its term. Amend Section 21.02.905 - Special Use Permit Procedures as follows: (c) Procedure: A Special Use Permit is processed in accordance with the procedures ~}¢~~~~h~3~. ~ Ad~strative S~ does not require a public h~g ~d is proces~ ~ a T~e ~ application. A S~ that may have sig~ficant impacts beyond the mediate site, that is ofnei~borhood- or co~ufiw-Mde interest, or that may be of a sensitive or ~ntroversifl nature, may be classified a Non-ad~strative S~ by the Director and processed as a T~e ~ application. Amend Section 21.02.910(c) - Variance Procedure as follows: (c) Procedure: A Variance is processed in accordance with the procedures outtined~ .... !_ ._ ,-,,.~ ,,-~,-, ~c~,,'x __ _~ ~ ...... _' ....... _' .......... ~ .... '_ ___ .-,,.~ ,.'.,,,n tx.,~tr [~:!:i:!:!::.::i:!:i..~i:!..~:~:!~..::iii:!:iii::..i~:;:~:!:::iii~:......~...:~:~:~:~:?~:i:?::5:~:i:!:iii~i..ii~?:...:~~: &oct Amend Section 21.02.915(c) - Special Exception Procedures as follows: (c) Procedure: A Special Exception is processed in accordance with the procedures en:rdined ~~!!~i!~~!~~:~ and is approved administratively as a Type rld;cision'. ....... Amend Section 21.02.920(c) - Rezone Procedure as follows: (c) Procedure: (-1-) A single-parcel or small area rezone is a quasi-judicial action that is processed in accordance with the procedures ,~,.,,,,,~ mill. d&t~;:l L.&JII~IUClIII~ the .... ,, _ __ ~ _ _ a w£i[[~ii [estir~ioiiy, Amend Section 21.02.925(c) - Development Regulation Amendment Procedure as follows: (c) Procedure: ~~!!~!~:~i~i6~i::~!.~!~:i~i~?i:¢~::.i~he Planning Commission will conduct an open record public hearing for all amendments that are proposed to land use, environmental, or other related regulations and shall make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council, following its own open record public hearing, may approve, approve with modifications, deny, or remand the proposal for additional study. Amend 21.02.930(c) - Site Plan Review Procedures as follows: (c) Review Procedures: (~2_) A Site Plan shall be submitted as part of the application for a proposal that involves a new or modified structure, or other physical improvements or changes to its site. Site Plan Review shall be included as one step in the processing of the requested permit(s) and a separai.¢ fee (~) A request to review a conceptual, speculative, or other Site Plan that is not part ora development application shall be treated as an independent application and shall be accompanied by a Site Plan Review fee. (~ A cursory review of a conceptual or sketch plan during a pre-application conference shall be provided at no charge to assist the potential applicant. Such review shall not be an official review for decision-making purposes. (~ The Site Plan shall be reviewed for consistency with applicable regulations and development standards. Based on the ~ and co.m...p.!exity of the project, the Director shall determine whether the rexnew' is' done by ~ ~-~mmun~~pment'"'~a'""~';: ........ ,.. ~'~:~' ""~*' ~....a:~.`*~:`.~..`.~*~:~a:~*..`.~.`..:.~:~:~:~:~:~:..`.:.....:~:~:...:..`.~:~:~*~::`...`.~:~*~:~:~::: staff or by the Technical Review Committee consisting of representatives from all affected departments and agencies." Delete Section 21.02.935 APPEAL Delete Figure 21.02.840 - PERMIT PROCESSING SUMMARY Delete Figure 21.02.895(a) - NOTICE REQUn~MENTS Delete Figure 21.02.895(b) - CONTENTS OF NOTICE APPLICATIONS Adopt new Chapter 21.03 as shown in Attachmem A Delete Chapter 21.04, Shoreline Development Amend Chapter 21.12 as shown in Attachment B. ATTACHMENT A Chapter 21.03 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES Sections: 21.03.010 PURPOSE, APPLICABILITY, AND GENERAL PROCESS 21.03.020 DEFINITIONS 21.03.030 TYPE CLASSI~CATION OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES, PERMITS AND REGULATIONS 21.03.040 21.03.050 21.03.060 21.03.070 21.03.080 21.03.090 21.03.100 21.03.110 21.03.120 21.03.130 21.03.140 21.03.150 21.03.160 PREAPPLICATION MEETING APPLICATION SUBMITTAL TECHNICAL REVIEW DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION CONIPLETENESS INCOMPLETE APPLICATION NOTICE OF APPLICATION TYPE I - MINIS~~ DECISION TYPE II -ADM]NISTRATIVE DECISION TYPE m - QUASI JUDICLAL DECISION TYPE IV - LEGISLATIVE DECISION PUBLIC NOTICE TEVIELINES AND DURATION OF APPROVAL APPEALS 21.03.010 PURPOSE, APPLICABILITY, AND GENERAL PROCESS (a) Purpose and Applicability. The purpose of this Chapter is to provide timely and predictable procedures and an integrated project review process for applications for development under the Bremerton Municipal Code and other applicable City Ordinances. (b) Conflicts. In the event of conflicts between any provision of this Chapter and other Chapters of the Bremerton Municipal Code or other ordinances, the procedures contained in this Chapter shall govern. (c) Process. Generally, the process for review of project applications shall consist of the following stages: (1) Preapplication Meeting (2) Summary of Requirements for Processing (3) Application (4) Application Type Classification (5) Completeness Determination(s) (6) Initiation of Appropriate Public Involvement Process (7) Decision by Appropriate Official or Body (8) Appeal Period 21.0:3.020 DEFINITIONS (a) "Council" or "City Council" means the City Council of the City of Bremerton. (b) "Closed record appeal" means an administrative appeal on the record to the City Council following an open record hearing on a project permit application on the record with no or limited new evidence or information allowed to be submitted and only appeal argument allowed. (c) "Day(s)" means calendar days. (d) "Director" means the Director of the City of Bremerton Department of Economic and Community Development, or the Director's designee. (e) "Open record heating" means a hearing, conducted by a single hearing body or officer authorized by City of Bremerton to conduct such hearings, that creates City of Bremerton's public record through testimony and submission of evidence and information, under procedures prescribed by City of Bremerton by ordinance or resolution. On appeal, an open record hearing may only be held only if no open record predecision hearing was held on a project permit. All other appeals will be closed record appeals. (f) "Open record predecision hearing" means a hearing held prior to City of Bremerton's decision on a project permit. (g) "Project permit" or "project permit application" means any land use or environmental permit or license required from City of Bremerton for a project action, including, but not limited to, building permits, subdivisions, binding site plans, planned un/t developments, conditional uses, shoreline substantial development permits, site plan review, permits or approvals required by critical area ordinances, site-specific rezones authorized by the City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan (Plan) or a subarea plan, but excluding the adoption or amendment of the Plan, a subarea plan, or development regulations except as otherwise specifically included in this Ordinance. (h) "PubLic meeting" means an information meeting, hearing, workshop, or other gathering of people to obtain comments from the public or other agencies on a proposed project permit prior to City of Bremerton's decision. A public meeting may include a scoping meeting on a dra~ enviromental impact statement. A public meeting does not include an open record hearing. Unless a requirement of the body conducting the meeting, the proceedings at a public meeting are not required to be recorded. A report or recommendation may be included in the City of Bremerton 2 project permit application file. (i) "Review authority" means the Director, or other City official or their designee, processing and making land use and development decisions. :21.03.030 TYPE CLASSIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES, PERMITS AND REGULATIONS (a) Upon presentation, all development applications shall be classified by the City as either Type I, Type ]/, Type GI or Type IV. The classification shall be in accordance with Table A below and shall determine the process which will govern the review of the application for approval. TABLE A CLASSIFICATION PERMIT/ACTIVITY Review Authority Exempt Type I Type Type Type Amendments of CC X Comprehensive Plan Amendments of CC X Re~ulations Annexations CC X Appeal of Type I Decision PC X Appeal of Type II Decision CC X Building Code BO X Interpretation Building Permit BO X Comp and Neighborhood D X Plan Interpretations Construction Standards, CC X Amendment Design Keview where D X required by Special Area Plan CLASSHZICATION PERMIT/A~ Review Authority Exempt Type I Type Type Type H HI IV Determination of Zone D X Boundaries Deve!0Pment A~reemen~ CC " X District, community, CC X neighborhood or other special area plans Final Planned Unit D X Development Home Occupations D X Landscape.Plan Approval D X Lot Line Adjustment D X~ X2 Major Amendment to Type cC X 1II decision Minor Amendment to land D X ,use permit Preliminary Planned Unit CC X Development Urban Renewal Plan CC X Recreational Vehicle 90- D X day permit Rezone for specific CC X ,properties Or small area .... SiN Permit D X Shoreline PC X Conditional Use Permit and Variance Shoreline Substantial D X ..Development. Permit Short Subdivision D X Site Development Activity CE X Permit (grading, clearing, drainage) CLASSIFICATION PERMIT/ACTIVITY Review Authority Exempt Type I Type Type Type II 1TI IV Site Plan Review not D X associated with another land use permit Special Exception D X Special Use Permit - D X Administrative Special Use Permit - Non- CC Administrative X Surplus or sale of other CC X public property Vacation of Street Right- CC X of-Way Variance X Temporary Emergency D X Wetland or Stream Permit Wetland or Stream D X Assessment Wetland or Stream Permit D X Zoning Interpretations D X Zoning Map Amendment CC X (other than single lot or small area rezones) ~Where proposal in either categorically exempt from environmental review or where an environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits. 2For those projects not meeting the requirements identified in footnote 1 above. D - Director CE-City Engineer BO-Building Official PC-Planning Commission CC-City Council Co) If this Ordinance expressly provides that an application is subject to one of the four types of procedures or another procedure, then the application shall be processed accordingly. If this Ordinance does not expressly provide for review using one of the four types of procedures, and another specific procedure is not required by law, the Director shall classify the application as one of the four procedural types and it will be processed accordingly. (1) The act of classifying an application shall be a Type I action. Classification of an application shall be subject to reconsideration and appeal at the same time and in the same way as the merits of the application in question. (2) Where a project requires more than one application type, then all applications may follow the process of the highest application type. As an option, the applicant can request to process each application individually. (c) Where applicable, all substantive and procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and BMC Chapter 21.12, Environmental Review Procedures, shall be met through the application review process established by this Chapter. (1) To the greatest extent possible, all notification requirements as required by Chapter 21.12, shall be combined with the notification requirements of this Chapter. (2) Where a Determination of Significance, Determination of Non-Significance or Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance has been made pursuant to Chapter 21.12 for an application but said application is identified as exempt on Table A or does not require any public notification, then the review process of Chapter 21.12 shall be followed. 21.03.040 PREAPPLICATION MEETENG. (a) The purposes ofpreapplication meeting and review are: (1) To provide the City with sufficient information about a proposed project to enable City staff to classify the project and inform the applicant of approval requirements; (2) To acquaint the applicant with the requirements of this Chapter and other applicable law. The ability of City staff to inform applicants of all requirements is dependent upon the specificity of the information and description of the project provided by the applicant. While it is the intent of the City to inform the applicant of all applicable requirements, failure to identify all requirements through the preapplication review shall not prevent the City from applying all relevant laws to the application; and (3) To provide an opportunity for other City staff and the public to become acquainted with the proposed application and applicable law. Members of the public may attend a pre, application meeting, but it is not a public hearing, and there is no obligation to receive public input. (b) A pre, application meeting is required for Type II, 1II or IV applications. (c) To initiate preapplication review, an applicant shall submit a completed form provided by the Department of Economic and Community Development for that purpose and all information required by the relevant section(s) of this Chapter. Information not provided on the form shall be provided on attachments such as drawings, required checklists or other documents. (d) A preapplication review meeting shall be held within fourteen (14) days alter receipt of an application for preapplication review, unless it is determined by staffthat the project is complex. For a complex project, the preapplication review shall be held within twenty-one (21) days after receipt of an application. Where possible, the applicant shall be notified of the meeting's time and location at the time of submitting a presubmittal application, otherwise, the applicant shall be notified of the meeting within seven (7) days of application submittal. (e) The Director shall designate a staff'member who shall coordinate the involvement of City staff responsible for planning, development and environmental review, roads, drainage, parks and other subjects, as appropriate, in the preapplication review process. Responsible staff' shall either attend the preapplication meeting or take other steps to fulfill the purposes of pre-application review. (f) Within seven (7) days after the date of the preapplication meeting, the review authority shall mail to the applicant a written summary of the Preapplication Review. To the extent possible, utilizing the information provided by the applicant, the written summary shall: (1) Briefly describe the proposed project including any phasing; (2) Identify all relevant City applications required for the proposed project including: (A) Submittal requirements for each application; and 03) Applicable approval criteria for said applications; (3) Preliminary determination if the proposed project is categorically exempt from SEPA requirements, or if'not exempt, preliminary determination of the lead agency for environmental review; (4) Where known, identify applications required by other local, state and/or federal agencies; (5) Identify relevant development and environmental issues associated with the proposed project including but not limited to critical areas and shoreline environments; (6) Evaluate any information the applicant has offered to comply with the relevant criteria and standards, and identify additional information that is needed to comply with the relevant criteria and standards or is recommended to respond to other issues; (7) Identify all applicable City fees in effect at the time of the meeting and a statement that fees may change; (8) Identify other information relevant to the application which is in the possession of the City or other agencies of which the City is aware, such as: (A) Comprehensive plan map designation and zoning on and in the vicinity of the property which is the subject of the application; (B) Applicable comprehensive plan and neighborhood plan policies and relevant development standards and regulations; (C) Physical development limitations, such as steep or unstable slopes, wetlands, well head protection areas, or water bodies, that exist on and in the vicinity of the property subject to the application; (D) Public facilities that will serve the subject property, including fire services, roads, storm drainage, and, if residential, parks and schools. Also, related service considerations, such as minimum access and fire flow requirements or other minimum service levels; and 05) Other applications that have been approved or are being processed for projects in the vicinity of the proposed application that may affect or be affected by the proposal in the application. 21.03.050 APPLICATION SUBMTI~AL (a) The applicant shall submit applications for all relevant permits. The following information shall be provided for all applications. The Director may waive any portion of the following information requirements if it is found to be unnecessary: (1) A completed original application form(s) signed by (a) the owner(s) of the property which is the subject of the application; or (b) a representative authorized to do so by written instrument executed by the owner(s) and filed with the application. An application subject to Type IV review may be filed by the Director, the Planning Commission or the City Council without the signature or consent of the property owner(s); (2) A legal description supplied by a title company, surveyor licensed in the state of Washington, or other party approved by the review authority; (3) A current County Assessor map(s) showing the property(ies) subject to the application; (4) Vicinity Map showing the location of the subject property and including surrounding major streets, shorelines and other reference points; (5) A site plan of the subject property that shall be drawn to scale and shall provide sn~cient information that clearly describes the proposal. At a minimum, the site plan shall show the location of all existing and proposed buildings and structures as well as any other physical changes to the subject property; (6) Mailing labels with names and addresses of ail owners of record of parcels within the notification radius for the type permit requested. Such notices shall not be required for Type I applications; (7) A copy of the Preapplication Meeting Summary as required by 21.03.040 (f), unless waived by the Director or if the application is submitted within the seven day timeline allowed to prepare the Summary; (8) The applicable fee(s) adopted by the City Council for the application(s) in question; (9) All of the information required in the relevant sections of this Chapter; (10) If not categorically exempt, a completed and signed environmental checklist and any other supporting documentation provided by the applicant or identified in the presubmittal meeting; and (11) Any additional information identified by the Director following the preapplication meeting as necessary to provide the City with sufficient information about the proposed project. (b) The Department shall establish an official file containing ail applications, correspondence and other materials related to the application(s). The file is public record and available for inspection at the Department during normal working hours. 21.03.060 TECHNICAL REVIEW (a) Upon their receipt, Type II, III and IV applications will be distributed to other City departments, agencies and interested organizations for their review and comment during a specified comment period of 14 days from receipt of application(s). (b) The technical review process shall address both project and environmental impact analysis. (c) The technical review shall: (1) Determine consistency of the project with applicable plans and regulations. At a minimum, this consistency determination shall address the following areas: (A) Type of land uses allowed; 03) Level (density or intensity) of development allowed; (C) Compliance with applicable development standards, regulations and/or guidelines; and CD) Adequacy of needed infrastructure; (2) Evaluate potential environmental impacts and mitigation.measures, and assist in the threshold determination Section 21.12.050. 21.03.070 DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION COMPLETENESS (a) Upon completion of the Technical Review and within twenty-eight (28) days of application submittal, the City shall determine whether each application is complete or incomplete. A written Notice of Completeness or Incompleteness shall be mailed to the applicant within the prescribed time period. (b) The decision determining an application complete and imposition of any requirements for engineering, traffic or other studies shall be based on the criteria set forth in this Chapter, other applicable laws and relevant implementing measures timely adopted by the review authority. An application is deemed complete if it includes the information provided in Section 21.03.050 (a) and 21.12.050 (d), or if additional information identified through the Technical Review process pursuant to 21.03.060 is provided to the satisfaction of the City. The requirement to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (lEIS) pursuant to Chapter 21.12 shall not apply in the determination of completeness. (c) In determining application completeness, the Director may, if appropriate because of the nature of the site, the proposed development or other factors, waive or modify, in writing with supporting reasons, application requirements that are clearly not necessary to show a proposal complies with relevant criteria and standards of this Chapter. (d) At the sole discretion of the Director, an application may be deemed sufficiently complete for continued processing and a Notice of Completeness may be issued even though additional information is required or project modifications may be undertaken subsequently. In such circumstances, the determination of completeness shall not preclude the reviewing authority from requesting additional information or studies either at the time of the Notice of Completeness or subsequently if new information is required or substantial changes in the proposed action occur. 10 (e) A Type II or 1II application shall be deemed complete if a written determination has not been mailed to the applicant within twenty-eight (28) days of the date the application is submitted. 21.03.080 INCObIPLETE APPLICATION (a) The application shall be deemed incomplete, if the Director finds: (1) That additional information is needed to: (A) Meet the informational requirements of Section 21.03.050 notwithstanding any waivers granted pursuant to Sections 21.03.050 (a) or 21.03.070 (c) or (d); (B) Clarify the information submitted at the time of application; (C) Make the evaluations and determinations required by Section 21.03.060 (c); (2) That the application has been substantially revised as a result of the technical review process and that the information provided at the time of application submittal is found by the Director to be inadequate; (b) If the City determines an application is not complete, the review authority shall send the applicant a written statement rejecting the application and specify what is required to complete the application, including any recommendations for any additional information that, although not necessary to make the application complete, would be recommended to address relevant issues. (c) The applicant shall have 90 days upon the mailing of the Notice of Incompleteness to submit the information requested in the notice. (d) If the applicant does not provide the necessary information within 90 days or refuses in writing to do so, the application shall lapse and shall not be resubmitted for one full year. An application shall only be resubmitted as a new application with full fees. (e) Within the 90 day period as specified within subsection (b), the applicant may request in writing the processing of an application be postponed, in which event, the City will take no further action until the application is reactivated by the applicant, all applicable timelines and deadlines will be stayed in the interim. Applications which have not been reactivated at the end of 180 days after the date of postponement shall be returned to the applicant and deemed to have been voluntarily withdrawn. Withdrawn applications must be resubmitted as new applications with full fees after one full year of the date of postponement. (f) If the application has lapsed for any reason prior to becoming a complete application, fifty (50) percent of the application fees shall be refunded. 21.03.090 NOTICE OF APPLICATION (a) The Notice of Application shall be issued fourteen (14) days after the application has been determined complete pursuant to Section 21.03.070. The contents and distribution of the notice shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 21.03.140. Co) Upon issuance of a Notice of Application, derisions and public heatings shall comply with the following timelines: (1) For applications other than those required by the Shoreline Master Program,: (A) The decisions for Type I and Il shall be made not less than fifteen (15) days atter the issuance of the notice; (B) The public hearing for Type 111 applications shall be held at least fifteen (15) days at~er issuance of the notice; (2) For applications required by the Shoreline Master Program,: (A) For Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, the City's decision shall be made at least thirty (30) days after the issuance of the notice; (B) For Shoreline Variance and Conditional Use Permit, the public hearing shall occur not less than fifteen (15) days after the issuance of the notice and the Notice of Decision pursuant to Section 21.03.080(g) shall be made not less than thirty (30) days after the issuance of the Notice of Application. (3) All decisions involving SEPA shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 21.12, Environmental Review Procedures and WAC 197-11. 21.03.100 TYPE I - MINISTERIAL DECISION (a) Approvals for Type I applications shall meet the following requirements: (1) Where a Type I application is not categorically exempt from the requirements of Chapter 21.12, the review authority shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application within seventy-eight (78) days after the date the application was accepted as complete subject to the provisions of Section 21.03.150. (2) Where a Type I application is exempt from the requirements of Chapter 21.12, the review authority shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application within twenty- eight (28) days after the date the application was accepted as complete; provided, an applicant may agree in writing to extend the time in which the review authority shall issue a decision. The review 12 authority may consider new information the applicant submits with or after such a written agreement. (b) For a Type I application, public notices including Notice of Completeness as identified in Section 21.03.070 and Notice of Application as identified in Section 21.03.090 and 21.03.140 are not required. Any notice requirements pursuant to Chapter 21.12 shall be met. (c) During the review of the application, the Director may initiate a public meeting to be conducted by the City staff, the Planning Commission, neighborhood organization or other appropriate body. The purpose of the meeting is to explain the proposal, discuss its characteristics and alternatives, and receive questions and comments fi.om citizens or other interested parties. Notice no later than ten (10) days prior to the meeting shall be mailed to interested parties and property owners within one hundred (100) feet of the boundaries of the project site. (d) Written notice of a Type I application derision shall be mailed to the applicant, applicant's representative, any party who has commented on the application or other parties as determined by the Director. (1) The applicant or party of record may appeal the decision within fourteen (14) days of the mailing of the decision in accordance with Section 21.03.160. (2) The notice shall identify the applicant's name, a description of the proposal or determination request, the decision on proposal and request, any applicable SEPA determinations, and a statement concerning the right of appeal of the decision or if applicable, SEPA determination. 21.03.110 TYPE ri - ADMINIS~~ DECISION (a) Within fourteen (14) days after the date a Type II application is deemed complete, the City issue a public Notice of Application pending review in accordance with the requirements of Section 21.03.140. (b) The review authority shall mail the applicant a copy of comments timely received in response to the notice together with a statement that the applicant may respond to the comments within fourteen (I4) days from the date the comments are mailed. The review authority shall consider the comments and the applicant's reply, so long as timely received. The review authority may consider comments and responses received after the deadline for filing. (c) For those applications not exempt from the requirements of Chapter 21.12, the Director shall conduct the threshold determination and issue the appropriate determination pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 21.12. (d) During the review of the application, the Director may initiate a public meeting to be conducted by the City staff, the Planning Commission, neighborhood organization or other appropriate body. The purpose of the meeting is to explain the proposal, discuss its characteristics 13 and alternatives, and receive questions and comments from citizens or other interested parties. Notice no later than ten (10) days prior to the meeting shall be mailed to interested parties and property owners within one hundred (100) feet of the boundaries of the project site. (e) A decision shall be made within seventy-eight (78) days from the time the application is deemed complete pursuant to Section 21.03.150, and shall include: (1) A statement of the applicable criteria and standards in this Chapter and other applicable law; (2) A statement of the facts relevant to the decision; (3) The basis for a conclusion to approve or deny; and (4) The decision to deny or approve the application and, if approved, any conditions of approval necessary to ensure that the proposed development will comply with applicable law. (f) Within seven (7) days of the decision, the review authority shall mail a Notice of Decision to the applicant, the applicant's representative, any known neighborhood association in whose area the property in question is situated, and all parties who have requested such notice regarding the application. The Notice of Decision shall include the following information: (1) A statement that the decision and SEPA determination are final, but may be appealed as provided in Section 21.03.160 to the City of Bremerton Planning Commission within fourteen (14) days after the Notice of Decision, with the appeal closing date in boldface type. The statement shall describe basic appeal requirements, including applicable fees and the elements of an appeal statement; (2) A statement that the complete case file, including findings, conclusions and any conditions of approval is available for review. The notice shall list the place, days and times when the case file is avagable and the name and telephone number of the City representative to contact about reviewing the file; and (3) If applicable, a statement that the application qualifies as a planned action project pursuant to Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions. 21.03.120 TYPE Ill - QUASI JUDICIAL DECISION (a) The Notice of Application pursuant to Section 21.03.140 for Type III applications shall be within fourteen (14) days after the day the application is deemed complete; (b) A Type III review process requires one (1) public meeting before the Planning Commission and one (1) open record public hearing before the City Council, with the exception of 14 Shoreline permits. (1) Where public hearings are required by the City of Bremerton's Shoreline Master Program, the Planning Commission shall conduct the public hearing, meet the public hearing requirements of this section and shall render the decision. (2) The public hearing must be held within seventy-eight (78) days after the date the review authority issues the determination that the application is complete, and not less than fitSeen (15) days after a Notice of Application has been issued and any SEPA threshold determination has been made. (c) At least ten (10) days before the date of a heating for a Type III application, the review authority shall issue a public notice of the hearing in accordance with the requirements in Section 21.03.140 of this chapter. (d) At least seven (7) days before the date of the heating, the Director shall issue a written staff report and recommendation regarding the application(s). The Director shall make the staff report and recormnendation available for public review and inspection and shall mail a copy without charge to the applicant and applicant's representative. The Director shall mail or provide a copy of the staff report at reasonable charge, as determined by the review authority, to all other parties who request it. (e) Public hearings shall be conducted in accordance with applicable rules of procedure, except to the extent waived by the review authority, and recorded on audio or audiovisual tape. (f) At the conclusion of the hearing on each application, the City Council shall announce one of the following: (1) That the hearing is continued. If'the hearing is continued to a place, date and time certain, additional notice of the continued hearing is not required to be mailed, published or posted. If the hearing is not continued to a place, date and time certain, notice of the continued hearing shall be given as though it was the initial heating; or (2) That the application(s) is/are denied, approved or approved with conditions, together with a brief summary of the basis for the decision, and that a final order will be issued as provided in subsection (g) of this section. (g) The City Council shall issue a written decision regarding the application(s) within fourteen (14) days after the date the record closes. The decision shall include: (1) A statement of the applicable criteria and standards in this Chapter and other applicable law; 15 (2) A statement of the facts that the review authority found showed the application does or does not comply with each applicable approval criterion and standards; (3) The basis for conclusions to approve, deny or impose conditions; and (4) The decision to deny or approve the application and, if approved, any conditions of approval necessary to ensure that the proposed development will comply with applicable criteria and standards. (h) Within seven (7) days from the date of the decision, the Director shall mail the Notice of Decision to the applicant and applicant's representative, all parties of record and any other parties requesting the Notice of Decision. The mailing shall include a notice which includes the following information: (1) A statement that the decision and SEPA determination are final, but may be appealed as provided in Section 21.03.160 of this chapter to Superior Court within fourteen (14) days after the date the notice is mailed. The appeal closing date shall be listed in boldface type. The statement shall describe how a party must appeal the decision, including the basic elements of a petition for review; (2) A statement that the complete case file is available for review, listing the place, days and times where the case file is available and the name and telephone number of the City representative to contact for information about the case; and (3) If applicable, a statement that the application qualifies as a planned action project pursuant to Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions. 21.03,130 TYPE IV - LEGISLATIVE DECISION (a) A Type IV procedure may require one (1) or more hearings before the City of Bremerton Planning Commission and does require one (1) or more hearings before the City of Bremerton City Council. All Comprehensive Plan Amendments shall be considered concurrently and cumulatively, not more than once per year, with the exceptions of the Capital Facilities Element, subarea plans, and Shoreline Master Program. (b) At least ten (10) days before the date of the first Planning Commission hearing for an application subject to Type IV review, the Director shall publish a public heating notice pursuant to the requirements of Section 21.03.140. Said notice shall also be mailed to any applicants, interested parties who request it in writing and any known neighborhood associations known to the Director and in whose area the property in question is situated. (c) At least seven (7) days before the date of the first hearing on a Type IV application(s), the Director shall issue a written staff report and a SEPA evaluation and recommendation regarding the application(s). The Director shall make a copy of thc staff report and SEPA evaluation available to the public for review and inspection, mail a copy of the consolidated report and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and mail or provide copies at reasonable charge to other parties who request it. (d) Public hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the rules of procedure as determined by the review authority and except to the extent waived by the review authority. A public hearing shall be recorded on audio or audiovisual tape. (e) At the conclusion of a Planning Commission hearing on a Type IV application, the Planning Commission shall announce one of the following actions, which may not be appealed: (1) That the heating is continued. If the hearing is continued to a place, date and time certain, then additional notice of the continued heating is not required to be mailed, published or posted. If the hearing is not continued to a place, date and time certain, then notice of the continued hearing shall be given as though it was the initial hearing before the Planning Commission; or (2) That the Planning Commission recommends against or in favor of approval of the application(s) with or without specified changes, or that the Planning Commission will recommend neither against nor for approval of the application(s), together with a brief summary of the basis for the recommendation. (f) At least ten (10) days before the date of the first City Council hearing for an application subject to Type IV review, the Director shall: (1) Prepare a public hearing notice that includes the information listed in subsection (b) of this section except the notice may be modified as needed to: (A) Reflect any changes made in the application(s) during the Planning Commission review; (B) Reflect that the City Council will conduct the hearing and the place, date and time of the Council hearing; or (C) State that the Planning Commission recommendation, staff' report, and SEPA evaluation are available for inspection at no cost and copies will be provided at reasonable cost; (2) Mail a copy of that notice to the parties identified in subsection (b) of this section; (3) Publish in a newspaper of general circulation a summary of the notice, including the date, time and place of the hearing and a summary of the subject of the Type IV process; and (4) Provide additional notice deemed appropriate and necessary by the Director based 17 on the subject of the Type IV process. (g) At the conclusion of its heating regarding a Type IV application, the City Council may continue the hearing or may adopt, modify or give further consideration to the application or recommendations. If the hearing is continued to a place, date and time certain, then additional notice of the continued hearing is not required to be provided. If the hearing is not continued to a place, date and time certain, then notice of the continued hearing shall be given as though it was the initial hearing before the City Council. (h) Within seven (7) days fi-om the date of the decision, the Director shall mail the Notice of Decision to the applicant and applicant's representative, all parties of record and any other party who have requested the Notice of Decision. The mailing shall include a notice which includes the following information: (1) A statement that the decision and SEPA determination are final, but may be appealed as provided in Section 21.03.160 of this chapter to Superior Court within fourteen (14) days after the date the notice is mailed. The appeal closing date shall be listed in boldface type. The statement shall describe how a party must appeal the decision, including the basic elements of a petition for review; (2) A statement that the complete case file is available for review, listing the place, days and times where the case file is available and the name and telephone number of the City representative to contact for information about the case; and (3) If applicable, a statement that the application qualifies as a planned action project pursuant to Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions. 21.03.140 PUBLIC NOTICE (a) Notice of Application. For Type II and Type III applications, a Notice of Application shall include the following information, to the extent known. (1) The case file number(s), the date of application(s), the date the application(s) was deemed complete, and the date of the Notice of Completeness; (2) A description of the proposal with a list of any project permit requests included with the application(s) and, if applicable, a list of any further studies required by the review authority; (3) Identification of other necessary permits not included in the application, to the extent known by City staff, (4) Identification of existing environmental documents evaluating the proposal; 18 (5) Specific dates for the public comment period, a statement that the public has the fight to comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any heatings, and request a copy of the decision once made. The statement shall descn~be any appeal fights and make it clear that only written comments received by the City within fifteen (15) days from the date of the notice will be considered; (6) If applicable: (A) The information required by Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Section 197-11-355(2) where a Determination of Non-Significance is anticipated; (B) A statement that the application qualifies as a planned action project pursuant to Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions. ; (7) The deadline for submitting a SEPA appeal; (8) The date, time, place and type of heating, if applicable, provided that any necessary threshold determination has been made under SEPA. Ifa necessary threshold determination has not yet been made at the time the Notice of Application is sent, the hearing date shall be set later, for a date no sooner than fifteen (15) days following the SEPA determination, and a separate Notice of Heating shall be mailed to the applicant, the applicant's representative and all other parties who have requested such notice; (9) If one has been made, a statement of the preliminary determination of what development regulations will be used for project mitigation. The statement shall indicate wkich regulations the application appears to comply with; (10) The name of the applicant or applicant's representative and the name, address and telephone number of the contact person for the applicant, if any; (11) A description of the site which is reasonably sufficient to inform the reader of its location; (12) The date, place and times where information about the application may be examined and the name and telephone number of the City representative to contact about the application; (13) The designation of the review authority, and a statement that public hearings, if applicable, will be conducted in accordance with the rules of procedure adopted by the review authority; and (14) Any additional information determined appropriate by the reviewing authority. 19 (b) Separate Notice of Public Hearing. For Type 112[ applications, where the Notice of Application under subsection (a) does not include a Notice of Heating, a separate Notice of the Hearing date shall be distributed in accordance with subsection (d) of this section. The contents of a notice of public heating shall include: (1) Name of the applicant or appellant or representative; (2) Description of the location of the site; (3) Nature of the proposed use or development and requested permits or, for appeals, the nature of and relief sought; (4) Date, time and place of the schedule public heating and the name of the reviewing authority conducting the public heating; (5) A statement that all interested persons may appear and provide testimony; (6) The time and place written comments or other exhibits can be submitted; (7) When and where the staff'report and related materials are available for review; (8) If appLicable, a statement that the application qualifies as a planned action project pursuant to Section 21.12.070, Planned Actions; (9) Name and phone number of a staff contact person. (c) Notice of Decision The contents and distribution of the Notice of Decision for Type I, 12I, 111 and IV are provided in Sections 21.03.100(d), 21.03.110 (f'), 21.03.120 (h) and 21.03.130 (h). (d) Distribution of Notices. (1) Within the time period specified in this chapter, the Director shall mail a copy of Notice of Application and, if applicable, notice of public hearing to: (A) The applicant and the applicant's representative; (B) Any neighborhood association known to the Director and in whose area the property in question is situated; (C) Owners of property within a radius of three hundred (300) feet of the property which is the subject of the application. The records of the Kitsap County Assessor shall be used to determine the property owner of record. The failure of a property owner to receive notice shall not affect the decision if'the notice was sent in accordance with this subsection. A sworn certificate of 20 malliag execated by the person who did the mailing shall be evidence that notice was properly mailed to parties listed or referenced in the certi~cate; (D) Agencies with jurisdiction; and (E) Other people and organizations who, in writing, request such notice. (2) For Type 1II review, the City shall publish in a newspaper of general circulation a summary of the Notice of Application, including the nature and location of the proposal, type of permit(s), comment period date and instructions for obtaining further information. For shoreline permits, Notice of Application shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation and comply with the requirements of Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Section 173-27-110. (3) The City shall publish a summary notice of public hearings in a newspaper of general circulation, including date, time and place of the hearing; the nature and location of the proposal and instructions for obtaining further information. (4) The applicant shall post the Notice of Application and notice of public hearing in a conspicuous place visible to the public consistent with the prescribed times as established by this Chapter. Failure to post notice in a timely manner shall be considered a request for a time extension by the applicant pursuant to Section 21.03.150 (3) (C). The applicant shall remove and properly dispose of the notices within seven (7) days after the hearing. (A) The contents of the Notice of Application shall include that required in subsection (2). The contents for a notice of public hearing shall include that required in subsection (3). 03) The applicant shall execute an affidavit certifying where and when the notices were posted. (e) Cost of Notices The City may collect a fee from the applicant to cover the cost of publishing in a newspaper for any notices required by this Chapter or Chapter 21.12. 21.03.150 TI2MEL[NES AND DURATION OF APPROVAL (a) Decisions. Decisions on Type I, II, and III applications shall be issued not more than seventy-eight (78) days after the date of the determination of completeness. (1) If a Determination of Significance (DS) is issued, the decision shall not issue sooner than seven (7) days after a final environmental impact statement is issued. (2) An applicant may agree in writing to extend the time in which the review authority shall issue a decision. The review authority may consider new evidence the applicant introduces with or after such a written request. (3) In determining the number of days that have elapsed after City of Bremerton has notified the applicant that the application is complete, the following periods shall be excluded: (A) Any period during which the applicant has been required by the City to correct plans, perform studies, or provide additional information. The period shall be calculated from the date the City notifies the applicant of the need for'additional information to the earlier of either: the date the City determines whether the additional information provided satisfies the request for information; or fourteen (14) days after the date the information has been provided to the City; (B) Any period of time during which an environmental impact statement is being prepared, which shall not exceed one (1) year fi'om the issuance of the determination of significance, or scoping notice ifa determination of significance is not issued, unless the City and applicant have otherwise agreed in writing to a longer period of time. If no mutual written agreement is completed, then the application shall become null and void after the one (1) year period unless the Director determines that delay in completion is due to factors beyond the control of the applicant; (C) Any period during which the Applicant has requested additional time to supplement the application or has otherwise requested that processing be delayed. The City shall consider the applicant having requested additional time in the event the processing of the application is delayed due to a failure to post a notice or pay the cost of a newspaper notice in a timely manner. The additional time shall be the amount of time due to the delay; and (D) Any period during which the application has been postponed at the request of the applicant in accordance with subsection 21.03.080(d) of this Chapter. (b) A Type I or II approval shall become void if not acted upon within one (1) year unless stated otherwise at the time of approval or within a related development agreement. A six (6) month extension may be granted by the Director if requested in writing prior to the expiration date. (c) An applicant may not submit an application that is substantially the same as an application that was denied until at least one (1) full year has passed since the denial. 21.0:3.160 APPEALS (a) Final decisions regarding applications subject to a Type I, II, III or IV procedure may be appealed only if, within fourteen (14) days at~er written notice of the decision is mailed, a written appeal of the decision is filed with the following bodies: (1) Type I: Planning Commission (2) Type II and SEPA determinations on Type III and IV: City Council (3) Type rtl and IV: Superior Court, with the exception of Shoreline Master Program amendments where the appeal of a decision shall be submitted to the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 36.70A. 250 through .320; (4) Shoreline Substantial Development Permits, Variances and Conditional Use Permits: City Council (5) As an alternative to subsection (4) decisions on Shoreline Substantial Development Permits, Variances and Conditional Use Permits may be appealed to the Shorelines Hearings Board within twenty-one (21) days of the decision of Department of Ecology decision. Co) Only parties of record may initiate an appeal to the Planning Commission or City Council. Parties of record shall include: (1) The applicant; (2) Anyone who submitted written comments concerning the application excluding persons who have only signed petitions or mechanically produced form letters; or (3) Anyone who participated in a public meeting or public hearing on the application. (c) The appeal shall contain the following information: (1) The case number designated by the City and the name of the applicant; (2) The name and signature of each appellant. If multiple parties file a single appeal, the appeal document shall designate one party as the contact representative for all contact with the Director. All contact with the Director regarding the appeal, including notice, shall be with this contact representative; (3) The specific aspect(s) of the decision and/or SEPA determination being appealed, the reasons why each is in error as a matter of fact or law, and the evidence relied upon to prove the error; and (4) The appeal fee adopted by the City Council. (d) Where a predecision public heating has been conducted on the application or an open record public hearing held on an appeal of the application, the appeal in question shall be a closed record appeal. Where a public heating has not been held on the application, an open record public heating on the appeal shall be held. (e) For appeals of SEPA procedural and substantive determinations: (1) The appeal shall be consolidated and considered at the time the decision-making 23 body conducts the public hearing for Type 1II and IV applications; (2) The appeal shall be made after a final threshold determination pursuant to WAC 197-11-390 or a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) has been issued pursuant to WAC 197-11-560 for Type I and II applications. Said appeals shall be reviewed by the decision-making body responsible for hearing appeals on the underlying application. (3) The City shall provide for a record that shall consist of the following: (A) Findings and conclusions; 03) Testimony under oath; and (C) A taped or written transcript. (f) The procedural determination by the city's responsible official shall carry substantial weight in any appeal proceeding. (g) The Planning Commission shall hear appeals of Type I decisions on the established record, including all materials received in evidence at any previous stage of the review, the final order being appealed, and argument by the parties. Notice of an appeal hearing shall be mailed to parties entitled to notice of the decision, but need not be posted or published. A staff report shall be prepared, a hearing shall be conducted, and a decision shall be made and noticed and can be appealed as for a Type II process. (h) The City Council shall hear appeals of Type II and shoreline permit decisions on the established record, including alt materials received in evidence at any previous stage of the review, the final order being appealed, and argument by the parties. (1) City Council consideration of an appeal shall be noticed in the same manner as a public hearing notice as provided for in Section 21.03.140 of this Ordinance. The Council may either decide the appeal at the designated meeting or continue the matter to a limited hearing for receipt of oral argument. If so continued, the Council shall: (A) Designate the parties or their representatives to present argument, and the permissible length thereof, in a manner calculated to afford a fair hearing of the issues specified by the Council; and 03) At least fifteen (15) days before such hearing, provide notice to all parties entitled under this chapter to such notice. The notice shall indicate that the limited hearing is not a new public hearing and that only legal argument from designated parties will be heard. (2) At the conclusion of an appeal heating, the City Council may affirm, reverse, 24 modify or remand an appealed decision. (A) A decision to remand a matter is not appealable. Appeal fi-om a new staff decision made on remand shall be treated as any other decision. (B) If the Council affirms an appealed decision, the Council shall adopt a final order that contains the conclusions the Council reached regarding the specific grounds for appeal and the reasons for those conclusions. The Council may adopt the decision of the lower review authority as its decision to the extent that the decision addresses the merits of the appeal or the Council may alter that decision. (C) If'the Council reverses or modifies an appealed decision, the Council shall adopt a final order that contains: (i) A statement of the applicable criteria and standards in this Ordinance and other applicable law relevant to the appeal; (ii) A statement of the facts that the Council finds which show that the appealed decision does not comply with applicable approval criteria or development standards; (iii) The reasons for a conclusion to modify or reverse the decision; and (iv) The decision to modify or reverse the appealed decision and, if approved, any conditions of approval necessary to ensure that the proposed development will comply with applicable criteria and standards. (3) The City Council office shall mall notice of a Council decision on the merits of an appeal to parties entitled to notice as provided in this chapter and other parties who appeared orally or in writing before the Council regarding the appeal. The notice shall include identification of the case by number, the applicant's name and a summary of the Council's decision. The notice shall also include a statement that the Council's decision can be appealed to Superior Court within twenty- one (21) days and, where applicable, shall comply with the official notice provisions of RCW 43.21C.075. (i) Decisions on appeals shall be made in the following timeframe: (1) An open record appeal shall be decided within ninety days (90) from the date the appeal was filed; (2) Where a closed record appeal is required, such appeal shall be decided within sixty (60) days when the appeal was filed. 25 ATTACEIMENT B Proposed Amendments For BMC Chapter 21.12 Chapter 21.12 Sections: 21.12.010 STATUTORY AUTIIORITY. 21.12.020 PURPOSE OF ARTICLE II - ADOPTION OF WAC PROVISIONS BY 21.12.040 RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL - DESIGNATION AND RESPONSIBILITY. 21 12 050 21.12.060 ,.~, ,....,~,,.~. .... TRANS~,~,R u~,~'" STAndS TO A STATE AGENCY. 21.12.070 21.12.0S0 ABBITIONAL "'~'~'~,~,=,~ CONSmE~ONS. 21.12.100 :~:~ ,,o~ ~ CA~GO~C~ EXE~ONS. 21.12.160 ~0 PUBLIC NO~CE ~QU~MENTS. 21 12 170 ~S~ONS~I~S FOR ~ C~[. 21.12.1g0 PU~OSEvr~ AR~E 5X - ADOP~ONv,,~ ..... ,,~ PROS~SIONS BY 21.12.200 i~ S~STANT~ ~UT~Om~. 21.12.270 21.12.010 STATUTORY AUTHORITY. The city adopts the ordinance codified in this chapter under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C. 120::![i!~::0, and the SEPA Rules, WAC 197-11-904. This chapter contains th ity SEPA p d d ~_ o,-~,., ~,_.,__ ~.L ..... ,,~-,, ,,,, ~. ...... L ..... · ,._ e c 's roce ures an policies, i tat o,'.r ~, ~UA~, ~iAGi~L~X t ~ t- i I vv ~, txiu~, ut u~cu iii conjur, ctior, -- ~"'- "- :- -'- '~'," ,'"* '~"'~v,*'- (Ord. 3934 Art. 1 §A, 1984). 21.12.020 PURPOSE OF ARTICLE H - ADOPTION OF WAC PROVISIONS BY This article contains the basic requirements that apply to the SEPA process. The city adopts the ~%iloMng sections of Chapter 197-11 of the Washington Administrative Code by reference*-i~ ¥ ¥ ,/'~'q,,.; A27 /-i of die S~A-.~ process. ~,~UI/LUIL{, U£ UIAVAA UIIIAAUAILd. I I ~DVIgV~. LIIIAALgILIUII} UII ~L~I, IUIi~ k~tti1111~ JLA- a }Yl U~;~3. 1984) 21.12.040 RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL - DESIGNATION AND RESPONSIBILITY. (a) For the proposals for whic~ the city is the ~ead agency, the responsible official shall be the ptarming-dh'e:~ ~a~!i~~i!~i!~~a~!! or his !~!~~!~i~appointed designee. Co) For all proposals for which the city is the lead agency, the responsible official shall make the threshold determination, supervise seeping and preparation of any required environmental impact statement (EIS), and perform any other functions assigned to the "lead agency" or "responsible official" by those sections of the SEPA niles that were adopted by reference ii-, Section 3.68.0,20. (c) The city shall retain all documents required by the SEPA niles (Chapter 197-11 WAC) and make them available in accordance with Chapter 42.17 RCW. (Ord. 3934 Art. 2 {}C, 1984). .~..~.oo~ LEAD AGENCY - DETER,C,~'gATION AND RESPONS~I-I. ,IT, S. agency ~'--~ ' ' ' ' LllU ~iLUUll-~y LllllU pUllU~, ely b~bll ~ULILIUII UII OCllall UL LIIU blLy llld~ U~ llllLldL~ Uy LllU 7 ¥ W --'-~-~-. JUJ 310 330 335 21.12.~,,,,.,0g0. ~o,-~ v,., CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS. "-" ""- ..... " ............ -'~'-~- "-- [Ly ' _ .... ,:__.:___ ,t ..... :...,_ .... lj 1 llG blt~ ~liil IIUL ~v G i~Ll/UiaLIUll IUI. p p-Ui-O$~~ .............. : ....~ ......... ~ ~_~ ..... ~ l~ ...... ' ......... : .......... ' -'--'-':-' fo " .........' LIULL~ ~l~ LIIU ~ilb~llL 9iI~I~U UI bi~lilU~ LIIU ~iU~Ub~l LU iIL~LU~U LllMbU bpUbiilb ILULI~LLUII ~tU~U~t ~ U~U~GU LU 6 WiiLLUil IU~U~L iUt ~i~ iJUtl~ bii~i ilUL OlllU LIiU bILy LU bUilblMgl Lii~ bi~bGLiUli U[ ~II~II~U~ Ill iLb LI~U~IIUi~ UULCiIIHIIaIUII. ~UI~. J~J~ ~t. J ~) ............ of~IS Thc ~'~ ~d ~ or ~--~ ~2d ~--' ~ -~-" by Purpose -:"-:-pan i IIVILIII~ bUIIIIIIUIIL. register . k..~JII~UlLCU agency COSTS to assist 21.12.1c, o ~:~ PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS. 12 ~J 111~ ~l~l~ ~ ~t~l ~1~ U~ 1 U~pUI~IUIU lUX [IIU ~IL~ ~ ~UIII~II~II~U ~ILII YY ~ I ~ / - I I ~'~ 2,1 12 I$0 '"'"'"'"'"""' '" .... '"" .... '"'"""'""'"" OF WAC ~'"' Tl-ds --'-'- ' --'-- for -:--- ....... a .... -__ xv_,2___, w__: ......... , v~_, _. 'S elivii-oB, iiieii[/d I.)x ~lJ(u c:u m~u~t S~A Of l'~auuima cixvu Uinu~ut~a r uu~,y Actkl~x.~- nj ,-x rr,v~, x fO/' "-ul*- Git-]' Owii ' 21.12.200 ~'""',~ SUBSTANTIVE AUTHORITY. (a) The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to those in the existing SEPA authorization of the city. (b) The city may attach conditions to a permit or approval for a proposal so long as: (1) Such conditions are necessary to mitigate specific probable adverse environmental impacts identified in environmental documents prepared pursuant to this chapter; and (2) Such conditions are in writing; and (3) The mitigation measures included in such conditions are reasonable and capable of being accomplished; and (4) The city has considered whether other local, state or federal mitigation measures applied to the proposal are sufficient to mitigate the identified impacts; and (5) Such conditions are based on one or more policies in subsection (d) below and cited in the license or other decision document. (c) The city may deny a permit or approval for a proposal on the basis of SEPA so long as: (1) A finding is made that approving the proposal would result in probable significant adverse environmental impacts that are identified in a final EIS or final supplemental EIS prepared pursuant to this Ordinance; and (2) A finding is made that there are no reasonable mitigation measures capable of being accomplished that are sufficient to mitigate the identified impact; and (3) The denial is based on one or more policies identified in subsection (d) below, and identified in writing in the decision document. (d) The city designates and adopts by reference the followhag policies as the basis for the city's exercise of authority pursuant to this section: (1) The city shall use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of state policy, to improve and coordinate plans, functions, programs and resources to the end that the state and its citizens may: (A) Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations; (B) Assure for all people of Washington safe, healthful, productive and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings; (C) Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences; (D) Preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage; (E) Maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice; (F) Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's amenities; and (G) Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources. (2) The city recognizes that each person has a fundamental and inalienable right to a healthfiil environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment. (e) Except for permits and variances issued pursuant to Chapter 21.04 of the Bremerton Municipal Code, action not requiring a decision of the planning commission/city council is conditioned or den/ed on the basis of SEPA by a nonetected official, the decision shall be appealable to the planning commission. Such appeal may be perfected by the proponent or any aggrieved party by giving notice to the responsible official within ten days of the decision being appealed. Review by the planning commission shall be on a de novo basis. (Ord. 3934 Art. 7 §B, 1984). 21.12.210, ii~!:~ APPEALS. 702 Ac[. / WO ~UUI~ LIUII. 712 I ~0 730 732 734 736 740 744 748 WAC 1 754 770, 776 778 792 793 hico~oratlon by reference. License. Privae project. Scope. Sigi~ficanL I u~ C auu~ S~C[iOiiSui .............. ~uapt~i l ~ ¢ -i i ul-~ ~hc ............... fy a~mn~tuu ~uuumbu~---: ............. ativ~ ~UU~- ~ - 1.71 i--i L'~L~U --r-L,I./iJU~,C; Ul LIU~ [.N/iL. Lead a~ii~y /OF pfiV~ pfoj66:S -- ~'- one a~ll~y wiui jul ~ul~uui~. UULI~. k~zu. JTJ~ ~t. iv ~ 170~J. 21.12.260 E?Uv~OI'~,[ENTALLY SENS~P,~. AREAS. 21.12.270 ~::20, FEES. The city shall require fees for its activities in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. Those fees shall be established, from time to time, by city council resolution. (Ord. 3934 Art. 10 §C, 1984). Y I ' i 965 ' ~--'~ -- ' ~uvpLiuii FzO~iC~. M~LGl iI~ll~LIUll UL 19 SEPA Rules impacts to be discussed in an ELS. Because an ELS is requ/red to analyze si?ifieant eavirorma~ntal b-,~. acts only, scoping is intended to identify and narrow the EIS to the s/gn~6cant issues. The required scoping process (WAC 197-11408) provides interageacy and public notice of a DS, or equivalent notification, and opportunity to co ...... eat The lead agency, has the option of expanding the scoping process (WAC 197-11- 410), but shall not be required to do so. Scoping is used ro encourage cooperation and early resolution of potential conflicts, to improve decisions, and to rednce paperwork and delay. [Statutory Authority: RCW 4321C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-793, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 19%11-794 Significant. (1) "Significanf' as used in SEPA mea~ a reasonable I~etihood of more th~u a moderate adverse irr~, ac~ on environmental cFmlity. (2) Si~t3mificance involves context and +nteasity (WAC 197- 11-330) and does not lend itself to a forrmfla or quantifiable test The context may vary with the physical setting, lntensi~y depends on the magnitude and duration of an ~act_ The severity of an impact should be weighed along with the likelgaood of its occurrence. An i~pact may be si~nific-~mt if its chance of occurrence is not great, but the resulting environmental ;,nl,act wonld be severe if it occurred (3) WAC 197-11-330 specifies a process, including criter/a and procedures, for determ+ning whether a proposal is l~ely to have a siE'aificant adverse environmental irrrpact [Statutory Authority.: KCW 43.21C. 110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-794, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-796 State agency.. "State agency" me. am any state board, comm£qsion, department, or officer, including state universities, colleges, and co ..... ',tmity colleges, that is anthorized by law to make rules, hear contested cases, or otherwise take the actions stated in WAC 197-11-704, except the judiciary and state legislature. [Statutory Author/W: RCW 432IC.110. 84.05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-796, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-797 Threshold determination. "Threshold determination" means the decision by ~e respons~le official of the lead agency whether or not an ELS is required for a proposal that is not categorically exempt ('WAC 197-i 1-310 and 197-11-330 (1)(b)). [Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-797, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] VqAC197-11-799 Underlying governmental action. '~.Jnderlying government action" means the governmental action, such as zoning or permit approvals, that is the subject of SEPA compliance. [Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-799, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] PART NINE - CATAGORICAL EXEM2FTIONS WAC 19%11-800 Categorical exemptions. The proposed actions contained in Part Nine are categorically exempt from threshold de~,,,~ation and EIS requirements, subject to the rules and limitations on categorical contained m WAC 197-11-305. (1) Minor new construction--Flexible thresholds. (a) The exe~q0tions in this subsection apply to all llcermes required to undertake the comu'uction in question, except when a rezone or any license governing em£qsions to the air or discharges to water is requ/red. To be exeml2t under this subsection, the project must be equal to or smaller than the exempt level For a specific proposal, the exempt level m Co) of this subsection ahall control, mlle..ss the city/cotmty in wh/ch the project is located establl.qhes an exemfot level under (c) of this subsection. If the proposal is located in mole than one city/county, the lower of the agencies' adopted levels ~hall control, regardless of which agency is the lead agency. (b) The following types of construction shall be except when undertaken wholly or partly on lands covered by (0 The construction or location of any residential structures of four dwelling units. (ii) The construction of a barn, loafing shed, farm eq3fipm, em storage building, produce storage or packing mcture, or similar agricultural mcture, covering 10,000 square feet, and to be used only by the property, owner or kis or her agent in the conduct of farming the property.. This exemption shall not apply to feed lots. (iff) The construct/cra of an office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage building with 4,000 sq'um'e feet of gross floor area, and with associated parking facilities designed for twenty automobiles. (iv) The consu-uction of a park/ng lot designed for twenty automobiles. (v) Any landfill or excavation of 100 cubic yards throughout the total lifetime of the fill or excavation; and any fill or excavation classified as a Class I, 12, or ITt forest practice under RCW 76.09.050 or regulations theremader. (c) Cities, towns or counties may raise the exempt levels to · e max/mum specified below by implementing ordinance or resolution. Such levels shall be specified in the agency's SEPA procedures (WAC 197-11-904) and sent to the department of ecology. A newly established exer_atot level shall be sutrpor~ed by local conditions, including zomg or other land use plans or regulations. Pm agency may adopt a system of several exempt levels (such a.s diff=xeat levels for different geographic areas). The rmximum exempt level for the exemptions m (1)(b) of this section shall be, respectively: (i) 20 dwelling-units. (ii) 30,000 square feet. (iff) 12,000 square feet; 40 automobiles. (iv) 40 automobiles. (v) 500 cubic yards. ICh. 197-11 WAC--p. 381 ~°[15~ WAC (4/15/98) SEPA Rules .2.¸ (2) Other minor new coastruction. The following .types of construction shall be exempt except where tmdertaken wholly or in part on lands covered by water (unless specifically exr. mpted in this subsection); the excu~tions provided by this section shall .apply to all licenses re.qu~ed to undertake the construction in question, except where a rrzone or any liceme governing emissions to the air or discharges to water, is required: (a) The construction or designation of bus stops, loading zones, shelters, access facilities and pull-out lames for tax/cabs, transit amd school vehicles. Co) The construction and/or installation of cc, .... ~ on- l:~remise signs, and public si~ and (c) The comUuction or installation of m/nor road and s~e~t improvements such as pavement mark/ng, freeway surveillance' and control systems, railroad protective devices (not including grade-separated crossings), grooving, glare screen, safety barriers, energy attenuators, transportation corridor landscaping (including the application of Washin~on state depaztment of agr/culture approved herbic/des by licensed personnel for fight of way weed control as long as this is not within watersheds controlled for the purpose of drinking water quality in accordance with WAC 248-54-660), temporary, traffic conu:ols and demurs, correction of substandard curves and intersect/om within eximJng rights of way, widening of a highway by less than a single lane width where capacity is not si_o-nificantly increased and no new right of way is required, adding au.~tiary lanes for localized purposes, (weaving, climbing, speed change, etc.), where capacity is not si_~nificamtly increased and no new right of way is required, channelization and elimination of sight restrictions at intersections, street lig_hting, =m_mrd m/is and barricade installation, imtallation of catch basins and culverin, and recousmaction of existing roadbed (existing curb-to-curb in urban locations), including adding or widening of shoulders, addition of bicycle lanes, paths and facilities, and pedesuSan walk~ and paths, but not including additional automobile lanes. (d) Crrading, excavating, t~]ing, septic tank installations, and lamdscaping necessary for any building er fac/lity. exempted by subsections (1) and (2) of th/s sec~or~ as well as ftmcing and the consu-uction of small structures and minor facilities accessory thereto. (e) Additions or modifications to or replacement of any building or facility exempted by subsections (1) amd (2) of this section when such addition, modification or replacement will not change the character of the building or facility/n a way that would remove it from an exempt class. (f) The demolition of' amy structure or facil/ty, the construction of which would be excited by subsections (1) and (2) of this section, except for structures or facilities with recoguxized historical sig'n~ficance. (g) The installation of impervious underground tanks, having a capacity of 10,000 gallons or less. Ca) The vacation of streets or roads. (i) The installation of hydrol"o~cal measuring devices, regardless of whether or not on lands covered by water. WAC (4/15/98) (j) The installation of any property, boundary or survey marker, other than fences, regardless of whether or not on lands covered by water. (3) Repair, remodeling and maintenance activities. The follow~g activities ~ball be categorically exe. mpc The repair, remodeling, maintenance, or minor alteration of ex/sting private or public m-uctures, facilities or eqmpment, including utilities, involving no material expamions or changes m use beyond that prev/ously existing; except that, where undertaken wholly or in part on lands covered by water, only minor repair or replacement of structures may be exempt (examl~Ies include r~air or replacement of piling, ram~s, floam, or mooring buoys, or minor repair, alteration, or maintena.uce of dock.s). The followillg maintenance activities shall not be considered exezaut under th/s subsection: (a) Dredging; Co) Reconstruction/maintenance of groins and smailar shoreline protection structures; or (c) Replacement of utility cables that must be buried under the surface of the bedlands. Repair/rebuilding of major chm~ d/kes, and reservoirs shall also not be considered exempt under ttm subsectior~ (4) Water fights. The following a.rrpropmtions of water shall be exempt, the exemption covering not only the perm/t to .a!~ropriate water, but also any hydraulics permit, shoreline permit or braiding permit requ/red for a normal diversion or intake stmcrare, well and pumphouse reasonably necessary to accomplish the exempted appropriation, and including any activities relating to consmaction of a distn'bution system solely for any exempted appropriation: (a) A.mlxopfiafions of fi.fry cubic feet per, second or less of surface water for irrigation purposes, when done without a government subsidy. (b) Appropriations of one cubic foot per second or less of surface water, or of 2,250 gallons per minute or less of ground water, for any purpose. (5) Purchase or sale of real property. The following real property transactions by an agency shal~ be ex~-ruf: (a) The purchase or acquisition of any fight to real property. CO) The sale, transfer or exchange of any publicly owned real property, but only if the property is =or subject to an authorized public use. (c) The lease of real property when the use of the property for the term of the lease will remain essentially the same as the e.,dsting use, or when the use under the lease is othervrise exempted by this chapter. (6) Minor land use decisions. The following land use decisions shall be exempt:. (a) Except upon lands covered by water, the approval of short plats or short subdivisions pursuant to the procedures required by RCW 58.17.060, but not including further short subdivisions or short platting within a plat or subdivision previonsly exempted under this subsection Co) Crranlmg of variances based on spec/al cixcum~tances, not including economic hardship, applicable to the subject property, such as size, shape, topography, location or ~5~ ich. ~v-u w^c--p. 391 "If you expect a nation to be tgnorant and ~ee, you expect what never was and ~ Tkomas Jefferson SUBJECT: PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT ZTA-98-001 Ladies and Gentlemen of the Bremerton City Council: PLEASE READ INTO THE CITY COUNCIL RECORD May 26, 1999 The matter coming before you this evening is one of extreme importance and long lasting effect. ff any of you have not studied the proposal and critically compared it, paragraph by paragraph - against an open copy of the present Bremerton Administrative Code and open copies of the higher authorities referenced; and evaluated each and every feature and deletion of the proposal to determine it's individual and cumulative impact on the right of the citizen to be informed and to challenge City activities - Then you are individually requested to abstain from any vote, or - to recommend that this matter be carried over to allow for extended study and an increased public comment period. Each of you, to the extent that you have read the proposal, must realize that it would be very difficult for the average citizen, unfamiliar with the details of performance set forth in the BMC, or the current workings of the DECD - to read it and to form a valid opinion regarding the overall worthiness of the proposal and recognition of any areas in that proposal which might fly in the face of the basic tenet that an informed electorate IS the basis for a functioning democracy. You Council Members are therefore now cast in the extremely important role of Agent for your constituencies - to protect their interests by your knowledgeable and considered actions on this matter here today. as a result of your review of ZTA-98-001 Did you see any attempt to decrease the information and notification that the City provides to the community regarding the City's intended actions ? Perhaps a notorious increase in decisions that the DECD can make unilaterally - without notice or citizen recourse ? Did you recognize any attempt to concentrate the power of official action in the hands of non elected city officials - a granting of power which is significantly larger than which exists today ? Any instances wherein oversight review or control by Elected Officials is diminished or eliminated ? Did you note any attempt to reduce the right and the ability of the citizen to Complain, Appeal, or to prosecute, if necessary through the Courts and Boards of Washington State? concerning any actions taken or approved by the City which are illegal or contrary to the best interests of the Citizenry ? If you have seen any or all of these features - you must decline to endorse or approve this Amendment until you have full confidence that any revision of the BMC will protect the citizen's right to know what the city is doing, and their right to challenge those decisions through established channels. George J. Miller P. O. Box 788 Bremerton, WA 98337 Helen Miller P.O. Box 788 Bremerton, WA 98337 Bremerton City Council 239 Fourth Street Bremerton, WA 98337 TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD AT THE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING THIS DATE May 26, 1999 SUBJECT: THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT ZTA-98-001 Ladies and Gentlemen of the Bremerton City Council: The matter of ZTA 98-001 being presented to you this evening is of considerable concern to many citizens of our community because of the effects it will have on our neighborhoods. Following is a potpourri of facts and conclusions assembled from a group of concerned citizens, who have reasonable background knowledge of the workings of the city, especially in the areas of Land Use and Shorelines development - AND who have gratuitously devoted literally hundreds of hours of their time to a voluntary partial review of the contents of the ZTA 98-001 document, and have compared it with existing controlling documents such as the SMA and the BMC. (Yes there are many other errors not identified in this presentation). The overriding theme expressed in the reviewer's comments was one of concern that the fabric of open government not be destroyed; sacrificed in order to facilitate the actions and activities of the City and DECD - by denying it's citizens their rightful opportunities to review, comment, and appeal their City's actions. A second concern was that the City, by ZTA, was attempting to cast off linkages to governing state documents which specified actions in areas where the City had recently been embarrassed by their unprofessional performances. Specific areas requiring additional oversight and review: 1.) The document presenting ZTA 98-001 is suspect, erroneous, incoherent, incomplete and therefore almost impossible to follow. 2.) In the section presenting PHASED SEPA REVIEW there are no references quoted - but there are short excerpts by Staff and the City Attorney - with no indication of their knowledge or qualifications in Land Use issues. There is nothing which indicates how a project action qualifies for Phased Review: What size project ? When is it appropriate ? When it is Not appropriate ? For example: WAC 197-11-060 (5) Phased Review states: "Phased review is not appropriate when it would merely divide a larger system into exempted fragments or avoid discussion of cumulative impacts; or it would segment and avoid present consideration of proposals and their impacts that are required to be evaluated in a single environmental document." Refer also to WAC 197-11-060 (3) (b) or WAC 197-11-305 (I) Case in Point: the 922 Shore Drive property. DECD attempted to split off and process a single Variation Permit without relating the total requirements of the property and the intended development. DECD claimed before the Shoreline Hearings Board that they had intended to address all of the remaining issues under the processing for Building Permits. Note that had this approach been successfully carried off- Building Permits handled as Type One Administrative Decision would not have been published, and the public would have had no notification of a project and their right to appeal thereby seriously diminished. 3.) (ZTA 21.03.030 b 2) -Type Classification and Development Activities Permits and Regulations. is in direct conflict with state law. RCW 36.70b. 120(2) "Ifa project action requires project permits from more titan one category, the local government shall provide for a consolidated permit review with only one Open Record Hearing and no more than one Closed Record Hearing." Each local government shall determine which project permits are subject to an Open Record Hearing and a Closed RecordAppeal- The CiD' of Bremerton has not done this. 4.) (ZTA Table A) There is no clear deffmition of what constitutes a Type 1 Administrative Decision. Table A is in error. A shoreline permit revision is classified as a Type 1 decision which is in direct violation of RCW 90-58 and the Bremerton SMP; which states that shoreline permits require proper notice and a 30 day Appeal period. Type 1 decisions have no notice and a 24 day appeal period. (How the citizens manage to appeal something they have not been informed of- is still a mystery). Table A is unclear. A lot line adjustment may now be exempt from public notice and appeal at the Director's discretion: The explanations for the table notations of "XI" and "X2" is unclear. It is equally unclear that while a property on Madrona Point was going through the motions of a Boundary Line Adjustment the City maintained that it did not approve the activity, but just "reviewed" it because they did not have directive documentation. 5.) Shoreline regulations, BMC 21.04: Is quoted as being "An Interim Measure" in the ZTA. The document itself, showing a revision histo~ running through 1982 does not indicate any such transient state. It is questionable whether the City can DELETE BMC 21.04, Shoreline Regulations, without incorporating the contents and provisions in the Bremerton SMP - which action requires specific procedures and approval by the Department of Ecology. In the absence of BMC 21.04.080 for example, the burden of proof that a substantial development permit is consistent with the criteria set out in the SMA - will de facto shift to the City; which would appear to be fertile ground for law suits necessitating increased city staff hours. 6.) As a result of classifying Shoreline Permit Revisions as a Type 1 decision, ZTA 21.03.100 is delinquent because it is direct conflict with the Bremerton SMP which states that appeal rights for shoreline permits are specified as having Public Notice requirements and a longer notice period than applies to zoning permits. 7.) Under ZTA the Director of DECD appears to be according himself too much responsibility in that the BMC does not afford him the power to designate. ZTA 21.03.100 needs clarification. It is painfully evident that in the case of Type 1 Administrative Decisions; the effect of those decisions are applicable ONLY to the subject property for which the decision was rendered. There is no precedent set, because it has not been subject to City Council review, the Public remains uninformed and the possibilities for Challenge is seriously diminished ..... ~vhich would be the only mechanism available to mm a decision into precedent in the hearing of the challenge before the City Council. By it's nature Type 1 Administrative Decisions offer the potential of abuse in the areas of selective enforcement and preferential ministerial decisions which can not be challenged. 8.) Substantial Development Permit Appeal procedure is not spelled out. It should require an Open Record Appeal Hearing. 9.) ZTA 21.12.080 Categorical Exemptions: The statement that "all categorical exemptions as identified in WAC 197.11.800 are adopted by reference." Compliance would be an exercise in semantics .... it is definitely not understandable the general public would require considerable clarification. Example - Please clarify 197.11.800.(6) and indicate precedent and method to insure uniform enforcement. 10.) ZTA 21.12.110 "Appeals of SEPA Procedural or Substantive determinations shall follow the requirements of section 21, 02.120, Appeals" And that is the beginning of a runaround of references. Clarity is missing. It first jumps from page 41 to page 18,19, thence to page 26, 27. When you f'mally get there it L ,,' states that the only option to a SEPA Appeal is to ,SUPERIOR COURT. (Note: ~f~,~-.S' "[~"~/: .nVOL{ :--(:'~,-~¥/.. ~P~_.. ~ S~-4~-. t~l~orelines related decisions are APPEALABLt TO THE SHORELINES }IEARINGS ..... ~- ~ .' ' ' t, '-:.32::""' ....~"'"" '.%, '~i 7'*_ :_.-:,z~ . -~ '~' ........... 11.) ZTA 21.12.050 Procedures for environmental review: (f) SEPA Determination of Completeness. Refers to Sections 21.03.057 and 21.03.058. WHERE ARE THEY ? 12.) In closing - realize that the City. of Bremerton suffers from a long history, of noncompliance with RCW 90.58.140 and WAC 173-27-110 in their published and posted PUBLIC NOTICES relating to shorelines permits. The Shorelines Hearings Board No 98-63 granted in summary, judgement a reversal of a Shorelines Substantial Development Permit - on the basis of NONCOMPLIANCE BEING PREJUDICIAL. IN CONCLUSION: IN VIEW OF THE CONFLICTS AND ERRORS IN THE DOCUMENT IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUGGESTED THAT ZTA 98-0001 ADOPTION SHOULD NOT BE VOTED ON THIS EVENING. 4