Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/22/96 AGENDABREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 239 4TH STREET BREMERTON, WA 98337 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MAY 22~ 1996 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 - May 8, 1996 #AB96-104 3. CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS 4. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS 5. MAYOR'S REPORT 6. PUBLIC RECOGNITION -- (Comments Limited to 3 Minutes) NEW BUSINESS A. Bid Award To Pentamation, Inc., For Central Computer Equipment To Replace The NCR Tower Computers #AB96-105 ~ RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution %2549, Adopting City Of Bremerton %AB96-106 lO Wastewater Comprehensive Plan ORDIN CES A. Ordinance %4552 (Second Reading) Amending The #AB96-100 1996 Budget (Budget Adjustments #96-0 through 96-12) (CONTINUED NEXT PAGE) Ee Ordinance #4553 (Second Reading), Amendment To B.M.C. Chapter 1310 - Municipal Tree Ordinance Ordinance #4554 (Second Reading) Vacating The Alley Running North/South Between 5TH Street And 6TH Street, West Of Veneta Avenue And The #AB96-101'~' #AB96-102 4~ Eastern Most 16.25 Feet Of The Adjoining East/West Alley/Star Of The Sea Parish Ordinance #4555 (Second Reading) Adopting Revised Official Zoning Map Of The City Of Bremerton #AB96-103 ~3 Ordinance (First Reading) Establishing The #AB96-107 office of Risk Management And Safety Within The Department Of Administrative Services And Amending Chapter 2.92 Of The Bremerton Municipal Code 10. PUBLIC HEARING - 6:00 P.M. OR LATER A. To Amend Three Chapters of The official Zoning #AB96-108 Ordinance Consistent With The Comprehensive Plan And To Meet Growth Management Act Requirements; And Ordinance (First Reading) AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: MINUTES - MAY 8, 1996 FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: 5-22-96 City Council 5-] 7-96 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS: NOTE: Minutes will be distributed on Monday, May 20. ENDORSEMENT MAYOR tNFORF~ATION__ 4. SU~Y STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: 8. RECOMi~ENDATION: 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIP~ATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED __ DATE: 11. AMENDED __ TAPE #1376 UNAPPROVED DP, A~ CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 8, 1996 #0021 #0032 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, May 8, 1996, at 5:30 P.M., with Council Vice President Richard Neville presiding. Council members present were Bob Winters, A1 Colvin, Cecil McConnell, Carlos Montgomery, Sherril Huff-Menees, David Fart, and Lon Overson. Council President John Law was absent Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and Deputy City Clerk Gil Johnson. The meeting opened with the Pledge of President Law and Invocation given by Memorial Lutheran Church. Allegiance led by Council Pastor August Lubkeman of CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes -- April 24, 1996 #AB96-091 M/S/C/U(Huff-Menees/Montgomery) to approve 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. M/S/C/U(Colvin/Montgomery) on May 8, 1996, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 197520 through 197526, 197537 through 197691 in the amount of $283,799.61; and Regular Payroll for the period ending 4-30-96, in the amount of $811,122.09. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Overson reported on an eventful weekend with the grand opening celebration at the Emperor Palace on Washington Avenue and the ground breaking for a new school building at Star of the Sea Catholic Church; and the Olympic Torch Run on Tuesday, May 7. Mr. Fart was pleased to report that a sight obstruction problem identified about a year ago has been remedies. Me credited the success in getting that sight obstruction removed to Bob Tulp, Public Works Operations Manager, Mrs. Huff-Menees congratulated all those involved in the planning TAPE #1376 City Council May 8, 1996 Page 2 of 20 Reg. Mtg. Minutes and organizing of the Bremerton portion of the Olympic Torch Run, which turned out to be a wonderful event. She reminded everyone of the upcoming Armed Forces actives the week of May 13 - 18; and congratulated the new Armed Forces Queen's court. Mr. Montqomer¥ reported on Saturday he attended the West Park Community Wellness Festival, which was well attended and provided lots of good information. He thanked Tracy Nelson and Deborah Brown for inviting him to that event. He noted the Head Start Program celebrated its 30th Anniversary this weekend. He observed the Olympic Torch Run from the boardwalk and noted the rainy weather did not bother those that turned out for this event. Districts 6, 7, and 8 will hold a combined Neighborhood Meeting on Thursday, May 23, 7:00 P.M., at the Bremerton School District Office. The program for that meeting will be an update report on the Sinclair landing Project and Mayor Horton to talk about goals and priorities and answer questions. Mr. McConnell announced the next District #2 Neighborhood Meeting is scheduled for May 14, 6:30 P.M., at Fire Station #3. The guest speaker at that meeting will be Jim Spencer, Parks and Recreation Director. Mr. Colvin reported he also attended the Grand Opening of the Emperor's Palace where he found the food, service and friendliness to be impressive. He too attended the ground breaking ceremony at Star of the Sea Catholic Church and was very impressed by the many young people that were so well behaved. On Tuesday, May 7, he attended an event in Tacoma where he witnessed Governor Lowery sign a $150,000 Americorps Grant that will help youth between 15-18 years old. The next District #1 Neighborhood Meeting is scheduled for May 16, 7:00 P.M., at the Sheridan Park and Recreation Center. The guest speaker at that meeting will be Mayor Lynn Horton. He encouraged senior citizens, who were happy over the removal of the Scotch broom, to attend that meeting in order to thank Mayor Horton for her support in that endeavor. Mr. Winters reported he participated in the West Park Community Wellness Festival and was pleased that the weather cooperated, lots of people came and received good information. Regretfully, he was unable to attend the Grand Opening of the Emperor's Palace. He too enjoyed the festivities of the Olympic Torch Run and was somewhat disappointed that the only television coverage given to Bremerton was the torch being carried onto the ferry to continue the run to Seattle. During that event, he made his own video and will pass it on to TCI Cable Access for possible viewing on the access channel. Mr. Neville announced Mayor Horton and Council President John Law TAPE #1376 City Council Reg. May 8, 1996 Page 3 of 20 Mtg. Minutes have gone to Washington D.C., as part of the Puget Sound Naval shipyard contingency to accept the Commander In Chiefs Excellence Award for Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. He noted the week of May 5 - 11 is Municipal Clerks' Association Week and extended a special "thank you" to Kathleen McCluskey, Gil Johnson and all the Clerk's staff for a job well done. He announced Bremerton High School students are presenting the play "WEST SIDE STORY" on May 9, 10 and 11. MAYOR~8 REPORT In the absence of Mayor Horton, Mayor Protem Bob Winters read the following Proclamations: (1) May 6 - 13, 1995 as National Nurses Week and May 13, 1995 as Navy Nurse Corps Day. Captain Maqgie Rowell, Director of Nursing Services/Naval Hospital, accompanied by CDR Chris Stokey, Senior Department Heads/Naval Hospital, accepted the proclamation on behalf of the hundreds of nurses in this area. (2) May 12 -18, 1996, as ARMED FORCES WEEK. of the Armed Forces Activities accepted briefly outlined the festival activities. John Curtis, Chairman the proclamation and PUBLIC RECOGNITION Gord¥ Byrd talked about the Olympic Torch Run and was disappointed Bremerton didn't get more coverage on the Channel 11 News program. He wanted the public to know he is still working to fund a shelter for the homeless. Dave Olson handed out a copy of a newspaper article titled "CODE 911", which listed the ages of the individuals involved in the tragic beating of Darren McGiesey were 21 years of age. He read the following statement: "Eastside Tavern has been the victim of an over zealous, highly prejudice, sloppy and inaccurate investigation by the Bremerton Police Department and Washington State Liquor Control Board Officers and Agent. Both the Bremerton Police Department and the Washington State Liquor Control Board in their hurried rush to judgement, have failed to or purposely ignored facts leading to the true crimes and criminals in this case, in an attempt to bolster their position and what has been described and purported to be a hate crime by the media. Further, false and inaccurate statements in this case have been responsible for the arrests, false warrants and charges were used to accomplish this end. He could only wonder which business or individual will be the City's next victim. As many of you know, if the City wants property for development and no buy out figure can be agreed on with the property owner, the City simply condemns and takes the property leaving the tenants homeless, without being compensated for years of hard work and personal investment. This is also the case with businesses of Bremerton. Who or what business or TAPE #1376 City Council Reg. May 8, 1996 Page 4 of 20 Mtg. Minutes individual will be cheated out of his or her investment and livelihood next at the hands of City government? Any intelligent and thinking individuals will see through sham that is being paraded before them. If you believe that innocent until proven guilty still should be in affect in this city and this country, then your incumbent to call your Mayor at 478-5266 or his area Councilman John Law at his home 479-2723, or office 478-5280, and ask them what they, as individuals, are doing to get to the truth in this matter and if those answers are not sufficient, don't hesitate to call your Chief Of Police at 478-5228. The public has the right to know the truth, don't forget to let these people know that they work for you and you're paying attention. And, if the answers are insufficient, exercise your vote to get rid of the ineffective individuals. Joan Dinqfield introduced Doyle Detroit, the new Executive Director of Westsound Community Access Television. Doyle Detroit commented that usually she is running a TV camera or directing in the transmission booth, so she found it a pleasure to be "out front" and greet everyone. Effort is underway planning the transition between management from TCI Cable Vision to the new non-profit access corporation, which will be a fairly slow transition. It is expected that some time in the next 4-5 months her group will be taking over and improving the service that TCI and the City have already provided. She hopes to expand government coverage to include several cities, in addition to Bremerton. The next Westsound Community Access Television Board meeting will be held on May 13, 6:30 P.M., in the meeting room below Ryan's Restaurant on Fairgrounds Road; and they are very interested in having community support and participation in the new access corporation. Charlie Brown thanked Mayor Horton and Councilman Colvin for their support in getting rid of the Scotch broom at the north end of Warren Avenue bridge. Lan Wong, representing Emperor's Palace #2, thanked the Council members for attending their Grand Opening event. The restaurant is open for business and she hoped everyone would stop by and see them. John Thomas related a recent incident where his Fire Department, Sub Base Bangor, along with two other Fire Departments were called out on a mutual aid medical aid call. His emergency crew passed by the residence three times before finding it because the house number was not visible from the street. He strongly urged everyone to take note of how their home address is displayed and if it is not clearly posted, to fix it so it could be identified quickly in the event of an emergency situation. TAPE #1376 City Council Reg. Mtg. May 8, 1996 Page 5 of 20 Minutes Carol Atkinson, Bremerton Main Street Association, commented on the success of the Olympic Torch Run through Bremerton and particularly the effort given by Terrie O'Neill, the City's Municipal Services Coordinator, who chaired the local Torch Run Committee. Ms. Atkinson announced a mural will be painted on a building at the end of the Naval Museum depicting Puget Sound, ferries, Olympic mountains and highlighting the Blackberry Festival. Weather permitting, the mural should be completed by Armed Forces Week. 7A - AGAPE ADMINISTRATION FEESt ~AB96-092 When AGAPE first received Shelter Plus Care funds, it was decided not to use any dollars for administrative costs until it was determined how far the rental assistance dollars would go. The program has been in operation since July of 1995, many of the clients are unable to contribute toward the rents, thus allowing AGAPE to recoup some administrative fees. Deborah Pearler-Stewart, Neighborhood Development Department, stated the City received a $596,400 HUD grant in January 1995, to provide drug and alcohol free housing for people, who are chemically dependent. The sponsor and primary provider for the project is AGAPE, whose program is composed of three stages that are geared toward fostering independence. In this program individuals progress from living in a structured group home to living in subsidized apartments throughout the City. The Shelter Plus Care Grant Program provides rental assistance. When the program was started, a decision was made to forego Administrative reimbursement until the program could be evaluated. The program has been active since July 1995, and the clients have been able to pay more in rent than anticipated. The program allows an 8% Administrative Fee for specific actions associated with the program. The analysis revealed the City of Bremerton accomplishes approximately 2% of the activities and AGAPE accomplishes 6%. It is recommended that AGAPE and the City be allowed to recoup the Administrative cost. Barbara Day-Miller, Executive Director AGAPE, thanked the city Council, Mayor Horton and Ian Sievers, City Attorney, for their support, as well as Marylyn Waibel and Deborah Peavler-Stewart. So far, 43 patients have been provided housing through this program and they now have a men's and women's house open on Crawford Drive and two duplexes, which makes four units of two bedroom facilities, on Fitz Drive, and an individual two bedroom house with a additional apartment. Out of the 43 people that started in the program, only two have aborted the program, one returned to in- patient treatment and has returned to their facility, so they have approximately a 99.9% success rate to date. Recently, they placed their first male client, who had custody of his two children, which was a first for this program. #1337 #1391 TAPE #1376 City Council Reg. May 8, 1996 Page 6 of 20 Mtg. Minutes Gene Hart asked if there was a waiting list and if so, how many people were on it. Mrs. Day-Miller stated at the present they have 13 men and 4 women on a waiting list and all available housing is filled. She emphasized over two thirds of the rent fees are coming from the client residents, which means the grant will last longer than the 10 year allocation period. Charlie Brown asked if the rental fees were fixed or on a sliding scale based on income? Mrs. Day-Miller stated they are based on the individual's income. If someone has absolutely no income, then their rent is fully subsidized until they become employed. Mr. Colvln complimented Mrs. Day-Miller on her leadership for this program. Mrs. Day-Miller shared the fact they have been able to lease two duplex units for five years and the landlords are very supportive of the program. Mr. MeConnell pointed out on Attachments A, B. and C, it states the amount that may be used for Administration is "0", but on Exhibit 1 it authorizes the utilization of up to 8%. Ms. Pearler-Stewart explained HUD regulations allow the 8% Administrative fee, and pointed out that authorization on page 7 of the regulations provided in the Agenda Packet. M/S/C/U(Farr/Winters) to amend the contract with AGAPE to allow administrative fees, 6% for AGAPE and 2% for the City of Bremerton, based on the "Shelter Plus Care Program - Administrative Fee", Exhibit 1. 8A - ORDINANCE NO. 4551 (SECOND R~aDING) aMeNDING THE SELECTION PROCESSt BENEFITSt AND STARTING COMPENSATION FOR DEPARTMENT HEADS~ MANAGEMenT, AND PROFESSIONAL STAFF; AND AMENDING CHAPTERS 2.49 AND 2.50 OF THE BREMERTON MUNICIPAL CODE, #AB96-08~ Public comment - none. M/S/C(Montgomery/Huff-Menees) to pass Ordinance No. 4551 on second reading, amending the confirmation standards, salary, and compensation plans, work schedules, and leave benefits for department heads, management and professional staff; and amending Chapter 2.49 and 2.50 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. Vote on motion: Motion carried. In Favor: Opposed: Overson, Farr, Huff-Menees, Montgomery, Colvin, Winters McConnell Neville, 9A - PUBLIC HEARING ON ALMIRA/RIDDELL ROAD APARTMENT SITE PLA~! R~v£BW, #AB96-093 In March of 1991, the City Council approved a request to rezone the TAPE #1376 City Council Reg. Mtg. May 8, 1996 Page 7 of 20 Minutes subject 20 acre site from "Single-Family (SF-3)" to "Multi-Family (MF)". Because of the size and location of the site, and the high level of interest shown by surrounding residents, the City Council conditioned the rezone approval to require the preliminary site plan to be reviewed by the Council at a public hearing. The site plan is now returning to the City Council for a public hearing. The attached "Analysis and Decision" describes the proposal and the seven specific factors the Council asked to be addressed in the design. Acting President Neville asked the "Appearance Of Fairness/Conflict of Interest Question." Mr. McConnell revealed the fact he had received several phone calls concerning this issue and his response to each of those callers was to encourage them to come to the public hearing to voice their position before the full Council. And, approximately 1 1/2 months ago he had a discussion with Mr. Allingham on this proposal, but because Mr. Allingham is a staff members he did not see that as an ex parte communication. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated he saw mo problem with Mr. McConnell being seated. Acting President Neville announced all Council members presented will remain seated. Jack Allingham, Senior Planner, explained this proposal is a site plan review application for the construction of 360 dwelling units on a 20-acre site located just west of Almira Drive and south of Riddell Road. The site is undeveloped and abuts the current K- Mart/Eagle Hardware/Albertson's commercial complex further to the west. The site was rezoned to Multi-Family in 1990 and at that time the City Council put a condition on the rezone requiring that a preliminary site plan be presented to the City Council for review and approval. He noted Council was provided the site plan review application, a preliminary grading and drainage plan and a preliminary utilities plan. The specific points that Council was to look, as required in the Rezone Ordinance, were: transit access and turnouts; access onto neighborhood streets; streets and sidewalks; open space; setbacks and types of vegetation within them; basic lighting; and trash facilities. This project is being proposed as a two phase project. The proponent is proposing to construct 180 dwelling units on the south half of the site for Phase I. This phase will also contain approximately 312 off-street parking spaces as well as a recreational building with a swimming pool, sports court and a tot lot. At total building out, there would be an additional recreational building, another sport court and tot lot. The plan has ample provisions for open space, which amounts to 15% of the site. The architect calculates the open space as shown on the plan TAPE #1376 City Council Reg. Mtg. May 8, 1996 Page 8 of 20 Minutes to be approximately 26% of the site. The current Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is medium density residential 8-18 dwelling units per acre. This plan, on 20 acres, falls right at 18 dwelling units per acre and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The allowable density in a Multi- Family Zone allows one dwelling for every 2,053 square feet of lot area. At that density, the zoning allows up to 424 dwelling units and if additional open space is provided and a Planned Unit Development process was used, up to 600 dwelling units could be reviewed and approved on this site. Therefore, the 360 dwelling units being proposed are well within the density limitations. The off-street parking requirements are based on the number of bedrooms per dwelling unit and range between 1.5 and 2 spaces depending if it is a 1-2-3 bedroom unit. The plan provides for 625 parking spaces, which is what the architect calculates as the exact minimum required and is consistent with the requirement for parking and zoning. During the rezone of the site, transit was an issue and this plan shows the location of transit stops on Riddell Road just west of an access driveway onto the site and another one just south of the access driveway on the site at Clemens Street. The site has essentially three access location, one on Almira Road across from the intersections of Clemens and Almira Drive, a new access being proposed at Maple Avenue, which moves out to Hollis, and a third access at Riddell Road. Two public streets abut the site -- Almira Drive and Riddell Road. Almira Drive is a collector and is paved to standard width with curbs and gutters, but no sidewalks. Riddell Road is also paved, but is not developed to minimum standards for an arterial street, having no curbs, gutters or sidewalks. As a requirement of the approval and as being proposed, the plan calls for placing a 5-foot wide sidewalk along Almira Drive and Riddell Road. This plan also shows a 5-foot wide planting strip between the street and the sidewalk with street trees. Setback requirement for the Multi-Family zone are essentially a 20 ft. setback fronting the streets and 5 ft. side yard setbacks from the south and west property lines. The Zoning Ordinance requires for multi-family projects that one of the side yard setbacks have a minimum of a 15 ft. setback. The area along the south property line does show a minimum 15 ft. setback to the structures and that allows a 5 ft. side yard setback located along the west property line, which abuts the commercial zoning. Because this is a preliminary plan, a detailed lighting plan has not been submitted. However, lighting is not allowed to flood onto TAPE #1376 city Council Reg. Mtg. May 8, 1996 Page 9 of 20 Minutes adjoining properties and generally parking lot lighting is a shielded light source that does not produce glare and generally interior sidewalk lighting is a softer but less directional light source. A detailed lighting plan is usually required at a final plan review. A final aspect the rezone required was reviewing the location of trash facilities/dumpsters and the plan has locations shown, which appear to be screened and located within the inner parking lot areas away from surrounding residential areas. The Planning staff reviewed the preliminary plan and recommends the city Council approve the preliminary plan subject to a final plan to be approved by the Director of Community Development. The analysis and decision of the City Council, which has been provided as a condition, will state that the final plan be approved by the Director, that this approval process mirrors the City's final PUD process, and is approved by the various Departments. The plan before Council is conceptual and not a design plan for construction, but is thorough enough to define what is proposed by the developer. Rick Manninq, developer, handed out color photos of an apartment complex he built in Port Orchard ( Arbor Terrace Apartments). He assured the public that he is a local person and works out of his office in Port Orchard. It is his desire to build a project that will make him proud, such as the prior projects he built in Kitsap County. He emphasized the project as proposed is not a low income project, but rather affordable housing. Several meetings were held with surrounding neighborhoods to hear their concerns and his input to them was his concerns were the same as theirs. He pointed out the site would be built out in two phases and from the market reports they have received this project will be well received. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the proposed project and voiced their concerns: Ramona Cariese, Almira Drive; Robert Kollars, 4119 Petersville Road; Don Schomberq, Manager of Guardian Mini Storage- 1950 NE Riddell Road; Susan Bell, Clemens Street; Susan Brown, 1333 E. Hope Street; Wade Ketterlinq, 1502 Almira Ct.; Walter Nutter, 1518 Almira Ct.; Tonya Patnode, 1332 Hollis Street; Joann Foss, 1328 Hollis Street; David Patterson, 4115 Westview; Michael Shannon, 1518 Vue Ct.; A1 Mercer, Hollis Street; Charlie Brown, 1333 E. Hope Street: (1) Concerned that if 3-story units are built it will block the view and will limit the view to the back side of the buildings. (2) Impact on traffic will only make current traffic even more hazardous. (3) Currently, there are no sidewalks on Almira Drive and children are required to walk along the roadside. (4) The developer proposes to put in sidewalk for only a 2-block area, which is not sufficient to meet the needs of the neighborhood. (5) The subject site is marshy and TAPE #1376 City Council Reg. Mtg. May 8, 1996 Page 10 of 20 Minutes at one time was a swamp. (6) Any access onto Riddell Road should be limited because of the adverse impact it will have on the already heavily traveled street. (7) When there is ice/snow on Riddell Road vehicles have difficulty traveling up the hill (east) and in some instances have slid into commercial buildings. (8) Want to keep neighborhood safe with a residential safe feeling. (9) Children do not have sidewalks to ride their bikes on and increased traffic on Clemens will impact that area adversely. (10) If the site is developed, trees need to be planted along Almira Drive to replace what currently provides shade along the subject site. (11) The developer must be required to put in sidewalks along. Almira Drive the entire length of the subject site. (12) Question - will the glacial rock be saved? (13) City's planning staff holds a threat over the neighborhoods that maximum MF zoning of 600 total units is allowable on the subject site. (14) At the time of the rezone, the City Council ignored the Planning Commission's recommendation to limit MF zoning to 15 dewellings per acre and allowed it to go up to the maximum. (15) If the proposal is approved and construction begins, the neighbors would like to see the following: (a) limiting the access onto Almira Drive to one proposed entrance. (b) A row or two of evergreens planted in the buffer zone between the complex and the residential areas on Almira Drive and Hollis, preferably something that is already a fair size, at least 7 feet, which could also help buffer noise. (c) The City make the improvements to Riddell Road at the beginning of phase I construction. (d) All construction equipment, supply vehicles, etc., be prohibited from using Almira Drive for access to and from the construction site and be required to use the Riddell Road or Hollis Street entrances for the majority of the construction period. (e) Riddell Road access point will be both an entrance and exit. If the City is going to make Riddell Road a mainline artery, there is no excuse for it not to be both an entrance and exit. (f) The City's easement between the twenty acre parcel and the businesses fronting Wheaton Way be used as an alternate construction entrance and exit. This should also be considered as a permanent access to the apartment complex. (g) Construction equipment and vehicles cannot be allowed to park along Almira Drive or Hollis Street. (h) Construction work hour limits be enforced, i.e., no work done before 6:30 AM or after 10:00 PM, or as the normal residential Noise Ordinance allows. (i) No slash burning or other burn methods be allowed before, during or after the construction phase because of the adverse affect on residents suffering from asthmatic conditions. (j) Need for extra Police patrols due to increased number of residents and serious consideration for increased Fire and emergency vehicles. (16) The following statement was read into the record from a letter written by Bruce and Georgia Nelson submitted during the initial rezoning: "The next time that you hear "rezone" and no one from the neighborhood involved attends and protests, will you be able to TAPE #1376 City Council Reg. May 8, 1996 Page 11 of 20 Mtg. Minutes convince yourself that no one cares. If a turn out of 100+ people could not convince you, why should anyone try. There would have been more people attending your meeting if they thought your minds were not already made up." (17) Urged Council to use extreme caution approving something that cannot be undone. (18) People living to the north use Riddell to Almira Drive and then up Clemens and over and down Halverson to avoid congestion on Wheaton Way. (19) Traffic on the streets surrounding the subject site currently adversely affects the residents and they view this project as something that will compound the current problems without the City doing something to make their neighborhoods more traffic safe. (20) Concerned about having contacted 12 City of Bremerton telephone numbers and no one responded to messages recorded. TAPE #1377 (21) Question - why build more apartments when the current vacancy rate for rentals is so high? (22) Question - if we are trying to develop our community, why aren't we trying to develop it into family areas? (23) Concerned about the loss of wildlife and birds when the subject site is developed. (24) Several questions were raised regarding how stormwater drainage will be handled. (25) Question -what happened to the access proposed for the southwest corner of the subject site? (26) Question - has provision been made within the development site to take care of the water that runs off of Almira Drive? (27) Question - why can't the City buy this property and keep it as a wooded park? Gil Johnson, Deputy City Clerk, read the following letters into the record: Edith and Richard Thompson, 1304 Hollis Street - We live right behind this acreage, which you propose to build 360 units and that is OK with us providing you leave the road behind us as is. We have lived here since 1979 and use the road for our motor home and cars all this time. If a pathway is used over 7 years, it is lawful for it to be a road as we understand it. And, it is safer than the Hollis Street side with so much traffic to back onto when we come out of the garage. Please note our wishes and thanks so much. Gloria L. Aqas, 1522 Almira Court - Over five years ago, I wrote to the members of the then City Council (all except Council member Lon Overson have been replaced by new members) and to the Bremerton Planning Commission to express my opposition of the rezone of the above 20-acre parcel from single-family (SF-3) to multi-family (MF) and the subsequent construction of a 440 unit multi-family apartment complex on the site by American Redicorp, Inc. I am again writing to the Honorable members of the City Council to express my opposition of the construction of a 360-unit multi- family apartment complex on the same parcel. In fairness to the owner(s) of the property, since I do not wish them deprived of TAPE #1377 City Council Reg. Mtg. May 8, 1996 Page 12 of 20 Minutes their income from the property, I am not opposed to the construction of a complex of a much lesser total n~mher of units. My reasons for opposing the new proposal are the same as my reasons for opposing the rezone request and the construction of a 440-unit multi-family apartment complex five (5) years ago. I am enclosing copies of letters for your reference. To summarize my reasons, they are as follows: (1) Increased noise and traffic in the neighborhood. The expansion of the nearby shopping complex and the opening of Almira Drive Extension within the last five years have created more traffic congestion, noise and hazards to pedestrians and neighborhood residents. We use to be able to walk (pollution control and good exercise) to the shopping centers without fear of being sideswiped by passing vehicles. Across the street from one of the proposed entrances to the apartment complex, on Clemens Street, is one of two school bus stops along Almira Drive where about 15-20 young school children congregate while they wait for their school bus on school days. These young neighborhood children walk to the bus stop along the street curbs due to the absence of a sidewalk on this section of Almira Drive where they can walk safely. This is especially dangerous to them during the early and dark hours of winter and on rainy days. This is same problem of the senior citizens and others, and occasionally, residents of the Kitsap Mental Health Center, who go for their daily "free and leisurely walks" along Almira Drive and Riddell Road. There may or may not be any statistical records of pedestrian accidents at these locations, but we do not need them to happen to drive our point. Construction of the apartment complex would require cutting down most of the buffer trees on the site and this would open up the entire neighborhood to the traffic noises and light glares coming from the busy stretch of Wheaton Way and Riddell Road and not counting the noise of the over 600 projected number of vehicles that will come from the complex. I would like to invite the decision-making body to come and observe these locations during peak hours of any work/school days and on weekends. (2) Increased demands on water, sewer, stormwater, and stree~ services. The City of Bremerton is very lucky to have a remarkable water resource and it is not experiencing water shortages the neighboring water districts have. Let us not abuse one of the very few good things that we still have. Sewer, stormwater, and street services are another matter. The Bremerton Wastewater Treatment Plant continues to have problems with sewage spills and odor control; City stormwater and street crews cannot keep up with the stormwater system and street maintenance. Again, I wish to invite the decision-making body to come and see for themselves the rapidly TAPE #1377 City Council Reg. May 8, 1996 Page 13 of 20 Mtg. Minutes deteriorating neighborhood streets, covered with potholes and bulging road surfaces. It is very hazardous trying to avoid the potholes especially when it is dark and rainy and with tailgaters and speeding motorists behind you. Also, it takes more than one phone call or written report to the Street Division before a pothole is repaired. (3) Increased police and fire services. Again, the City of Bremerton is lucky to have dedicated Police and Fire personnel, but does anybody know that now and then a Police car would be stationed at one of the street corners facing the site to monitor motorists and other events? Why is there a need for this additional burden to the Police force? (4) Overcrowded schools. When will we see the end of overcrowded schools? Let us concentrate on giving a good and solid education to the school children, instead of worrying about building additional schools. What good are additional school buildings to accommodate more students if the quality of education they get does not prepare them to be good citizens? If the City is interested in increasing its tax base,why not encourage developers and investors to invest in the revitalization of downtown Bremerton? New residents will not do their shopping in Bremerton or stick around in Bremerton because there are no big shopping centers and adequate entertainment in Bremerton. They 3- 18 will go to Silverdale, Tacoma and Seattle for their shopping and entertainment needs. I urge the City Council to consider these things. Thank you for listening." W&de Ketterlinq expressed concern that at the last meeting with surrounding neighbors, a City Engineer stated he considers the developer's stormwater holding tanks to be half the size they need to be. He was not aware of any reference to a retaining wall at the top of the slope under Almira Drive, which he believes will be a necessity. Since Kitsap County paved the short roadway leading to the Kitsap Mental Health facility, residents in that area have seen increased traffic on Almira Drive, which is being used as a by-pass of five stop lights on Wheaton. He is greatly concerned that the proposed project will cause his property value to decrease and he believes with increased density there will be an impact on local schools. Charlie Brown asked if Mr. Manning owned the subject site or just the developer? Mr. Manning stated at the present he does not own the site, but once he receives the necessary permits he will TAPE #1377 City Council Reg. Mtg. May 8, 1996 Page 14 of 20 Minutes proceed with the financing. He emphasized this hearing was not the first time he has met with residents in a public form to discuss some of the concerns, which he believes have been addressed. They have included a lot of things that were not pointed out to them that needed being done when they first started this process. In the beginning, they were only going to be required to provide a site plan. Issues such as stormwater and traffic were brought up at the public meetings, which necessitated them to meet with consultants and get their expert opinions on any impacts. He pointed out they started out with a zoned piece of property when they pursued this project and his approach was to not work against the neighbors, but to make the process as easy as possible. The Wetlands Report identified that there are no wetlands on the subject site. In regard to the traffic concerns, he conducted a detailed traffic analysis that revealed "a not substantially increased number of cars from the 1991 study in most areas". The fossil rock will be retained on the site and a buffer placed around it. It was mentioned that it would be nice to have the section closest to Riddell Road as part of the first phase. The first phase will be purchased once they receive approval on their financing and the project is approved. They do have a contract to purchase the entire site, however, they will not be purchasing the second portion until and if they develop the proposed project. Therefore, development of roads or any other amenities on phase 2 would be impractical at the phase 1 stage. He pointed out there is no easement on the west side of the site, which borders the shopping center, it is actually an overlay of asphalt that was done when Eagle Hardware was developed. In reference to the concern about the need for more Police officers, he pointed out once this site is developed it will generate more tax revenue, which he believed would be more than substantial. He pointed out there is little need for Police patrols at the Arbor Terrace Apartment complex and they do allow a couple of Police Officers to reside at the complex. In reference to the site drainage concern, he pointed out the plan calls for retention ponds that were engineered through extensive study on how much water would be flowing off the roadways. This issue will be further addressed through the development process. In reference to the people accessing their backyards through the use of an easement on the subject site, there has been verbal agreement that they will allow and make provisions for that access in the project. A survey will be required to fulfill that commitment and will be part of the ongoing process. In regard to the question about the drainage pipe coming down off of Almira Drive onto the site, tentatively they plan to run that pipeline into one of the detention ponds. Robert Kollars stated he believed Mr. Manning has been the brunt of a neighborhood problem that is not his responsiblity. So far, about 95% of the comments made at this hearing have to do with TAPE #1377 city Council Reg. Mtg. May 8, 1996 Page 15 of 20 Minutes existing traffic problems. He questioned if this project is approved and is developed, is it possible to use this opportunity to improve a bad traffic situation? He pointed out a problem of vehicles speeding up the hill on Hollis Street, and asked about the possibility of installing a circular traffic calmer in the middle of the street that would require people to slow down? He continues to be apposed to the whole issue, but he did not want to be a NIMBY -"not in my back yard", and say forget it without having a solution. If the project is developed, he preferred looking at ways to make it a positive thing where problems are addressed. Mich&el Shannon asked the depth of the water retention pond? Mr. Montgomery pointed out the plan shows the retention pond depth at 6 feet. He also noted the plan shows stormwater storage tanks underneath several of the parking lots. Mr. Fart interjected the plan, as presented, is a conceptual design and purpose of this hearing is not to address final details. Mr. Shannon stated from past experience he has seen drains catching only a portion of the run off during heavy rains and questioned where will that excess water go? Ne4 Lever, City Engineering Department, pointed out and discussed the preliminary storm drainage plan and utility plan provided by the developer. In response to an earlier comment about the run off vaults not being the correct capacity, he was alluding to something Mr. Lever stated at a neighborhood meeting and that was the preliminary storm drain analysis had some errors and needed to be revised for final design. Water will be detained in the vaults and the stormwater will have to be released at the pre- developed rate. Mr. Montqomery referenced an area that is currently in grass and questioned if it was a platted street or will the developer be required to put in a street? Mr. Allinqham explained it is an undeveloped but dedicated City right-of-way, approximately 60 feet wide, and approximately 30 feet leads to the site itself and it would require improvements to Maple Street to access Hollis Street. Mr. Montgomery questioned the elevation grade of the proposed access onto Almira Drive? Mr. Allinqham stated a sufficient grade would be required to allow vehicles to enter onto Almira at an adequate sight distance. Mr. Montqomery asked if slash burns are allowed in the City. Mr. Alllngham stated yes, the Fire Department controls outdoor burning and for a project such as this it would require the written approval of all the surrounding property owners. He was aware of instances where developers have paid for hotel accommodations for people in a particular area when they carried out a slash burn. Mr. Montqomery stated the proposed plan looked good to him, except for the access onto Almira Drive. He asked if the City Council will have an opportunity to approve the final site plan? Mr. Allinqham stated normally a multi-family development that is zoned for multi-family does not receive City Council approval. However, when this site was rezoned in 1990, the TAPE #1377 City Council Reg. May 8, 1996 Page 16 of 20 Mtg. Minutes City Council required that a preliminary site plan be brought before the Council. The approval being recommended by City staff is that the final site plan (construction document) be reviewed by the Director Of Community Development, who would normally review and approve a site plan per the Zoning Code. That decision would be announced through a public notice with an appeal process. Mr. Overson pointed out the elevation of the site from Almira Drive is such that views should not be impacted by the building structures and that the view may be improved once trees on the site are removed or thinned. He believes "traffic" is the major concern and the City needs to do something concrete to address the problem, which would involve something that is traffic taming, such as stop lights. He doubted a traffic calming circle would be appropriate on Maple Avenue due to the steep grade. He asked Mr. Allingham if anyone has considered using what appears to be a City right-of-way through the present shopping center between what is now Albertson's Grocery store and the Video store? He also believed if this were a county project, they would use that kind of access and place a stop light where those four streets meet. Mr. Allinqham stated he did raise that question with the City's Engineering Department and it was determined the area is an easement for utilities and not public right-of-way. Mr. Overson questioned if the City had given up on considering that possibility and hoped for a more "can do" attitude because he believes it would be a better option for an access. Mr. &llinqham stated to use that easement it would require action by the City Council. Mr. Overson stated in his opinion there needs to be a stop light at the Riddell Road access and Hollis Street access. He has personally been contacted by residents on Worrall, who are unsettled at the speed people travel in that area. He asked if the City is considering placement of stop lights to alleviate some of these concerns? Mr. Alllnqham stated no. Mr. Winters asked for clarification if Mr. Shomberg's storage business is inside the City? Mr. Allinqha~ stated no, everything on the north side of Riddell Road is outside the City limits. Mr. Winters questioned the height of the structures and would they be 3-stores? Mr. Manning explained the structures are a 2-story over a basement that allows straight-in access from the parking lots to the second floor, which allows for handicap access to the middle floors. From the parking lot elevations, the structure would be 2- story measuring 16 feet plus 8-12 feet for the roof structure. Mr. Winters questioned other projects built by Mr. Manning? Mr. Manning described a similar project built in Kingston, which was very well received and he just completed a project in Pierce County, which resulted in an excellent recommendation from the Planning Department for that jurisdiction. Mr. Winters referenced Congressman Norm Dicks' comments about increasing density within TAPE #1377 City Council Reg. May 8, 1996 Page 17 of 20 Mtg. Minutes the City; however, what the City has come up against on at least three projects is "we don't want it in our back yard or across the street". At some point, the City must come to a decision where density will occur within City limits. Residents do not want to see increased costs for utilities or services, but are against increased density, which could help keep those costs down. Mr. McConnell expressed concern, based on his past experience, that the neighborhood may be impacted by noise generated at the outdoor swimming pool during the summer months. He felt it might be more appropriate if the recreation building would be turned around so that the building would act as a buffer between the residents across Almira Drive and the swimming pool. And, that any damage done to Almira Drive from construction vehicles would be repaired by the developer. He questioned where the stormwater being piped down from Almira Drive will be released into? Mr. Lever explained the stormwater will go into the conveyance system entering into the Pine Road interceptor and heads down towards Lions Field. Mr. M~¢onnell asked if the bus stop on Riddell Road will have a pull out? Mr. Allinqham stated yes, improvements to Riddell Road will be required that pull outs be provided as well as a turning lane. Mr. McConnell asked if the water retention ponds on this site would be open or covered? Mr. Lever pointed out there are a number of options for the type of structure used for detention. Underground storage is acceptable as are open ponds. There is also an option for infiltration. Mr. M¢Connell asked if the intent is to have open water retention ponds? Mr. Lever stated the proposal shows underground concrete vaults under the parking areas, which would not be open ponds; however, that decision is up to the developer. Mr. M¢Connell stated when this issue was discussed at the Council Operations Committee meeting, he was led to believe that there would be an open water retention pond. Mr. Lever stated the plan submitted with the application does not show an open pond, but does show concrete vaults under the parking lots; however, either are acceptable. Mr. M~onnell stated he opposed having an open pond because of the safety of children He agreed with Mr. Overson that some kind of traffic delays need to be provided because of increased traffic problems in that area. He also believed that during construction, access to the site should be limited to Riddell for the heavier equipment. He was also concerned that this project would place a lot of people into an already impacted area. He would like to see the requirement attached that the final plan for the project come back before Council for approval because the Planning staff approval process could increase the density up to 400 units and decrease open space. He was in a quandary over this proposal because this site is in his district, but there is no legal way he could vote against the proposal because it conforms to the City's Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. He recalled that 20+ years ago when Merit Mart was built the subject site was TAPE #1377 city Council Reg. May 8, 1996 Page 18 of 20 Mtg. Minutes a negotiated buffer as a condition of approval and was a wetland. That point was brought up in 1991, but there was no recording to substantiate that action. Mrs. Huff-Menees stated it disturbed her to hear a resident say they called City offices several times and their messages were never returned, and hoped such a situation can be corrected. She referenced Mr. Kollar's comments that this does represent an opportunity to provide some traffic improvements for the area around the proposed site, which are badly needed now and more so if the project is approved. She asked if Mr. Manning had an opportunity to see the petitions signed by the residents? She asked if Mr. Manning was willing to work out start times for construction so it did not adversely impact the neighborhoods? Mr. Manning stated being sensitive to noise during construction is something they address even if it was not part of the requirements for approval. Mrs. Huff-Menees asked Mr. Manning to address proposed buffer landscaping? Mr. Manning explained a 20-foot landscaping buffer is planned to runs around the project, which includes a fully irrigated landscape plan that will be in place prior to start of construction. Landscaping is a way to soften this kind of project, so they do spent money in that area and that can be seen in other projects he has built; and it is professionally maintained. Mrs. Huff-Menees concurred with Mr. Overson's comments relating to traffic issues and would like to see the motion to approve contain some contingencies in terms of some definitive plans coming back to Council with respect to traffic calming. She noted that was not the developer's responsibility, and if traffic lights were not possible she was aware of a variety of other kinds of traffic calming methods. Mr. Fart stated his support of this proposal and noted a lot of the concerns expressed during this hearing have to do with traffic problems. In his opinion, a lot of the traffic problems are County residents passing through the residential neighborhoods on their way to the large apartment complexes and shopping areas outside the City. The City needs a larger revenue base in order to cut down the cost of services to City residents. An earlier comment from the public identified that Riddell Road is under the County's jurisdiction, but rarely does one see a County Sheriff Deputy patrolling that area, but there is City Police patrols along Almira Drive. Legally, he could not see how the Council could deny a project that meets the conditions set forth by the City Council and one that would help revitalize the City. He did not think it was fair to lay extra restrictions or penalize the developer for the actions of law breakers. He agreed there needs to be some focus on current traffic problems, but not to the detriment of this project, and should be addressed through enforcement. He felt an earlier comment that the project would draw drug dealing was completely #2706 TAPE #1377 City Council Reg. May 8, 1996 Page 19 of 20 Mtg. Minutes unfair to the developer. He estimated the market rate for the units would be $500-800/month, not low income housing. If he were in the position of the neighborhood, he would strive to establish a friendship with the developer, which may gain much more in the long run. Mr. Colvin thanked the residents for sharing their views with the Council. He asked, under the law, the maximum number of units that can be built on the subject site? Mr. Allingham stated 600, with 360 proposed under Phase I. Mr. Neville asked the Deputy City Clerk to review the five conditions required as part of the rezone approval. He too was concerned over the non-response from City departments to Mrs. Patnode and encouraged her to contact Mayor Horton's office or the City Council for assistance. Based on her testimony, she contacted approximately 15 different City numbers and no one responded to her messages. Mr. Montgomery questioned if the easement behind Eagle Hardware was usable as an access to the site for construction equipment? Mr. Manning explained the easement belongs to Eagle Hardware and he doubted they would want him to use that area as an access. The easement area is within his property line; however, once an area has been asphalted over for a certain number of years, it becomes the property of the person, who had it asphalted. Mr. Sievers stated that was correct. Mr. Montgomery asked Mr. Manning if it was necessary to have an access from the site onto Almira Drive? Mr. Manning stated yes. Mr. Montgomery asked why couldn't access be limited to Riddell Road and Hollis Street, if some type of traffic calmer can be installed on Hollis Street? Mr. Manning stated it is important to enter the project in as many areas as possible. The project will impact traffic on each of the streets less if access can be gained from all of them as proposed. In reference to the location of the swimming pool, it will be set down a lot lower than the grade of the street and when driving into the complex it will be very picturesque making it a nice entry. In regard to any excessive noise from the swimming pool area, he anticipates having a retaining wall along Almira, which will also act as a buffer. Mr. Montgomery noted the landscape architectural firm for the site is a well respected group. Mr. Manning pointed out additional landscaping has been added to that proposed by the landscape architect and they have worked with this group on other projects. M/S/C(Farr/Winters) to approve the "Analysis and Decision" of the Bremerton City Council approving the preliminary site plan review for the Riddell Road and Almira Drive apartments, subject to the conditions for final site plan approval as proposed. TAPE #1377 City Council Reg. Mtg. May 8, 1996 Page 20 of 20 Minutes Mr. Montqomer¥ made an amendment to the motion, that was later withdrawn after further discussion, that addressed the advisability of pursuing the idea of providing an access to the project through the easement across the shopping center to the west and installation of stop lights on Riddell Road and Hollis Street accesses. Mr. Fart spoke to Mr. Montgomery's amended motion and cautioned the Council to not obligate the City to something that may be difficult to provide. He did not want to see the current traffic problems tied in any way to the approval of a project that meets all of the current requirements. He cautioned Council to think through this suggestion and come up with another avenue and cause the Administration to address, to Council's satisfaction, the traffic problems that have been identified during this hearing. Mr. Sievers stated the approval of the final plan by the Director of Community Development would be fairly mechanical and would not warrant Council's holding up that decision based on development of some kind of traffic calming devices in the subject area. If this project meets Council's approval, it does not mean Council cannot require consideration, at Council level, of other matters and just insist the Administration bring forward options or suggestions for additional access and traffic calming for that area. Vote on motion: Motion carried. In Favor: Opposed: Overson, Farr, Huff-Menees, Montgomery, Neville, Colvin, Winters McConnell With no further business meeting adjourned at 8:35 P.M.. KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk JOHN E. LAW, Council President City of Bremerton KLM/JL/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Bid award for central computer equipment to replace the NCR. Tower computers FORAGENDAOF: ~ ,~-~ - ?~ ORIGINATING DEPT: Administrative Services ORIGINATOR: Bill Eley DATE SUBMITTED: May 7, 1996 2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back ff necess..~vy,),~ City TtWasurer ~ Fiscal & Budget Committee Operations committee COUNCIL COMMITTEE EXHIBITS: ENDORSEMENTr~ INFORMATION [] MAY O R~.~r'r~--1 ~ APPROVED BY COUNCIL PR.ESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ~ SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The central NCR Tower computers were purchased in 1987/8. They are becoming less reliable and more costly to maintain. Disk space is limited and it would be expensive to add more disk space to these vintage computers. It was ag~ed during the budget process for 1996 that the City should undertake a major computer upgrade during 1996 and 1997. Part of that upgrade was to ~place the central NCR Tower computers. In December Council approved a Request for Proposals for that part of the upgrade project. It was estimated at the thne that the replacement hardware and operating system software would cost $60,000. The cost of the Pentamafion proposal recommended by staff is $58,833. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the purchase of replacement computer hardware and operating system so~vare from Pentamation, Inc. in the amount of $58,833. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED [ ] TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED [ ] DISAPPROVED [ ] AMENDED [ ] DATE: Il. AGENDA BILL NO.: q~- lO~'~' (OVER) 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE Non-passage would remove the anticipated throughput increase that thc acquisition of replacement equipment would provide. The machines axe old and replacement parts axe becoming scarce. We axe under an ever mcreasiag risk of total central computing failure if we do not provide replacement equipment ia the near future. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EOUIPMENT OR OTI-~R RESOURCES: This replacement is already budgeted and would allow certain staff more time to accomplish other tasks associated with their job rifles. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: RFP Computer Vendors Bid Opening 12/15/96 Advertised: The Sun Daily Journal of Commerce RFPs sent to: Pentamation Inc AT&T Global R & D Industries Dennis Parr & Associates Scitel, Leeds and Associates Managed & Logistics Associates Harwood International Unique Computers Advanced Applications and Systems Small Business Solutions Seattle Data Systems Micron Electronics PC Tech Micro Pro Jones Business Systems Service Communications Total Network Interface Computer Connection RDI MicroCad k PENTAMATION AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT Client: City of Bremerton,WA Agreement Number: 9602031/SL 239 Fourth Street Bremerton, WA 98337 Pentamation Enterprises, Inc. (PEI) hereby agrees to sell to the Client and the Client agrees to purchase the equipment, referred to as the "Equipment" identified in the Attachment A and installation services therefore, in accordance with the terms and conditions specified herein: 1. Equij~ent Instattatiem Services Provided PEI shall use its standard system assurance programs to individually test each unit of the Equipment according to manufacturers specifications, and when practical, integrate each unit into the system for a total syst~ test prior to shipment and installation on the Client's premises. Prior to installation of the Equipment, representatives fr~ PEI's Computer Engineering Divisi~ and/or Cor~unications' Department will visit the Client's premises on a mutually agreed date for the purpose of approving the locations for computer systems and principal components of the c~nications network and establishing plans for the installation of the Equipment and communications facilities. C. Based on Client selected comtaunications facilities, PEI will order and coordinate the installation and check-out of the communications facilities with the EquLpment LnstalLation. D. PEI or its designee shall perform computer installation services to the Equipment on the Client's pr~nises. Installation shall be completed on a mutually agreed to date, subject to the obligations of the ClLent to provide the operational enviroe~aent for the Equipment as provided in Client Responsibilities bel~,howeYer not later than 60 days frcm si~nin~ of contract. E. PEI warrants that all Equipm'~nt lt'sted on the Attachment A will be installed in good working order ready for use according to the manufacturer's published specifications. PEI makes no other expressed or implied warranties as to any matter. ALL WARRANTIES AS TO MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE HEREBY EXCLUDED. F. Pentamation will provide the Client with a set of standard reference manuals for operation of the Equipment by Client's trained p~rsonnel. Once the Equipment is installed on the Client's premises and PEI or its designee has successfully concluded final diagnostic tests, the installation will be considered oompLete. PEI will render to Client an invoice reflecting the Equipment and installation costs sho~n in Attachment A, along with any additional items ordered by the Client such as, but not limited to, cable, tape reel and ribbons. PEI warrants that it owns the Equipment free and clear of all encumbrances and Liens of whatsoever nature or kind. Title to the Equij~ent is to remain vested in PEI until the purchase price thereof shall have been paid in full. Risk of loss or damage to the Equipment shall be upon Client as soon as the Equipment leaves PEI's or manufacturer's premises for shipment to Client. 2. Char!Qes a~ Client Respor~ibilities Terms of the purchase prices outlined in Attachment A are 20% of the Equipment charges upon agreement signing, with the balance of the Equipment charges along with installation and other charges due upon hardware installation and the successful running of manufacturer specified diagnostics. Client agrees to pay invoices rendered for the purchase and installation of Equipment on the terms of net 30 days fro~ date of invoice. A service charge of 1.5% per month will be applied to unpaid balances over 30 days old. Client's non-payment of any sums due as specified in this Agreement shall be considered a default, and PEI shall have the option to do one or more of the following (A) (ii terminate this Agreement; (ii) take immediate possession of the Equipment; (iii) retain all money paid hereunder as Liquidated damages; and/or (Bi exercise any other right or remedy available to PEI at law or equity. The CLient shall pay all costs of transportation and in-transit insurance for the Equipment to its premises and all other related costs that may include special rigging, storage, packaging, and similar charges to position the equipment located in the approved locations. The Client shall provide, at its cost, the suitable space and operating environment necessary for all the Equipment, including any special electric Fx~ver services, air conditioning, humidity controls or other necessary space and environmental modifications. The Client is responsible for the cost of all cabling, phone equil~ent, services and facilities needed to attach servers, workstations, video terminals and terminal printers and the like to the computer equipment. This includes installing the cables and the labor or installation fees associated with the preparation of terminal locations. F. Client shall provide PEI or its designee full and free access to the Equipment to provide the installation services. G. The Client's personnel shall not attempt any reqa(rs or adjustments to the Equipment at any time except under dLrection from PEI or its designee. Genera l A. The CLient shall pay all costs of damage to the Equipment caused by the fault or negligence of the Client; by acts of CLients' agents, servants or employees; by non-PEI alteration or service; by acts of God~ fire or other casualty, Floods, wars, riots, Communication Carriers, and the like. The terms and provisions of this agreement shall apply to the sales and installation oF any additional equipment hereafter sold by PEI to Client unless other terms and provisions are agreed to in writing by both parties. Such additional sales shall be evidenced by purchase order or other written Lnstrument signed by Client. CLient acknowledges that Equip~nt in excess of that Listed in Attac~nent A is not considered in the fee itemized in this agreement and Client will pay additional charges if PEI or its designee are required to provide, (ntegrate, install or repair any additional equipment. Payments will be due upon installation. ~). PEI's installation personnel shall remain on CLient's site not n~re than one day due to Client's failure to fulfill its site preparation obligation and additional return trips necessary will be billed at PEI's prevailing per diem rates plus expenses. C. This Agreement does not provide for on-goLng maintenance services for the EquLpment after the installatio~ services are completed. The Client shall be responsible for signing an agreement with PEI, or an equivalent alternative, to provide for equipment maintenance services that will become effective on the date of installation for all Equipr~nt shoran on the Attachment A. Failure on the part of the Client to sign maintenance agreements with PEI shall in no way further obligate PEI. Maintenance agreements are not required until expiration of warranty shown on Attachment "A". D. PEI shall not be Liable for indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages in connection with this Agreement. E. This Agreement and any attachments hereto signed by both parties shall be governed by the laws of the CemmonweaLth of Pennsylvania and constitute the entire Agreement and understanding between the Client and PEI concerning the subject matter hereof, and any representation, promise, modification or amendment shall not be binding upon either party unless in writing and signed on behalf of each duly authorized representative. This Agreement and the obligations and benefits of the parties hereunder may be assigned by either party upon written notice. F. This Agreement includes purchase of Informix software listed on Attact~nent "B". Accepted by: Pentamation Enterprises, Inc. Client: City of Bremerton, WA Officer: Officer: H. G. Stork (Signature) (Printeq) Title: Vice President Title: Date: Date: Attachment "A" Equipment. Software-and Service List to be provided DY Pentamation. Inc. Qty_ Description Price NCR Globalist S40 Computer System configured as follows: System baseboard with two pentium processor board slots; I to 4 way 100Mhz or 133Mhz Dyadic 133 MHz Pentium processor (Dual 133Mhz processors) w/1MB cache each 128MB Advanced ECC Memory Installed SMP Architecture 4 EISA I/O slots/2 PCI I/O slots/2 PCI-EISA IlO slots 2 Integrated Fast & Wide SCSI-2 channels 2 Serial I/O ports I Parallel port Hot Plug Disk Backplane w/6 drive slots 1024 x 768, 256 color svga graphics chipset w/1MB video ram on board 1.44 MB 3.5" Floppy Disk drive 5.25" Quad speed CD-ROM drive Dual Channel PCI RAID controller Manual/Drivers: RAID 5 Hot Pluggable 2GB Disk drives 1 4GB Pluggable disk drive 1 4/8 GB 4mm DAT DDS-2 tape autoloader, 6 tapes 1 PCI Ethernet Adapter 1 16+ Port RS232 TrY Adapter 1 manual/driver for above 3 16 Port TTY expansion Box 48 DB25 to R J45 cable adapter I 28.8KB diagnostic modem and cable 512 KB Flash BIOS Keyboard & Mouse 525 WATT auto-ranging power supply System diagnostics User Guide & SCSI Manual Power Cord 34,191 1 NCR 4071 2000VA Line Interactive UPS 1,329 1 PowerMon Software for above 13 Systems Hardware Total 35,533 UNIX Operating System CLT/SVR MP RAS unlimited version 3.0.02* 10,834 1 System Software Installation/Setup 3,800 Systems Software Total 14,634 1 Burn-in, System $ ~pFFest, Installation/Onsite Verifica*' q 7,666 1 Freight & Insurance 1,000 System Delivery/Setup Charges 8,666 Total Order 58,833 * Provided that Informix have a port to this version. NOTES: 1. The City will make a decision on the spooling sofbNare it intends to use prior to the installation of the new system. Any literature you could provide on the version of EasySpooler that you are proposing would be greatly appreciated. It is understood that the cost of the spooling software is not included above. We did not include a 10BaseT Hub in the above specifications. All equipment and the operating system should be eligible for NCR maintenance. Over the past several years the City has developed a good working relationship with the NCR Corporation, both locally and within their central despatch organization. With this in mind we should like to coordinate all hardware and systems software maintenance directly with NCR. MAINTENANCE CHARGES: The above equipment is covered by a three year on-site, next day, service warranty and monthly maintenance will not be necessary during that period. The exceptions to this are as follows: item Monthly Maintenance 28.8K Diagnostic Modem 5 UNIX Operating System 300 Total Monthly Maintenance 305 Maintenance on these two items will commence upon installation. PENTAMATION At t act~lent "B" Informix SE - 16 users runtime 4GL - 16 users runfime SQL - 1 user runtime Total: CITY OF BREMERTON One Time License Fee Annual Maintenance $3,650 2,880 1,77q) $440 340 210 $8,300 $990 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: RESOLUTION #~5~ City of Bremerton Wastewater Comprehensive Plan FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: May.~J 1996 PW & Utilities W. Eugene Sampiey/t~P. April 30, 1996 2. C?.RARANCES: (Corm~lentionj~'q~ 3. if Director PW & Utilities~'- ~.~P~m~, J Director Co~uni~ Dev. ~~ A. Ci~Atto~ey ~~% B. Ci~ Treasurer ~~ C. Fis~l & ~dget Co~. ~rations Co~ttee EXHIBITS: Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Statement Resolution ~ ENDORSEMENT ~ INFORMATION 4. SU~E~2~RY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The Bremerton Wastewater Comprehensive Plan serves as a guide for policy development and decision making processes for the Department of Public Works and Utilities. The plan identifies short-term capital improvements and defines long-term system planning goals within the Bremerton Sewer Service Area. This plan complies with regulatory requirements and accommodates system expansion in accordance with the State Growth Management Act. 8. RECfk~4ENDATION: That City Council adopt Resolution # ~ 5~/~ , approving the Bremerton Wastewater Comprehensive Plan and authorize the Department of Public Works and Utilities to implement this plan subject to City Administrative policies and procedures. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICI~kL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PW&U Director N/A PT..U.T.RD TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVI~D DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: AMENDED 2. CIRCE CC~qENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSA~.: Without a Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, the City would not be able to meet future wastewater and sewer use needs as growth occurs in the service area. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS~ FACILITIES~ EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: Staffing: Additional staff time may be required and would be budgeted to implement programs and projects outlined in the plan. Budget: The Wastewater Comprehensive Plan outlines a Capital Improvements Schedule. Facilities & Equipment: Improvements and expansion of wastewater collection and treatment components are identified in the plan. 7. HESF~A/~CH SOURCES: RCW 90.48.110 Chapter 173-240 WAC State Growth Management Act RESOLUTION NO..~'5-z-/~) A RESOLUTION to adopt the City of Bremerton Wastewater Comprehensive Plan. WHEREAS, The City of Bremerton desires to plan for the future and growth in its wastewater system service area; and WHEREAS, a wastewater comprehensive plan provides a means to meet future wastewater collection system and wastewater treatment plant needs; and WHEREAS, the City has not adopted a wastewater comprehensive plan since the Sinclair Inlet Sewerage Facilities Plan completed in 1978; and WHEREAS, the 1990 Sinclair Inlet Urban Bay Action Plan recommends comprehensive planning of Bremerton's wastewater facilities; and WHEREAS, the requirements for comprehensive wastewater planning are specified in State Department of Ecology regulations promulgated under Washington Administrative Code 173-240- O50; Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton: That The City of Bremerton Wastewater Comprehensive Plan attached hereto be adopted. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of , 1996. APPROVED this __ day of , 1996 JOHN E. LAW Council President ATfkiST: LYNN S. HORTON Mayor KATHLEEN L. MCCLUSKEY, Clerk RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION to adopt the City of Bremerton Wastewater Comprehensive Plan. WHEREAS, The City of Bremerton desires to plan for the future and growth in its wastewater system service area; and WHEREAS, a wastewater comprehensive plan provides a means to meet future wastewater collection system and wastewater treatment plant needs; and WHEREAS, the City has not adopted a wastewater comprehensive plan since the Sinclair Inlet Sewerage Facilities Plan completed in 1978; and WHEREAS, the 1990 Sinclair Inlet Urban Bay Action Plan recommends comprehensive planning of Bremerton's wastewater facilities; and WHEREAS, the requirements for comprehensive wastewater planning are specified in State Department of Ecology regulations promulgated under Washington Administrative Code 173-240- 050; Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton: That The City of Bremerton Wastewater Comprehensive Plan attached hereto be adopted. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of , 1996. APPROVED this day of , 1996 JOHN E. LAW Council President ATTEST: LYNN S. HORTON Mayor KATHLEEN L. MCCLUSKEY, Clerk 1. SUBJECT: AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. '~'}~"~ AMENDING THE 1996 BUDGET FOR AGENDA OF: May~, 1996 ORIGINATING DEPT: Treasurer ORIGINATOR: R. Han'n~- DATE SUBMITTED: April 22, 1996 ' 2. CLEARANCES: Co.~e~t,~ ba~k if necessary) Dir. Ad mi nist r a~_~e~S~_~/~' ~-''' City Atto rne ..~_____y_~-~ - 3. EXHIBITS: Proposed Ordinance Suppo~ng Budget Adjustment Forms ENDORSEMENTS ~ INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTA 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: A number of actions have been taken by the City which need to be incorporated into the Budget in order for the document to remain an accurate projection of City financial activity. 8. RECOMMENDATION; Motion to approve Ordinance amending the 1996 Budget on first reading. .~/ Motion to pass Ordinance No. second reading. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Treasurer ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Mayor EXPIRATION DATE: 12/31/96 REVIEW DATE: N/A PULLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED 11. AGENDA BILL NO: AMENDED__ 9A 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The 1996 Budget will not accurately project anticipated financial activity of the City. Several previously authorized actions will exceed current appropriations. 6, IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: As indicated in the attachments. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: 1996 BudgetAdjustment Requests. ORDrNnNCE NO. AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 4539 relating to the budget of the City of Bremerton for Fiscal Year 1996 THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1: Section 1 of Ordinance No. 4539 is hereby amended as follows: That the financial budget for the City of Bremerton, to wit: "Official Budget for the year 1996, City of Bremerton", now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Bremerton, be and the same is hereby approved and adopted, and the respective amounts provided for in said budget for the several funds of the City of Bremerton, be and the same are hereby fixed and adopted as follows: ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR THE YEAR 1996 001 101 102 103 104 105 106 108 109 110 112 201 305 307 308 401 407 451 481 503 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT General Arterial Street ................................................. 2,506,156 City Street .................................................... 2,070,390 Contingency Reserve ............................................ 733,500 Civic Improvement/Stadium ..................................... 155,000 Parking System Revenue Comm. Development Block Grant ............................. 1,374,000 Abatement Revolving Fund ...................................... 414,000 Real Estate Transfer Tax Police Special Projects ............................................ 43,199 Parks Facility Construction ........................................ 96,000 G. O. Bonds ................................................... 1,024,787 Waterfront Parks Consturction Fire Department Capital ......................................... 314,570 Pendergast Regional Park Const ................................. 119,000 Water Operating Municipal Golf Course ........................................ ~.,222,000 Wastewater Operating ........................................ 15,268,985 Stormwater Operations ........................................ 1,258,715 Risk Management ............................................. 1,898,000 22,005,161 664,638 885,000 31,300 10,040,073 4,224,012 510 601 621 622 623 624 Equipment Rental Reserve ..................................... 2,457,794 Cemetery Perpetual Care ........................................ 123,500 Local Improvement Dist. Guaranty .............................. 116,000 Roosevelt Capital Asset ......................................... 356,000 Gift and Donations Fund .......................................... 32,400 Employee Medical Insurance Reserve ............................ 555,000 GRAND TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES: ero ~A-~ ,~ n $68 ...... ,~ ,, ,,., ,767,180 Of the total revenue, the sum of $4,703,968 is the estimated amount to be received fi.om a $3.8020 levy per $1,000 of assessed valuation of all property within the city limits of the City of Bremerton as set forth in Ordinance No. 4532. APPROVED by the City Council on the first reading this day of May, 1996. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk in authentication of such passage this day of May, 1996. APPROVED this JOHN E. LAW, Council President day of May, 1996 ATTEST: LYNN HORTON, Mayor KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk EFFECTIVE DATE: PUBLISHED: ORDINANCE NO: 1996 AMENDING ORDINANCE 1 SUMMARY OF BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS CURRENT NET AMENDED 1996 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS BUDGET 001 GENERAL 21,849,461 $155,700 22,005,161 101 ARTERIAL STREET 2,506,156 2,506,156 102 STREET 2,070,390 2,070,390 103 CAPITAL RESERVE 733,500 733,500 104 CIVIC IMPROVEMENT 155,000 155,000 105 PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE 664,250 388 664,638 106 C.D.B.G. 1,374,000 1,374,000 108 ABATEMENT REVOLVING FUND 414,000 414,000 109 REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX 875,000 10,000 885,000 110 POLICE SPECIAL PROJECTS 43,199 43,199 112 PARKS FACILITY CONSTRUCTION 96,000 96,000 201 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND 1,024,787 1,024,787 305 WATERFRONT PARKS CONSTRUCTION 27,200 4,100 31,300 307 FIRE DEPARTMENT CAPITAL 314,570 314,570 308 PENDERGAST REGIONAL PARK CONST. 119,000 119,000 401 WATER OPERATING 9,991,812 48,261 10,040,073 407 GOLF COURSE 4,223,000 1,012 4,224,012 451 WASTEWATER OPERATING 15,268,985 15,268,985 481 STORMWATER OPERATING 1,258,715 1,258,715 503 RISK MANAGEMENT 1,898,000 1,898,000 510 EQUIPMENT RENTAL RESERVE 2,457,794 2,457,794 601 CEMETERY PERPETUAL CARE 123,500 123,500 621 LID GUARANTY 116,000 116,000 622 ROOSEVELT CAPITAL ASSET 356,000 356,000 623 DONATIONS FUND 32,400 32,400 624 EMPLOYEE MEDICAL INSURANCE RES. 555,000 555,000 TOTAL $68,547,719 $68,767,180 $219,461 Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST EMPLOYEE MEDICAL RESERVE FUND NO. 624 NO. 96-12 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description Amount REDUCE: ENDING CASH 25,000 USE OF FUNDS: Description INCREASE: SUPPLIES AND SERVICES Amount 25,000 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide expenditure authority necessary to pay for the YMCA memberships for City employees which were previously authorized. The contract cost is $2,500 per month and began March 1. Department Head Signature Date Director Signature Date Treasurer Comments: ~-~ Recommended ~-~ Not Recommended Treasurer's Signature Date Mayor Comments: Recommended I Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Date Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fisc¢l & Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST PARK and GENERAL MISC. No. 96-11 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description REDUCE: INTERFUNDINSURANCE Amount 35,000 USE OF FUNDS: Description INCREASE: PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENTIMP. Amount 35,000 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will allow the use of the savings realized from insurance premiums coming in under budget to make improvements to the City's playground equipment. It is expected that these improvements will reduce injudes to children and the related claims and litigation expenses to the City. Department Head Signature Date Treasurer Comments: Director Signature Date Recommended Not Recommended Treasurer's Signature Mayor Comments: Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Date Recommended ~! Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Co Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST TRANSPORTATION DEPT. - GENERAL FUND NO. SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description REDUCE: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTOR DEPOSIT Amount 456,500 48.000 USE OF FUNDS: Description INCREASE: PERSONNEL COMPUTER SYSTEM PARTS & SUPPLIES SUB - LET WORK SHOP TOOLS SAVINGS Amount 190,000 20000 190,000 40,000 25,000 39.500 504.500 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will authorize the positions and expenditures necessary to change the City's vehicle maintenance activity from a contracted basis to a City staffed activity. The position of Fleet Manager is authorized and funded as of Apdl 1 and all other positions are authorized and funded as of May 1. Department Head Signature Date Treasurer Comments: Director Signature Date Recommended Mayor Comments: Not Recommended Treasurer's Sig~it'ure ' '~'-- Date Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Mayor's Signature Date ~ Recommended ~ Not Recommended ~-~ Approved ~, Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST GENERALFUND-POLICE DEPT. No. 96-8 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description INCREASE: CONTRACT REVENUE Amount 56,620 USE OF FUNDS: Description INCREASE: PERSONNEL COSTS Amount 56,620 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide for the creation of one additional Police Officer position effective Apdl 1, 1996 and provide funding for that position and additional overtime sufficient to provide the services specified in the contract between the City and Bremerton Housing Authority. Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date Director Signature Date Recommended ~ Not Recommended Mayor Comments: Treasurer's Signature Date Recommended I Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Mayor's Signature Date I Recommended ~ Not Recommended Approved ~ Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST EMPLOYEE INSURANCE RESERVE and OTHERS No. 96-7 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description TRANSFER FROM RESERVE Amount 119,321 USE OF FUNDS: Description Amount MEDICAL INSURANCE PREMIUMS GENERAL FUND 69,660 PARKING FUND 388 WATER FUND 48,261 GOLF FUND 1,012 119,321 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide for the transfer of funds from reserve necessary for the 1996 contract with KPS for employee medical insurance. Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date Director Signature--S_ Date Recommended Not Recommended Treasurer"~-Signatur~- Date Mayor Comments: Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied M~yor's Signature Date Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Recommended lappr°ved r-~ Not Recommended ~ Denied Fiscal& Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST No. 96-6 WATERFRONT PARK CONSTRUCTION FUND NO. 305 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description Increase Revenue: Draw on Assigned Funds Amount 4,100 USE OF FUNDS: Description Increase Expenditures: Mitigation Monitoring Amount 4,100 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide for costs of monitoring which will exceed the odginal estimate included in the budget. DepArtmelot Head'Signature Date Treasurer Comments: Director Signature Date Recommended [~ Not Recommended Mayor Comments: Treasurer's Signature-J, Date Recommended [~ Not Recommended , / M~yor's Signature Date Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Recommended [~ Not Recommended lapproved Denied Fiscal &'Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - GENERAL FUND No. 96-5 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description REDUCE COURT REVENUE Amount 34,700 USE OF FUNDS: Description REDUCE COURT PERSONNEL Amount 34,700 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide for the elimination of one Probation Officer position effective Apdl 1, 1996. Revised budget document pages are attached. Department Head Signature Date Treasurer Comments: Director Signature Dtate ~ ~---. Recommended Not Recommendad ~ Treasurer's Sign~ature Mayor Comments: ~-~ Recommended i lapproved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Date ~-~ Recommended [Approved Not Recommended Denied FiS~C~&~BUdget C o m~mi~t t ~e~)i ~n~a't u~re Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX FUND NO. 109 No. 96-4 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description DECREASE ENDING CASH Amount 186,822 ( Remaining Budget End Cash = $214,449 ) USE OF FUNDS: Description SMITH COVE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Amount 186,822 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide expenditure authority for the complete odginal scope of work, (Phase I through VI), and the changes in scope identified to date (Evergreen PaRk and support with Ecology). Department Head Signature Date · Signature Date Treasurer Comments: Recommended ~ Not Rec°mmended--~-fTreasure r'~s'~~¢~ Da~e~' Mayor Comments: ,~"~Recommended i I Approved Not Recommended Denied ~ ~ii~'g na~tu!e Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST- PENDERGAST PARK CONSTRUCTION #308 No. 96-3 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description REDUCE ENDING CASH Remaining ending cash = $90,000 Amount 10,000 USE OF FUNDS: Description SLOPE STABILIZATION PROJECT Amount 10,000 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide funds needed to control soil movement on the slopes between the upper and lower ballfield levels. Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date .D.~ector Signaturb' Date ~.._Recommended ~ Not Recommended S~ na u Mayor Comments: D~te / ~ Recommended Not Recommended ] Approved Denied ~eyor's Signature Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: E/ate [-~ Recommended ~ Approved Not Recommended Denied ~-iscal & B)~dgSt Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST PARKS DEPARTMENT 001-51 NO. 96-2 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description CONCESSION REVENUE Amount 64,120 USE OF FUNDS: Descdption CONCESSION LABOR SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT Amount 29,310 25,648 9,162 64,120 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide the budgetary authority for in-house operation of the ballfleld concession as described in Council study session. Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date tor Signature F~-..Recommended Mayor Comments: Not Recommended Treasureds '~at~ Recommended Not Recommended i Approved ~ Denied ~r's Signature Date Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal '8, Budget ~ommi(tee 'Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX FUND 109 NO. SOURCE OF FUNDS: Descd[~tion iNCREASE BEGINNING CASH Amount 10,000 USE OF FUNDS: Description FOREST RIDGE PARK IMP. Amount 10,000 NARRATIVE: Improvements to the restrooms at Forest Ridge Park approved in the 1995 Budget were not completed pdor to year end and were not rebudgeted in 1996. Staff is requesting re-appropriation of the funds needed to complete these improvements. Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date /,~irector SignatLIFe Date Recommended Mayor Comments: Not Recommended Treasurer's Signature Date Recommended I Approved ~ Not Recommended //~ Denied ~'~z~i~ --.~, ~-- Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: M~yor's Signature Date Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description ~"7~. io'73.5'Hq~o Amount USE OF FUNDS: Description Amount NARRATIVE: Depa-'~tmen%Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date Dire'c~'or Signature Dattb, , __ Recommended F~ Not Recommended Mayor Comments: Treasurer's F~ Recommended ~-~ Approved ~ Not Recommended ~-~ Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Mayor's Signature Date Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 0rdinanc eCRepealing Chapter SUBJECT :_13 .10 Of The B.M.C. And FOR AGEAIDA OF:May 15, 1996 Adopting A New Chapter ORIGINATING DEPT: Parks Dept. Providing For Planting, ORIGINATORS: B. Lorber/J. Trainer Removal, Maintenance Of DATE SUBMI'i-r~D:May 7, 1996 Municipal Trees And Shrubs City Cl~k ENDORSEMENT./ I~O~TION YOR J CLEARANCES: (Cormnent on ba~ 3. EXHIBITS: if necessa_,ry~!~' ,~ Revised Ordinance Public Work/0ps ~ City Tree Policy Community Dev. City Engineer Director PW/Utility ~ City Attorney _~=~=~z~--~-~, ~ · Parks ~_~_~_~ Fiscal and Budget ~ ~0~6%..---~ Operations APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMI%'fAL: 4. SO]~RV5%RY STA'£wz4ENTAND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIb ACTIQN: The existing Tree Ordinance was last updated in 1989. The current changes more clearly define individual, city, and city department responsibilities, and eliminate the need for citizen Street Tree Permits. Pruning practices are clearly identified and should help preserve tree health and appearance. The final major changes is in simplifying the ordinance by removing repetitive abatement verbage that is already in place in Chapter 11.16. This Ordinance Revision incorporates the views and inputs of Engineering, Public Work, Operations, the City Attorney, Parks and Recreation, and the Tree Committee. The revised Ordinance received additional review at the April Traffic Safety Committee meeting. $. RECOMMENDATION: Approve revision to the Bremerton Municipal Code.) Municipal Tree Ordinance (Chapter 13.10 of the TO PASS ORDINANCE ON SECOND READING. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Parks & Rec. E1TFORCEMENTOFFICIAL: Jim Spencer EXPIRATION DATE: Ongoing REVIEW DATE: N/A ,. T~L~ COUNCIL DIRE~I~: 10. NOTICE OF ACTIQN kPPROVED DISAPPRO~u3 DATE: 11. :LL # 2. CLEARA/qCE COMMENTS: IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: The current ordinance is cumbersome and would remain in affect· The Street Tree permit process is not being followed, and confusion abounds as to who is responsible for which municipal trees and who makes determination on tree health and hazards. Failure to approve the Ordinance revisions will perpetuate the "gray area" of tree responsibility and care. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EOUIPMENT OR OTHER RESQURCRR City Departments are following the responsibility matrix shown in the attached City Tree Policy. This policy is consistent with the requirements of the revised Municipal Tree Ordinance. 7 o RESEARCH SOURCES: City Attorney, Parks Urban Forester, Recreation and City of Bremerton Parks & ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE repealing Chapter 13.10 of the Bremerton Municipal Code and adopting a new Chapter regulating the planting, removal, maintenance, and protection of municipal trees and shrubs directly affecting public areas in the City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, Washington. THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Repeal/New Chapter. Chapter 13.10 MUNICIPAL TREES, is hereby repealed and a new Chapter 13.10, MUNICIPAL TREES, ia adopted to read as follows: 13.10.010 PURPOSE. It is the policy of the City of Bremerton, to regulate and control planting, removal, maintenance and protection of trees and shrubs on public areas of the City to eliminate and guard against dangerous conditions which may result in injury to persons using public areas of the City; to promote and enhance the beauty of the City; to prevent damage to any overhead or underground utilities, street, sidewalk or other public property; to protect trees and shrubs located in public areas from undesirable and unsafe planting, removal and maintenance practices; to guard all trees and shrubs on public areas against the spread of disease and pests; and to increase public awareness of tree benefits and proper planting and maintenance practices through education. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to: 1) all trees and shrubs presently or hereafter planted in or upon any public area; and 2) all trees and shrubs planted in or upon any private premises which directly affect overhead and underground utilities, sidewalks, streets, public property, or cause unsafe viewing distances. 13.10.020 DEFINITIONS. (a) "Public area" shall include all public streets, roads, boulevards, sidewalks, planter strips, city-owned rights of way, parks, and the lands owned or leased by the city which are accessible to the public but not including municipal utility watershed or forest lands. TREE.JRC- Ordinance Disk 2 - 5/10/96 1 (b) "Municipal trees and/or shrubs" shall include all woody vegetation presently or hereafter planted on any public areas. (c) "Maintenance" and "Protection" shall include but not be limited to all operations of watering, pruning, spraying, bracing, inspection and other actions necessary to the health and aesthetics of the tree or shrub. (d) "Hazardous tree or shrub" shall be defined as any tree or shrub or part thereof growing on private or public property which: obstructs or impairs the free and full use of a public area, interferes with overhead or underground utilities, is afflicted with or weakened by a contagious or fatal disease, causes unsafe viewing distances, blocks or impedes usage of street or sidewalk, or presents an imminent and foreseeable danger to persons or property. 13.10.030 RESPONSIBILITY FOR MUNICIPAL TREES. (a) Private property owners will be responsible for the maintenance and liability of municipal trees adjacent to their property that have been planted by the owner or prior owner, or for which responsibility has been assumed by the owner through agreement with the City. (b) Private property owners may prune municipal trees adjacent to their property after approval is received from the city urban forester. (c) Property owners and/or occupants are responsible for notifying Engineering in the case that a municipal tree or shrub adjacent to their property space is creating a hazard, so that remedial actions can be taken. (d) Private groups may arrange for the planting or maintenance of areas of municipal trees under the authorization of the Parks and Recreation Department. 13.10.040 DAMAGE TO TREES AND SHRUBS. No person shall in any public area TREE.JRC - Ordinance Disk 2 - 5/10/96 2 of the City, break, injure, mutilate, kill or destroy any tree or shrub; permit any animal under his or her control to do so; prune without Parks and Recreation Department approval; permit any fire to injure any portion of any tree or shrub; permit any toxic chemical to seep, drain, or be emptied on or about any tree or shrub. During building operations the builder shall erect suitable protective barriers around municipal trees and shrubs which may be injured. Persons responsible for damage to trees on public areas shall be penalized pursuant to the Bremerton Municipal Code Section 13.04.180 regarding damage to park property, and Section 13.04.040. 13.10.050 FASTENING MATERIALS TO TREES OR SHRUBS. No person shall fasten any sign, rope, wire, or other materials to, around, or through any municipal tree or shrub without obtaining permission from the Parks and Recreation Department, except in emergencies such as storms or accidents, pursuant to Section 13.04.030 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. 13.10.060 PUBLIC UTILITIES. Public utility work affecting trees or shrubs on public areas shall be limited to the actual necessities of the services of the company and such work shall be done in a neat and professional manner. The utility shall notify the Parks and Recreation Department of any plans for maintenance on public areas and consult with the Parks and Recreation Department should any trees need to be topped or removed so that they may suggest ways to preserve the beauty or symmetry of the tree and keep removals to a minimum. 13.10.070 MASTER STREET TREE PLAN. A Master Street Tree Plan shall be developed by the Parks and Recreation Department for park and Central Business District trees. It will be based upon an inventory of existing municipal trees in these areas and an evaluation of the site and space factors which will aid in the determination of those trees best suited for Bremerton's urban environment and result in the development of a long-range plan for future TREE.JRC- Ordh~ance Disk 2 - 5/10/96 3 planting and maintenance. 13.10.080 PLANTING, PRUNING, REMOVAL, AND MAINTENANCE STANDARDS. The following standards are hereby established for the planting, pruning, removal, and maintenance of municipal trees and shrubs in the public areas of the City: (a) Planting: (1) All trees will be not less than one and one half inch caliper and be No. 1 grade, as described by the American Association of Nurserymen (AAN). (2) No tree or shrub shall be planted closer than two feet from the curb line or 10 feet from a driveway or alley. Trees shall be spaced at intervals of at least 20 feet depending upon species and the expected height of the tree at maturity. Plantings at or near intersections shall be spaced in accordance with sight distance specification set by the City Zoning Ordinance. (3) Sidewalk cuts, where necessary, shall be approved by the Engineering Division and will be a minimum of 4 feet in diameter so as to allow the natural percolation of water. Paver blocks, cobblestones or tree grates or other permeable surfaces will be used to fill sidewalk cuts around trees. (4) All young trees, for a minimum of one year, shall be securely staked and guyed until the roots become established. (5) Municipal trees and shrubs planted prior to the passage of this ordinance are exempt from these planting standards. (6) A list of recommended species of municipal trees is available from the Parks and Recreation Department for those desiring to plant municipal trees in city areas adjacent to their properties. Approval of the tree species is required by the city urban forester prior to planting, if it is not on the recommended species list. TREE.JRC - Ordhlance Disk 2 - 5/10/96 4 (7) Public Education programs regarding tree planting, care and maintenance will be provided by the Parks and Recreation Department in conjunction with Arbor Day festivities each year in April to encourage public involvement in tree planting. Additionally, the Parks and Recreation Department will maintain a tree library available for use by the public. (b) Pruning: Pruning of any municipal tree on any public area must be authorized by the Parks and Recreation Department's city urban forester or performed by City employees at the discretion of the Department. Trees are pruned to preserve their health and appearance, and to eliminate safety and utility concerns, which will increase their longevity in an urban area. (1) Pruning Defined: i. Fine Pruning: removal of dead, diseased, objectionable and/or weak branches on the main trunks and limbs which are larger than 1/2 inch diameter. ii. Medium Pruning: removal of dead, diseased, objectionable and/or weak branches which are larger than one inch in diameter. iii. Safety Pruning: removal of the dead, diseased and/or weak branches to a size that in falling would injure a person and/or property. iv. Cut Back to Topping: cutting back, drop crotching or topping consists of the reduction of tops, sides, underbranches or individual limbs with attention given to symmetrical appearance. (2) All trees and shrubs which have branches overhanging a public street or boulevard shall have said branches pruned to a clearance height of fourteen (14) feet. Those overhanging a public sidewalk shall be pruned to a clearance height of eight feet. The provisions of this section may be waived by the Parks and TREE.JRC - Ordinance Disk 2 - 5/10/96 5 Recreation Department in the case of newly planted trees so long as they do not interfere with public parking, travel or safe viewing distances at intersections, or endanger public safety as determined by the Engineering Division. Any tree or shrub on private property which hangs over a city right of way which is not pruned as herein provided shall be subject to the provisions of Section 13.10.090 of this chapter. (3) All dead wood, stubs, broken branches, badly formed branches, diseased branches, and branches interfering with public travel, lighting, existing buildings and traffic signs shall be removed during the pruning operation, with consideration given to the symmetry and beauty of the municipal tree or shrub. (c) Removal: (1) All municipal trees and shrubs which have fallen or been authorized for removal shall be completely removed from the growing site and disposed of in an authorized manner. The stump shall be ground out to a depth suitable for future planting of trees or turf. (2) When municipal trees or shrubs are removed because of inappropriate location, a more appropriate site for replacement will be selected, when possible, in as close a proximity as spacing permits. Trees removed due to health, age, size for its location, or undesirable species type shall be replaced, when appropriate/available, with a suitable tree or shrub which will not produce the same problem in accordance with this ordinance. (3) No municipal tree or shrub shall be removed from any public area for the sole purpose of providing a view for any private property or individual. (d) Maintenance: TREEJRC- Ordhlance Disk 2 - 5/10/96 6 (1) All municipal trees in the central business district will receive routine maintenance on a 4 year cycle. (2) Special consideration will be given to the watering, weeding and protection of young trees during the first three years. (3) The use of biological controls and sprays will be encouraged and used by city employees whenever possible in the treatment of insect infestations in trees on city lands and rights of way. 13.10.090 ABATEMENT OF HAZARD TREES OR SHRUBS. On Private Properties - Property owners with trees or shrubs determined to be hazardous or public nuisance to public areas, such as streets and sidewalks, will be handled in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 11.16 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. 13.10.100 APPEAL OF ABATEMENT NOTICE. Appeals of abatement notices shall be handled in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 11.16 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. 13.10.110 COST OF PLANTING, REMOVING, MAINTAINING AND PROTECTING TREES AND SHRUBS. The costs of planting, removing, maintaining and protecting trees and shrubs on all public areas of the city, when done by Parks and Recreation Department and Public Works Department shall be borne by the city out of the Parks and Recreation Department and Public Works Department budgets as assets allow, and from funds donated or grant monies received specifically for that purpose. When a private party plants, removes, maintains or protects trees pursuant to Section 13.10.080, that party shall be responsible for all incurred costs. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective ten (10) days from passage and publication. TREE.JRC - Ordinance Disk 2 - 5110196 7 APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of 1996. 1996. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ day of APPROVED this JOHN E. LAW, Council President day of ., 1996. LYNN HORTON, Mayor ATTEST: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk TREE.JRC- Ordinance Disk 2 - 5/10/96 CITY OF BREMERTON Index Effective Date Approved 2-24 May 22, 1996 ~'-"'~,~,'~; ,~ iZ~,~,~ REFERENCE: City of Bremerton PURPOSE: To identify the tasks and delineate responsibilities for the planting, care, removal, and ongoing maintenance of municipal tree and shrub forestation in the City of Bremerton. INFORMATION: The Urban Forestry Program aims to provide the following benefits to the residents and community of Bremerton: * Beautification * Noise abatement * Air cooling and purification * Property value enhancement * Information to the public on the value and need for healthy community trees and shrubs. POLICY: The matrix below identifies the tasks that are required to support the urban tree and shrub program. For clarification the program has been broken down into the following three areas: 1) Park property 2) Street trees (as defined by the attached map of areas within the Central Business District) and 3) Trees and shrubs within right of ways. The letters on the matrix refer to the following City Departments: P=Parks and Recreation, PWO=Public Works Operations, E=Engineering, CBD=Centrai Business District. CBD RIGHTS TASKS RESPONSIBILITIES: PARKS TREES OF WAYS Identification of Hazardous Trees: Tree Health P P P Vision Restrictions P/E P/E E/PWO Pedestrian Hazards P/E P/E E/PWO Obstruction or impairment of free use of public areas P/E P/E E/PWO Interferes with underground utilities P/E E E/PWO Tree Removal incl. repair of sidewalks & roads P PWO PWO Tree Replacement (based on availability) P P P Tree and Shrub Pruning P P PWO Median Strip Planter Maintenance P PWO PWO Public Education P P P PROCEDURES: PUBLIC CALLS ON TREE/SHRUB ISSUES: 1. Determine from the matrix above, which department should be responding to the call, based on the location of the tree/shrub. 2. Write all information down on the "Tree Calls" sheet, and if necessary, route to the appropriate department. 3. If consultation is needed on determining plant health, call the Parks Department and request the urban forester's assistance. 4. Ifa tree/shrub requires pruning, contact the urban forester for consultation on minimizing plant damage and maintaining tree symmetry. DIVISION PROJECTS INVOLVING TREES/SHRUBS: 1. Keep communications open. If assistance is needed to determine the health, pruning, or placement of trees and shrubs, call the urban forester. 2. Consult the attached "Recommended Street Tree List" when purchasing and/or replacing trees. SAMPLE "TREE CALLS" SHEET Caller Name Phone Number Address Zip Type of tree problem: Location of tree: Action requested: Response given: Date: Action taken: Time: Your name: AGENDA BILL 1. SUBJECT:Public Hearing/Ordinance FOR AGENDA OF: May 15, 1996 Street Vacation · ORIGINATING DE~T: Dept. of Comm.~v. Applicant. Star of the Sea ORIGINATOR. Jack Allinqham~/~. 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back if necessary) Director ~f Comm. De_y_~: .~ Engineering Dep~ Operations C/~.'./4-i7-96 city Atty.:_~J~/~ 3. EXHIBITS: 1. Planning Comm. Findings and Conclusions with application 2. Ordinance for vacation (Ordinance No. ) ENDORSEMENT / INFO(.RMA~ON ,/ APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT, FOR SUBMITTAL: 4.SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Our Lady Star of The Sea Parish is requesting approval of land use applications to redevelop their school at its present location north of Veneta Avenue between 5th and 6th streets. In order to consolidate all the property needed for the project, the Parish is requesting vacation of an adjoining alley way at the west side of their property. The planning Commission conducted a public Hearing on December 19, 1995 and has recommended approval of this request. The City Council, as the legislative body, must hold a public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation. 8. RECOMMENDATION: Th~la~%~ng-Commis~'mon recommends-approv.a~-of-%he-a-Lley-way-vacations. A~d a~p~g--~ee~n--~irst ~eadi~g. ~ T0 Pass Ordinance cI.g$~ on second reading. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Donald Pratt ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: N/A EXPIRATION DATE: N/A PULLED / TABLED / APPROVED / DISAPPROVED / AMENDED / DATE: CLEARANCE COMMENTS= 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: To the City: Non-compliance Vacation; with R.C.W. Chapter 35.79 - Street IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: Additional staff time will be required to process the application through City Council Public Hearing; ordinance processing (publication, recording, accepting payment for R-O-W vacate, etc.) RESEARCH SOURCES: Planning Department File #SV-02-95; BMC 11.20 Street and Alley Vacation procedure; R.C.W. 35.79, Streets - Vacation. AN ORDINANCE VACATING THE ALLEY RUNNING NORTH/SOUTH BETWEEN 5TH STREET AND 6TH STREET, WEST OF VENETA AVENUE AND THE EASTERN MOST 16.25 FEET OF THE ADJOINING EAST/WEST ALLEY. WHEREAS, Our Lady Star of The Sea Parish, owner of two-thirds of the abutting property of the requested portion of right-of-way has initiated proceedings for vacation of a portion of the alley running north/south between 5th street and 6th street, west of veneta avenue and the eastern most 16.25 Feet of the adjoining east/west alley; and WHERE~S, notice has been posted and published according to law and a public hearing held on May 15, 1995; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that the portion of the right-of- way set forth herein is not needed for present or future traffic circulation and should be vacated because Our Lady Star of The Sea Parish is reconstructing and dedicating for public use a comparable alley way located approximately 60 feet further west as described in Section 2 below; now, therefore, THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Vacation. The following right-of-way are hereby vacated to the adjoining property owners: PORTIONS OF ALLEYS IN BLOCK 1, PLAT OF PETER HESSER'S FIRST ADDITION TO THE CITY OF BREMERTON, PER VOLUME 3, PAGE 38, RECORDS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A POINT 30 FEET SOUTH AND 66 FEET WEST FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTH~rEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, W.M., THIS BEING THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH MARGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 6TH STREET AND THE WEST MARGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF VENETA AVENUE; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH MARGIN OF 6TH STREET N 89° 44' 30" W - 180.23 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG EAST MARGIN OF ALLEY, S 00° 01' 49" W - 220.66 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH MARGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 5TH STREET; THENCE ALONG SAID MARGIN OF 5TH STREET N 89° 46' 30" W - 14.00 FEET; THENCE ALONG WEST MARGIN OF ALLEY N 00° 01' 49" E -103.33 FEET; THENCE ALONG SOUTH MARGIN OF ALLEY N 89° 45' 30" W - 15.50 FEET; THENCE N 00' 01' 49" E - 14.00 FEET; THENCE ALONG NORTH MARGIN OF ALLEY S 89° 45' 30" E - 15.50 FEET; THENCE N 00° 01' 49" E - 103.33 FEET TO POINT ON THE SOUTH MARGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 6TH STREET; THENCE ALONG SAID MARGIN OF 6TH STREET S 89° 44' 30" E - 14.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 3306 SQUARE FEET. SITUATE IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, W.M., CITY OF BREMERTON, KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON. ~ Section 2. Conditions. This right-of-way vacation shall be subject to the following conditions and deed restriction: The applicant shall dedicated right-of-way for an alley through 1 and 18, Block 1 and 5 feet of additional right of way abutting the applicants property along Fifth Street as more fully described and defined in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Easements necessary for existing and future Utilities shall be reserved. Section 3. Effective Date. This vacation shall become effective ten (10) days from passage and publication and satisfaction of conditions of section 2. APPROVED by the City Council on the first reading this __ day of , 1995. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ day of , 1995. APPROVED this JOHN LAW Council President day of , 1995. ATTEST: LYNN HORTON, Mayor KATHLEEN L. MC CLUSKEY, CLERK EXHIBIT ORDINi%NCE NO. PORTION OF LOT 1, IN BLOCK 1, PLAT OF PETER H~SSER'S FIRST ADDITION TO THE CITY OF BREM~RTON, PER VOLUM~ 3, PAGE 38, P, ECORDS OF KITSA~ COUNTY, WASHINGTON MORE P~tRTICULAP2LY DESCRIBED A~ FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A POINT 30 FEET SOUTH AND 66 FEET WEST FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF T~fE WEST HAL~ OF TH~ NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUAR~-R OF THE SOUTHF. A~T QUARTER DF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, P. ANGB 1 EAST, W.M., THIS BEING THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH MARGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 6TH STREET AND THE WEST MARGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF VENETA AVENUE; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH KARGIN OF 6TH STREET N 89' 44' 30" W - 221.23 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; TF~ENCE S 00' 01' 49~l W - 50.00 FEET; T~LENCE S 04" 07' 51" W - 48.95 FEET; THENCE S 45' 08' 11" W - 6.35 FEET TO THE SOLFfHF~%~T CORNER OF THE W'EST 5 FEET OF T~rE ABOVE SAID LOT 1; T~CR ALONG ~ SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1, S 89' 45' 30" E - 19.50 FEET; THENCE N 00' 01' 49" E - 4.02 FEET; THENCE N 04' 07' 51" E - 48.95 FEET; ~"rLENCE N 00' 01' 49" E - 50.48 FEET TO POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT; T~.NCE ALONG TH~ SOUTH MA/~GIN OF RIGHT-OF- WAY OF 6~ S%~REET, N 89' 44' 30" W - 15.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 1562 SQUA/~E FEET. SITUATE IN THE SOL"~R~4EST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, W.M., CITY OF BREMERTON, KITSA~ COUNTY, WASHINGTON. L PORTION OF LOT 18, IN BLOCK 1, PLAT OF PETER WESSER'S FIRST ADDITION TO THE CITY OF BP~EM]~RTON, PER VOLUM~ 3, PAGE 38, RECORDS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COM~CING AT A POINT 30 FEET SOUTH AND 66 FEET WEST FROM THE NORTHE;%ST CORNER OF TH~ WEST HA~LF OF THE NORTH HAL~ OF THE SO--ST QUARTER OF TH~ SOUT~iEAST QUA/~TER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE i EAST, W.M., THIS BEING THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF ~ SOUTH ~GIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 6TH STREET ~2~D THE WNST M~uRGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF VENETA AIrENUE; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH ~L~RGIN OF 6TH ST~ET N 89' 44~ 30" W - 229.23 FEET; THENCE S 00' 01t 49" W - 117.34 FEET TO POINT ON TEE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 18 AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S 44' 51I 50" E - 6.38 FEET; THENCE S 00' 01' 49" W - 98.84 FEET TO POINT ON THE NORTH F~%RGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 5TH STREET; THENCE ALONG SAID MARGIN OF 5TH STREET S 89' 46~ 30" E - 15.00 FEET; THENCE N 00' 01' 49" E 103.34 FEET TO POINT ON T~E NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT; THENCE ALONG LAST SAID LINE, N 89' 45' 30" W - 19.50 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING · CONTAINING 1560 SQUA/~E PEET. SITUATE IN ~q{E SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, W.M. , CITY OF BREM~RTON, KITSAP COU~VfY, W~HINGTON. THE SOU~H 5.00 FEET OF ~ FOLLOWING: PORTION OF LOT 18, IN BLOCK 1, PLAT OF PETER HESSER' S FIRST ADDITION TO THE CITY OF BP~E~[ERTON, PER VOLUME 3, PAGE 38, RECORDS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND OF VACATED ALLEY IN SAID BLOCK 1 AND OF THE WEST HALF OF T~E NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE $OUT~T QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, R~GE 1 EAST, W.M., ALL MORE pARTICULARLy DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 30 FEET SCUTCH AND 66 FEET WEST FROM THE NORTHEAST COP-NER OF THE ABO~ SAID SECTION SUBDIVISION, THIS BEING TH~ POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH MARGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 6TH STREET AND THE WEST MARGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF VENETA A~rENUE; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH M-~RGIN OF 6TH STP~EET N 89' 44' 30" W - 206.23 PEET; T~ENCE S 00' 01~ 49" W - 50.48 PEET; THENCE S 04' 07' 51" W - 48.95 FEET; THENCE S 00' 01' 49" W - 121.35 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH MARGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 5TH STREET; THENCE ALONG SAID M~GIN OF 5TH STP~ET, S 89' 46' 30" E - 209.73 PEET TO POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST MARGIN OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF VENETA AVENUE; THENCE ALONG SAID MARGIN OF VENETA AVENUE N 00' 01' 49" E - 220.55 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 1,049 SQUAP~E FEET. SITUATE IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE I EAST, W.M., CITY OF BREM~RTON, KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON. · I-4 VENETA AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION (SV-02-95) PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE: January 16, 1996 A. Application: I. SUM){ARY Request for Vacation of right-of-way (R-O-W): B. Applicant: C. Location: De Alley way: 218 Ft. X 14 Ft. (approx.) (3052 S.F.) 16.25 Ft. X 14 Ft. (227.5 SF) Our Lady Star of The Sea Parish 1517 6th Street Bremerton , WA 98310 Contact : Rice Fergus Architects (Dave Fergus) The alley running north/south between 5th Street and 6th Street, west of Veneta Avenue and the eastern most 16.25 feet of the adjoining east/west alley. Attachments:. I. Right-of-way Vacation Application II. Written testimony - 1 letter B~SED ON 'rHK RECORD D~v~LOPED AT x~ PUBLIC NRa~TwG C~UCTED ON J~N1FARY 16, 1996 T~U~ PLANNING COMMISSION ENTERS II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project Description: Our Lady Star of The Sea Parish is requesting approval of land use applications to redevelop their school at its present location north of Veneta Avenue between 5th and 6th streets. In order to consolidate all the property needed for the project, the Parish is requesting vacation of an adjoining alley way at the west side of their property. In exchange for alley, the Parish proposes to dedicate and relocate the alley at the west portion of their site. The new alley will be constructed to City standards with 13 feet of pavement width and an overall R-O-W width of 15 feet. The Parish's school site plan hinges on City Council approval of the requested R-O-W vacation and dedication of the realigned alley. Zoning: Central Bremerton Residential Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan Map Designation for the site is "Medium-Density Residential" 8 to 18 dwelling units per acre. SEPA: Street Vacations Circulation: are exempt per WAC 197-11-800(2) (h). Existinq Alley Functional Street ......... Classification Right-of-way width .......... Pavement width .............. Number of lanes ............. Surface type ................ Surface condition ........... Curbs & type ................ Sidewalks & width ............ NA 14 feet 14 feet 1 asphalt/concrete fair NA NA III · Enqineerinq Dept.: (The following relevant Engineering Department.) Right-Of-Way: COMMENT SURVEY comments are provided by the Portions of an 8 Ft. wide sidewalk adjacent to 5th street is located on private property. A sidewalk easement will need to be provided. The proposed parallel parking on 5th St. shall be open to use by the public. Stormwater: There are two existing catch basins located at the south end of the alley to be vacated which currently discharge to the sanitary sewer system. The connections to the sewer system must be plugged and the catch basins removed or relocated. Any catch basins collecting stormwater in this area must be tightlined to the storm system. There is an existing stormline in the alley which flows east and then south to the catch basin which discharges to the sanitary sewer. This line must be tightlined to the storm system and a maintenance easement provided to the city of Bremerton if it is conveyed across private property. Surface runoff from the alley must also be collected and conveyed to the storm system. Riqht-of-Way Vacation: Legal descriptions are required for the proposed areas to be vacated and dedicated which have been stamped by a licensed Professional Land Surveyor. Engineering approves of the proposed alley vacation. However, it is recommended that the alley leg connecting to 6th street be deleted. Impacts to surroundinq properties: The vacation and relocation of the alley will create a significant change in adjoining land uses to two abutting single family residences to the west. The Wilsons located at 1521 6th St. and Soriano on 5th St. will be bordered by an alley. Impacts to these properties can be mitigated with landscape buffering and screening. The sight plan approval is condition upon placement of a sight obscuring landscaped setback a minimum of 5 feet in width and a minimum of 5 feet in height to be provided along the west boundary of the school's site. IV. CRITERIA FOR ACTION The granting of a right-of-way vacation is evaluated on the following criteria: A. Is there any public need to retain the right-of-way; B. Will the public interest best be served by the vacation of the right-of-way. V. CONCLUSIONS Public Need: The area was platted several decades ago with relatively small lot sizes mainly suited for residential uses. Most of the blocks consist of two rows of 100 feet deep lots separated by an alley. In order to consolidate enough land area suitable for a modern educational facility, the abutting alley ways need to be vacated. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation can be maintained by dedicating, relocating and continuing the alley to 5TH and 6th streets. With these provisions, the residential neighborhood circulation pattern will be maintained. Therefore, there is no public need to retain the current configuration of the alley. Public interest: Allowing the R-O-W vacations will facilitate development of a private educational facility, alleviating demand on public school systems. Supporting the Parish's effort is in the public interest. VI. DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION BASED ON THE RECORD DEVELOPED, THE BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION AFTER CONSIDERING ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY, AND STAFF REPORT, RECOMMENDS TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THESE RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION PROPOSALS AS THE AREAS PROPOSED TO BE VACATED ARE NO LONGER NEEDED TO BE RETAINED FOR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY NEEDS, AND, THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST WILL BEST BE SERVED BY FACILITATING DEVELOPMENT OF A PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL FACiLITYt ALLEVIATING DEMAND ON PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEMS. THE VACATION SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: The applicant shall compensate the City for the property in accordance with City and State regulations. 2. Easements necessary for existing and future utilities shall be reserved or relocated within the new alley. WAYNE O~SEN, Chai~an Bremerton Planning Commission ]J::~F~: DONA/Z'D L. PRATT Exedut ive Secretary CITY OF ~N APPLICATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAy VACATION TO TEE PLA~NING APPLICANT: Our ADDRESS: i517 CITY: REQUEST: LEGAL Tract: C__~GMMISSION & CITY COUNCIL OF Lady Star of the Sea - 6th Street PHONE Bremerton~ WA Right-of-Way Vacation Petition. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY to be vacated: See attached TEE __CITY OF (Bus.) 373-5162 (Res.) ZIP: _ 98337 Area of (attach additional sheets if necessary) PA_RCEL LOCATION: (Give brief description of geographic location) Street Frontage: See attached Adjacent or nearest street intersection: See attached ~OMPREHEN$IVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATIONS: MDR (NC directly to north on Sixth) CURRENT ZONING: CBR SURROUNDING USE {$): North: South: East: West: Residential/ Commercial Residential Parish Church Residential Explain basis for request to vacate surplus: i. The adjacent multi-purpose building is set back less than i0' from 5th Street. The reduction in the front set back is offset by a 20' +/- voluntary building set back from the'alley. 3. The reduction in the front set back provides more usable ~pace D behind the building for an outdoor nursery play area. escribe how this request is consistent with, hut not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan, Shoreline Management Master Program, and other state and local laws: The request ts consistent with the requirements of the Comprehensive plan and other state and local laws. Describe how the public interest will best be served by this right-of-way vacation: Allows construction of new school designed to replace the existing school, which will be demolished. This allows for more efficient use of the properties. List any easement and/or existing utilities either public or private that abut or cross the proposed vacation. City waterline~ underground telephone~ overhead power~ storm sewer drain: sanitary sewer, Attach additional sheets if necessary. PROPERTY OWNERS~ List names, mailing addresses of the abutting property(s) that will receive vacated C{t¥ of Bre~e£ton all owners of area property: ~ (to receive all correspondence, advisory report, earing notice, etc., by mail and to be primary phoae and correspondence contact): Rice Fergus Architects, Attn: Dave Fergus MAILING ADDRESS: 262 - 4th St. CI~~.wv- Bremerton ZiP 98337 PHONE: C3~0~ 377-8773 ALTERNATE PHONE (if any): -- Please check application and attachments with the Planning Department before filing. Vicinity Map ir = 100' scale Kitsap County Assessor's map copy with the subject site in the center of the map. (Note: More than one sheet of the assessor's map may be needed to obtain proper "cenuering~ of the subject site on the assessor's map copy submitted with your application. Letter from Title Company~ or list from County Tax Assessor roles, listing the property from owners of record and their addresses, within 250 feet of the exterior boundaries of land involved. Any other information that will define your proposal including site plan, map of surrounding land uses and zoning, etc. IMPORTANT: Please check application and attachments with the Planning Department before filing. A public hearing will be scheduled only after a complete application, including all attachments, is received. Additional supporting information may be attached to this application as desired by the applicant or as requested by the Planning Department. I EEREBY STATE THAT I A~ T~E APPLICA~NT, OR A~N AGENT FOR THE APPLICANT, LISTED ABOVE: ~ND T~AT TEE FOREGOING STATEMENTS ANSWERS HEREIN MADE, A~ND ALL INFOR~ATi0N AND EVIDENCE HEREIN MADE, A~WD ~r~r~ INFORMATION A~ND EVIDENCE HEREWITH SUBMITTED ARE IN ALL RESPECTS A~ND TO TEE BEST OF ~ KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, TRUE A~ND COMPLETE. I UNDERSTAND THAT T~E FILING FEE ACCOMPANYING THIS APPLICATION .IS NOT REFUNDABLE, IS ONLY FOR THE PUR30SE OF PARTIALLY DEFRAYING THE NORMAL ADM!NiST~AT IVE EXPENSES OF PROCESSING THE APPLICATION, A~ND THAT THE PAYMENT OF SAID FEE DOES NOT RESULT IN AUTOMATIC ISSUA~NCE OF THE PEP~tT REQUESTED IN THiS APPLICATION. Printed Name of ~ ' ~ Applicant Date Date PS NORTH~ ~0V41 ~ - ~E)~E~TON OUR LADY STAR OF THE SEA 1513 six'il-1 SI'REET BREMERTON, WASHINGTON 98337 Bremerton City Council 239 Fourth Street Bremerton, Washington 98337 "RECEIVED CITY COUNCIL OFFICE" May 5, 1996 Re: Application by Our Lady Star of the Sea Parish, for vacation of right of way. I will be out of town on the evening of Wednesday, May 15, 1996, when the alley vacation will be discussed and acted upon. I have asked some members of our parish council and building committee to attend that meeting. Nevertheless, I would like to enter my own statement in favor of this vacation. There has already been extensive discussion of this matter with the Bremerton Planning Cor~nission, including two appearances before that commission. There have also been discussions with neighbors to mitigate the effect of, essentially, moving the alley. The two lots being exchanged for the present alley, were purchased by Our Lady Star of the Sea parish approximately twelve years ago. When it became necessary to consider the building of a new school, because of seismic deficiency of the current building, it was logical and even necessary to consider how we might incorporate these two lots, in our development, by making them contiguous to our other property. It is not possible to replace a school in the same space as the current building. Current standards require that the same amount of floor space, occupying three floors in the old building, must be limited to two. Hence the need to accomplish this alley exchange, in order to continue with our project. The completion of this project will essentially allow us to continue the work we have done, in education, for the past seventy years. Only now, we can do it in a new and improved environment, with an attractive building designed to blend, as much as possible, with an otherwise residential neighborhood. We are grateful for the assistance we have received from various agencies, and will be most appreciative of the Council's positive response to this application. Sincerely, cc Rice Fergus AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: __. ORDINANCI= FOR AGENDA OF: To adopt an amended cityw[de Official Zoning ORIGINATING DEPT: Map that is consistent with the Comprehensive ORIGINATOR: Ptan and that meets GMA requirements. DATE SUBMITTED: Mav 151 1996 DCD/Planning Ron W. Hough Mav 9. 1996 2. CLEARANCES.'/(~s~..~k if necessary) City Attorne,~v-~"~"~''~'''~-' ', 3. EXHIBITS: Dir. Comm. Dev. Operations Comm.- Staff Report Ordinance Exhibit "A" (Zoning Atlas) Planning Commission Minutes ENDORSEMENT__ INFORMATION__ APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTAL: MAYOR COU.C L PRES,DE.T 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Bremerton adopted its revised Comprehensive Plan in April 1995, and re-adopted it by Ordinance No. 4545 on February 21, 1996. The next step in this process is to make our development regulations consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by the Growth Management Act. The Planning Commission and staff have drafted corrections to the Zoning Map. Most of the corrections are minor, but affect properties citywide. Rather than process many small changes to the Official Zoning Map, the Planning Commission has forwarded a recommendation that the City Council adopt the revised Zoning Atlas, which is attached as Exhibit "A" to the accompanying ordinance. 8. RECOMMENDATION: City Council passage of the Ordiannce~n second readina. 9, RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: Donald L. Pratt 10. NOTICE OF ACTION: PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMENDED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations is a State requirement. It is also necessary for the predictability and implementation of the Plan. Some property owners who requested Plan amendments are now waiting for their zoning to follow. Correction of these Plan/Zoning map inconsistencies will help expedite new development and minimize complaints. Non-passage also means we are out of compliance with GMA and open to appeals or other related problems. The Anderson Creek appeal was relatively minor, but the process took nearly ten months and cost the City hundreds of hours of staff time and legal expenses. We don't want to do that again if we can help it. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: No anticipated adverse impacts. The new Zoning Atlas is easier to read and use, will eliminate legibility problems that exist with the old Atlas, and will make it easier to discuss zoning issues with the public, other City departments, other agencies, etc. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE adopting the revised Official Zoning Map of the City of Bremenon, Washington. WHEREAS, major revisions to the Official Zoning Ordinance and Map for the City of Bremerton were adopted in November 1988; and WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton adopted a revised Comprehensive Plan on April 5, 1995, in compliance with the Growth Management Act; and WHEREAS, the Plan amendments have created inconsistencies between the Plan Map and Zoning Map that must be corrected to comply with the consistency requirement of the Growth Management Act; and WHEREAS, all areas of the City have been reviewed, Plan/Zoning map conflicts noted, corrective proposals drafted, the City's Zoning Atlas updated, and a SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance issued on February 13, 1996; and WHEREAS, public heatings were conducted by the Bremerton Planning Commission on February 20, March 19, and April 16, 1996, prior to making its formal recommendation to the City Council for adoption of the new citywide Official Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton City Council conducted a public hearing on May 15, 1996, to accept public comments pertaining to the proposed zoning amendments and considered the Planning Commission's recommendation; now, therefore THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN Section 1. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Bremerton, as attached hereto as Exhibit "A" (Zoning Atlas), consisting of 11 pages, is hereby adopted. Section 2. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Bremerton, adopted in November 1988, and all subsequent amendments, are hereby repealed. APPROVED by the City Council on the first reading this day of ,1996. PASSED by the Bremerton City Council this ,1996. day of APPROVED this JOHN LAW, President Bremerton City Council day of ,1996. ATTEST: LYNN HORTON, Mayor KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk Published: Effective: 0 ZONES: UNINCORPORATED UNINCORPORATED ZONES: UNINCORPORATED ZONES: PUGET SOUND NAVAL SHIPYARD ZONES: '7/' ~p~ URD PUGE~ ZONES PS MF MF SF-'t - PS ZONES: m ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS Prepared by: Ron W. Hough, Planning Manager --- Department of Community Development --- May 7, 1996 The recently revised Bremerton Comprehensive Plan was adopted on April 5, 1995. The Plan was appealed in July, 1995 to the Growth Management Hearings Board. In December 1995, the Hearings Board issued its Final Order, requiring the City to make several minor text and map amendments to achieve "internal consistency". Those changes were made during January and February. Soon after its compliance hearing on April 3, 1996, the Hearings Board issued its final conclusion that the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan was in compliance. Now that the Plan has survived this test, we can move on to bring related regulations into consistency. The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires all development regulations to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, so that the Plan will be implemented. Staff has identified several minor map and regulation conflicts between the Plan and Zoning Ordinance and has drafted the amendments needed to correct these problems. The amendments were first prepared for study and discussion by the Planning Commission. Following several months of study and its final public hearing on April 16, the Commission recommended the revised Zoning Map and three chapters of Zoning Ordinance text for City Council approval and adoption. THEDEVELOPMENTCODE The Comprehensive Plan is implemented most directly through zoning, but several other ordinances and standards work together to achieve different purposes. While our first priority is to amend the Zoning Ordinance and Map, the ultimate objective is to bring several of the related regulations together in a coordinated "Development Code" that would be easier to understand and administer. At least the following areas would be covered in the Development Code: Zoning Land Divisions (short plat, subdivision, boundary line adjustment) Street and other minimum development standards Critical Lands Environmental Review (SEPA) Shoreline Regulations APPROACH TO ZONING AMENDMENTS The City's Zoning Ordinance contains eleven sections, each of ~vhich is in need of review and fine-tuning. The last major review and amendment was done in 1988. Through its day-to-day experience over the past eight years, staff has accumulated a list of problems and opportunities for improvement that can now be used to improve the code. Rather than attempt a major revision of the Zoning Maps and entire Ordinance all at once, we are moving through this exercise one step at a time and toward the following objectives: 1. Achieve consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The Zoning Map must be updated to do this. 2. Streamline the Permit Process. Reduce the number of steps involved and time required to process. Include ESHBI724 changes. 3. Clarify and Simplify. Update definitions ofterms. Weed out unnecessary requirements. Reduce text. Produce more public hand-outs. Simplify the administration of the code. 4. Integrate new ideas and improvements. Be creative and encourage innovation in new development. Give the regulations enough flexibility to allow new ideas to work. 5. Move toward a "Development Code". Draft. all amendments so that they'll fit into a coordinated Development Code format. ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS The most immediate concern was to revise the Zoning Maps to remove inconsistencies. The Zoning Atlas was used because it was easy to work with and a reproducible size. Approximately 100 properties throughout the City were proposed for significant zoning changes. These were changes in major categories, such as from residential to commercial, or industrial to residential, etc. Personal notices were sent to the owners of these properties. A few owners responded and attended Planning Commission public hearings. The Commission made some adjustments to the staffproposals based on that testimony. Following study sessions, the Commission conducted public hearings on February 20, March 19, and April 16, 1996, before forwarding the maps to the City Council for approval. The following three controversial areas were discussed during the Planning Commission's review: 2 Montgomery_ Avenue: The east side of Montgomery, between Sixth and Ninth Streets are proposed on the Comprehensive Plan to eventually transition from residential to business. The proposed zoning would have changed seven small lots from "Duplex Residential" to "General Business". A couple property owners from that area pointed out that the area is currently residential, has a residential future, and convinced the Planning Commission that the zoning should remain residential a while longer, until such time as the area is ready to convert to commercial. At that time, the commercial Comp. Plan designation will allow the smooth transition to commercial zoning. 3 Marlow at Wheaton Way: A small triangle of"General Business" zoning exists in East Bremerton, bordered by Marlow, Wheaton and E. 14th Street. Three small lots are within the triangle. Each has a building, two of which are small businesses. A residence lies between the businesses. The staff proposal was to remove the "GB" zoning and allow the three lots to be absorbed in the surrounding "Mixed Residential" zone. The two existing businesses would be allowed under the "MR" zoning and would not become nonconforming uses. By removing the "GB" zone, this residential area would be spared from a number of potentially incompatible uses allowed in that zone. The Commission agreed and the area is now proposed for "MR" zoning. 4 Warren Avenue at Clare: Clare is an off-ramp for northbound Warren Avenue traffic. At the top of the curve are two small lots. One is vacant and the other has a duplex. The vacant lot was zoned "Professional Office" several years ago but was never developed. Because of the less-than-ideal location for any kind of business, staff recommended that the "PO" spot zone be removed and the lot be included in the "Multi-family Residential" zone. Considering the location and very difficult traffic pattern, the best future for this lot may be in combination with a neighboring "MF" lot rather than as a free-standing business. The Planning Commission agreed and the lot is now proposed for "MF". ?0 ~LVo ,SHERIDAN COMMUNITY PARK 5 ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS The Zoning Maps show where "zones" are applied throughout the community but don't provide much information about the zones. The Zoning Ordinance text provides the detailed descriptions of the zones, lists of allowed land uses, procedures for land use permits, development standards, and other necessary information. To help ensure that the maps will work properly, three closely-related chapters of the Zoning Ordinance text were also updated and recommended for Council approval. These will be the subject of a public hearing on May 22: Chapter I: Introduction Chapter II: Definitions Chapter V: Zoning Districts RECOMMENDATION The Bremerton Planning Commission recommends City Council adoption of the revised Zoning Atlas, as attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 6 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING UNAPPROVED DRAFT April 16, 1996 The meeting began with the Secretary calling the roll: Those present were: Chairman Olsen. Vice-Chairman Stone. Commissioners Hancock. Dingfield. Boyd. Adams. and Robinson. Staff Present: Ron Hough. Jack Allingham. and Marylyn Waibel. Chairman Olsen asked if there were any additions or deletions to the Agenda? Commissioner Dingfi¢ld requested that two items, Resolution 01-96 and 02-96 regarding the size of the Planning Commission and amendments to the by-laws be added to New Business. Commissioner Dingfield moved for approval of the agenda as revised. Seconded by Commissioner Boyd. Question: Boyd. yes: Stone, yes: Robinson. yes: Hancock, yes: Adams. yes: Dingfield; yes. Olsen. yes. Motion passes, Chairman Olsen invited Mr. Ment0r to address the Commission. Mr, Mentor presented a letter (Exhibit 1) to the Commission. Mr. Mentor wanted to inform the Commission of his intentions to be at the next Planning Commission meeting in May to discuss his appeal of the site plan review for his proposed apartment complex at 5670 Kitsap Way. Public Heatings: Chairman Olsen asked the appearance/conflict questions. No response. Hearing #1, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit: Jack Allingham presented the staff report for Dr. James T. Clemen, applicant, to consider approval of a Shoreline Permit to construct a private recreation dock (Exhibit A) on Kitsap Lake. Location of proposed project, 1289 Lakehurst Drive NW, Bremerton. Planning staff recommends approval of the application. Chairman Olsen asked if there was any written testimony. The Secretary. responded no. William Palmer, Land Use Planning Consultant, representing Dr. Clemen, reiterated the project (Exhibit B) and requested Commission approval. Also, advised the Commission that they had already received Fisheries Approval. PAGE-I- Commissioner Robinson q "Cheminite". Mr. Palmer responded that the ~ it is a green chemical which is applied to the wood under~ explaining that her concern with regard to the having docks all over Kitsap Lake. contxols the - no has specific standards effect. public input in favor Hearing closed to public. and length of docks, which -- no response: fieutral - called attention to regard to the comment: "~ and will be a hazard to navi page 5, item 7 and proposed dock complies with if it was length responded t should state that not" be a hazard Commissioner Stone c by the applicant? e presented~/ Jack Allingham stated information was into the record. the City would accept and appealed by that "Exhibit B" which as correct, unle?/ the part5" /~' colored design of the 1. All net Hearing//2, Zoning Ordinance: Ron Hough presented that staff report to consider amendments to the Bremerton Zoning Ordinance pertaining primarily to definitions and zoning district standards. Chapter I, changing the zoning ordinance to the development code. Chapter II, definition changes and adding 40 new terms. Chapter V, zoning districts, adding new Sections 2, 3, 4, Zone Summary Table, and revising the Lot Requirements Table, revising Land Use Tables, and revising Section 8. PAGE -2- Rn~ presented a letter from Jon Rose. Pope Resources. outlining several comments on the changes. Commission discussion followed regarding the suggested changes. Hearing Closed. ~ asked if there were any corrections or amendments to the minutes of March 19, 1996. Commissioner Stone moved for approval of the minutes and seconded my Commissioner Dingfield. Chairman Stone stated that the minutes are approved as presented. Call to the Public: None New Business: R0n Hough presented the staff report on Zoning Amendments Recommendation, to approve a recommendation to the City Council regarding proposed amendments to the Official Zoning Map and specific chapters of the Zoning Ordinance. Motion by Comrai~sioner Dingfield moved that we recommend approval to the City Council the following Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map Amendments: Exhibit "A": Official Zoning Map, Exhibit "B": Revised Chapter I: Introduction. Exhibit "C": Revised Chapter II: Definitions. Exhibit "D": Revised Chapter V: Zoning Districts including all of the changes that were discussed this evening and recommended to the tables and various other parts. Seconded by Commissioner Hancock. Ouestion: Adams, yes; Dingfield: Boyd, yes: Stone. yes: Robinson. yes: Hancock. yes: Olsen. yes. Motion passes. Ron Houeh presented ~Notes for the Planning Commission," including ,the Kitsap County Comprehensive ~an Schedule, Chair and Vjee-Chair meetin,g with the May )r h s been :hanged to Friday, Fi. ffding of Compliance rejggrding Bremerton s Compre/h~m ive Plan, and th~ Compreh~;si~e Plan Amendments/~dule. / ~ presented the staff p/r6gress report for the Harriso/[l/District Ula~, including n~Seting sumn)dry from March 25, 19~6, Map of Existing Land Us~, Ma~ Identified Traff~ Issues, ~of Land _.Use Oppoml~es and Campbell Wa~y~.e lopment Concept. ~ /Commlssio~ discuss~ollowed regarding the~Jl~c issues. ~ ( C mo un'tree Rep~ / / disc)~s~ the conflict c : ne. The courts have/determined that the major ca)fie of~ conflict would be ~ / /T ~ , PAGE -3- ,/ / SUBJECT: Ordinance ~GENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL Risk Management FOR AGENDA OF: May 22, 1996 ORIGINATING DEPT: Admin. Services ORIGINATOR: Kathleen McCluske¥ DATE SUBMITTED: May 2, 1996 CLEARANCES: (comm~n~qn back if~ry) Attorney Risk Manager 3. EXHIBITS: ENDORSEMENT/ INFORMATION__ APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDEN~FOR SUBMITTAL: 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ~CTION: The Attached ordinance implements recommendations contained in the John Haywood (Pacific Risk Management) review of September 1995 as follows: 1. Establish a ~safety program 2. Designation of a safety officer, responsibilities and organizational structure 3. Designate Human Resources Manager to develop and manage return-to- work program 4. A claims management committee is established comprised of the Mayor, city Attorney, Director of Administrative Services, Risk Manager, appropriate department heads and the City's contracted claims adjuster. 5. Levels of settlement authority for litigated and non-litigated claims are established as follows: Risk Manager, non-litigated up to $14,999 city Attorney, litigated up to $14,999 Mayor, Claims Management Committee $15,000 to $49,999 Council Over $50,000 6. Notification of Risk Manager regarding settlements to assure insurance carrier approval. 8o RECOMMENDATION: 1. Motion to approve Risk Management ordinance on first reading. 2. Motion to pass Ordinance #. on second reading. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED__ TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED __ DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: AMEN] 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS (cont.): 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT (cont.): 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Risk Management would lack recommended and valuable changes. formal approval to proceed with the 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES The implementation of many of the recommendations will and already has resulted in reduced claims settlements and better claims management. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE establishing the Office of Risk Management and Safety within the Department of Administrative Services and amending Chapter 2.92 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. Section 1. Amendment. Section 2.92.010 is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.92.010 CREATED. There is hereby created an Office of Risk Management and Safety within the Department of Administrative Services. The Supervisor of said Office shall be the Risk Manager, who shall report directly to the Ci~' Clerk Director of Administrative Services. for' Section 2. Amendment. Section 2.92.020 is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.92.020 FUNCTIONS. The Office of Risk Management and Safety shall be responsible (1) Loss reduction or prevention where such reduction or prevention is cost effective; (2) Transfer of risks to other parties where feasible through the purchase of insurance, and/or risk retention through a system of self-insurance, in whatever combination is most responsible and cost effective; (3) Coordination and handling of all claims, including workers' compensation claims; and (4) The maintenance of an effective employee safe _ty program within the City. Section 3. Amendment. Section 2.92.030 is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.92.030 RESPONSIBILITY - SAFETY, LOSS REDUCTION, PREVENTION. T,,.e P J?. 1 (1) The Risk Manager shall be responsible for risk identification, analysis and control. Under the direction of the Risk Manager. the Safety_ Officer shall develop and administer the Ci _ty's Safety Program and ensure compliance with the program by makine aeriodic inspections of City facilities, work sites, and office spaces in regards to employee safety. The Risk Manager and the Safety Officer have full authority to immedlatelv stop any ongoing work when prescribed safety precautions are not being adhered to, or if there are serious concerns for safety until the matter is satisfactorily resolved. {2) The Safety Officer is not required to be assigned to the Department of Administrative Services. He or she may be assigned to any other department within the City, but when functioning in that capacity, the Safety Officer will serve under the direction of the Risk Manager. 2 (3) The Safety Officer, through the Risk Manager, will make written recommendations regardine employee safety_ to the appropriate Department Head. Should the Department Head disagree with the Safety Officer, a written response shall be made to the Director of Administrative Services stating the reasons for the disa~eement. The Mayor shall make the f'mal decision regarding implementation of any disputed recommendation. (4) The Safety Officer is responsible for ensuring proper safety training is provided to all City employees and for ensuring that required certifications for employees are kept current. He or she shall also become actively involved in the on-going training pro.ams provided by Human Resources and other departments and ensure that a portion of that training is on Safety_ Awareness and Loss Prevention. (5] The Risk Manager and Safety Officer are permanent members of the City's Safety and Health Committee and shall monitor the Committee to ensure compliance with all applicable WISHA dkectives, provide input, and offer advice and assistance in helping, the Committee to achieve its stated goals. The Safety Officer shall maintain the file of minutes of each Committee meeting. (6) Risk Manager shall advise and recommend to all City Departments, appropriate contractual clauses providing for indemnity, hold harmless and insurance provisions, and shall review all proposed City contracts, permits and leases to ensure that all contractual provisions relating to indemnity and hold harmless provisions adequately protect the City. (7) Risk Manager shall write interdepartmental rules detailing the procedure to be followed by the office and other departments to ensure accomplishment of the Loss Reduction/Prevention Functions. The Safety Officer is responsible for ensuring compliance with these directives by means of periodic inspections of office spaces, City work sites and review of departmental policies on safety and loss prevention. 3 Section 4. Amendment. Section 2.92.040 is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.92.040 INSURANCE/SELF-INSURANCE PROGRAMS. The Risk Manager is responsible for the design, negotiation, procurement and administration of all insured and/or self- insured programs: (1) The Risk Manager shall determine and recommend the appropriate retention levels and amount of reserves to be established; (2) The Risk Manager shall negotiate with insurance brokers for any type of insurance and may recommend that the City engage the services of such brokers; (3) The Risk Manager shall purchase, with the approval of the Ci~' C!er~z Director of Administrative Services and City Council, all insurance policies, funded self-insurance programs, and related services, and shall administer the same; (4) The Risk Manager shall make an annual report to the City Council regarding insurance coverage and the level of retained risk, and such other reports as are required by Council; (5) The Risk Manager shah write interdepartmental rules to ensure that city departments provide him/her with all information necessary to effectuate the insurance/self-insurance function. Section 5. Amendment. Section 2.92.050 is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.92.050 CLAIMS MANAGEMENT - SELF-INSURED WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS. The Risk Manager, or designee, shall be responsible for the direction and monitoring of all self-insured workers' compensation claims to a fair and equitable conclusion. (1) Every employee shall immediately complete the appropriate report form when work- related injury or illness occurs and promptly forward same to the designated supervisor, who is responsible for *~' ..... 1~-:~ .~f ~ ......... : .... '~ immediately forwarding to the Risk Manager with any pertinent comments. The Risk Manager shall complete the employer section. 4 (2) The Risk Manager shall coordinate activity on the claim with the claim's administrator, :aid claL~ ad:v:.~igtrat~r who shall be a certified workers' compensation claims administrator as required by law, including time-loss, medical verification, and instruction involving progress of the claim. (3) The Risk Manager shall coordinate with the City Attorney and the Human Resources Manager for retaining such outside expertise as necessary for the resolution of claims. These may include, but are not limited to, doctors, rehabilitation speclali~ts, and investigators. The City Attorney's Office may elect to represent the City in all hearings and/or trials involving workers' compensation claims, or shall appoint outside counsel when appropriate, and coordinated with the Risk Manager. (4) The Human Resources Manager shall develop appropriate return-to-work opportunities for iniured employees and when feasible will coordinate the implementation of specific return-to- work plans with the department heads involved. (5) The Risk Manager shall write interdepartmental rules detailing procedures to be followed by this office and other departments to ensure equitable claims resolution and compliance with State laws. Section 6. New Section. New Section 2.92.055 is hereby added as follows: 2.92.055 CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMMITYEE. To assist the Mayor a Claims Management Committee shall be formed comprised of the Mayor, City Attorney, Director of Administrative Services, Risk Manager, appropriate department heads, and the Ci _ty's contracted claims adiuster. This committee will review large, litigated, or controversial liability and workers' compensation claims against the City on a not-less-than quarterly basis. The committee's review shall include: 5 (a) The possibilities for early settlement. (b) Identification of defense and settlement strategies. (c) Identification of defense counsel. (d) Estimation of reserve level necessary_ for claims resolution. (e) Discussion and clarification of loss control responsibilities and policies. Section 7. Amendment. Section 2.92.060 is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.92.060 CLAIMS MANAGEMENT - NONLITIGATION CLAIMS. The Risk Manager or designee shall be responsible for the successful conclusion of all nonlitigation claims by or against the City. (1) The Director of Administrative Services shall be designated by the City Council to receive all claims. He/she shall forward to the Risk Manager all nonlltigation claims naming the City and/or its officers or employees, which claim(s) allege that said officers or employees, acting within the scope of their duties, caused the claimant damages. (2) All city departments, divisions and other city agencies shall report immediately to the Risk Manager the occurrence of any accident or incident which may give rise to a claim by or against the city to ensure prompt investigation of the incident. (3) The Risk Manager shall initiate and/or coordinate the investigation of all norditigation claims. The Risk Manager may employ, subject to Cz:mc'LI the Mayor's approval, the services of claims specialists. All investigation of nonlitigation claims and potential claims shall be conducted 6 as the agent of the City Attorney, and protected by the attorney-client privilege and attorney work product rule. (4) The Risk Manager shall have the authority to ~'ant ,?.r deny al!,.v.~..~,-.~v,,-~:~:~n*:^- c!.L...~_, v c~. negotiate the settlement of any cla~ to an amount not to exceed $14,999 subj~ to the approv~ of the Dk~tor of Adm~istratlve Se~ices. (5) For ~ no~tigation da~s ever ~::~ t[gxgan~ 5ye ~xn~re~ ~e~ar:, of $15,000 or more, the ~sk Manager sh~ provide the ~ Cla~s Management Committee with a ~itten r~mmendation that the no~tigation cla~ be a~epted or denied and the reasons therefor. Such ~itten r~mmendation shah be a~mpanied by a ~py of the ~vestigative ~e. Upon request of the Ci~' Att:rney Claims Management Committee, the ~sk Manager shah coord~ate addition~ ~vestigation of the cla~. ~e ~..~ ......... ~ Mayor sh~ have the authori~ to a~ept or deny the cla~, provided, however, that -~-~:':~*:~- ~: ...... ~ .......... ~: ..... ex,ss of $50 000 shah be sub~t to approval by the CiW Counc~. (6) ~e ~sk Manager shah ma~ta~ complete histories of ~ no~tigation cla~s reposed to the Office of ~sk Management and SafeW, and ~vestigation thereof sufficient to d~ument at least a five-year cla~s histo~. (7) ~e ~sk Manager sh~ write hterdepartmentM roles deta~g the pr~edures to ~ followed by the office and other departments to ensure efficient a~omp~shment of the no~tigation cla~s management function. 7 Section 8. Amendment. Section 2.92.070 is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.92.070 CLAIMS MANAGEMENT - LITIGATION CLAIMS. (1) Service of process on the Mayor, Mayor's designee or City Clerk shall constitute service on the City. No other city official or employee may accept service of a summons and/or complaint unless such official or employee is specifically named in the lawsuit. T- (2) The Mayor, Mayor's designee or City Clerk or defendant employee, upon accepting service of the summons and/or complaint, shall deliver copies to the ~ Director of Administrative Services for distribution to the Risk Manager and City Attorney. (3) The Risk Manager shah transmit copies of the lawsuit to the affected department and/or individual and, where appropriate, to the insurance company or representative. The Risk Manager shall advise the city attorney's office, in writing, of the insured status of the lawsuit. (4) The Risk Manager shall initiate and/or coordinate the investigation of all lawsuits which may be insured against involving the City and/or its officials/employees. The Risk Manager may to ....... Mayor s approval, the services of claims specialists. All investigation of employ, subject r~ ..... :~ , lawsuits shah be conducted as the agent of the City Attorney, and protected by the attorney-client privilege and attorney work product rule. (5) Upon completion of the investigation, or at any time requested by the City Attorney, the Risk Manager shall surrender the investigative file to the City Attorney. Upon request of the City Attorney, the Risk Manager shall coordinate additional investigation of the inwsuit. (6) T'.. .... ~ ......... ~ .... ~ ........................ v ...... .k ......a .~,, .....:.~ .k~ ~[ ..... The City Attorney shall have the authority to authorize settlements up to $14,999. (7) For all litigated claims of $157000 or more. the City_ Attorney shall provide the Claims Management Committee with a written recommendation that the litigated claim be accepted or denied and the reasons therefor. Such written recommendation shall be accompanied by a copy of the investigative f'fle. Upon request of the Claims Management Committee, the risk manager shall coordinate additional investigation of the claim. The Mayor shall have the authori _ty to accept or deny the claim, provided however that settlement oavments in excess of $50.000 shall be subject to approval by the City Council. (8) The City Attorney shall maintain complete histories of all lawsuits sufficient to document at least a five-year history of same. Section 9. New Section. New Section 2.92.075 is added as follows: 2.92.075 CLAIMS NEGOTIATION, DISCUSSION, AND REPORTING. (1) Except as specifically directed by the Risk Manager, Mayor or City Attorney, no city department, division, or other city agency, and no city official or employee, acting individually or collectively, may engage in the following acts: (a) Negotiate or otherwise effect the settlement of a claim or lawsuit involving the city; (b) Discuss with persons other than the Risk Manager, Mayor, City Attorney, or persons authorized by the Risk Manager, Mayor or City Attorney, incidents which could reasonably lead to a claim or lawsuit against the city; provided, however, that the employee may discuss the incident with his/her supervisor. (2) Prior to any formal settlement offer, the Risk Manager shall be advised~ in writing, of all proposed settlements of claims and lawsuits against the CiW. The Risk Manager shall seek 9 approval of its excess insurers, in conformance with the provisions of any insurance policies applicable to the claim or lawsuit. In the event the insurer does not provide necessary_ settlement approval, no settlement shall be made without the Mayor's written approval and acknowledgment that the City's insurers have withheld aoproval. The City Attorney shall provide the Risk Manager with a written copy of the final disposition of the lawsuit. (3) The Risk Manager, on or before January 20th of the subsequent year, shall report to the council the total number and amount of all claims filed against the city and the number and amounts of all claims or lawsuits paid by the city during the preceding calendar year. Section 10. Amendment. Section 2.92.080 is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.92.080 RECOVERY OF LOSSES. (1) Action for Recovery. The Risk Manager and City Attorney shall be responsible for bringing all actions, including claims and lawsuits, for recovery of losses to the City arising out of the acts of others. Such losses may include property damage or losses which impact the City as a result of personal injuries to city officers or employees. In addition, the City Attorney may join the City as a party with any third parS; in a lawsuit involving recovery of loss to the City. The City Attorney and Risk Manager shall write interdepartmental rules detail/ng the procedures to be followed by each in the execution of this function. (2) Allocation of Recoveries. Any moneys recovered (excluding costs of recovery) by the Risk Manager or City Attorney on account of losses to the City shall be paid to the budget unit or department which has expended funds and/or materials as a result of the loss. Any moneys in excess of those so expended shall be transferred to the ~ risk management fund as set forth in Section 2.92.090 of this chapter. 10 Section 11. Amendment. Section 2.92.090 is hereby repealed and recoddied as Section 3.30 Risk Management Fund: 3.30 g4gg/4~a34C~4:~d~ RISK MANAGEMENT FUND. 3.30.010 Established. There is created an intragovernmental service fund to be known as the :mg-.:rancc tr'.:zt risk management fund. 3.30.020 Permissible Uses. Permissible uses of the '2'::uranca trust risk management fund shall be limited to the following: (a) Payment of claims and related costs; (b) Payment of negotiated settlements and related costs; (c) Payment of judgements and related costs; (d) Payment of the costs of litigation, including, but not limited to, outside attorneys fees and costs of discovery and witnesses; (e) Payment of insurance premiums and related costs; and (f) Payment of administrative costs related to Office of Risk Management operations. 3.30.030 Review. The operation of the ~nguzance risk management fund shall be reported and reviewed quarterly with the council fiscal and budget committee. The report shall include the all exp ' d; amounts of enditures made from the '.ns'.:rancc fun ~'*' ...... ~'-: ............ :~-~ on , ' for claims, negotiated settlements, insurance settlements, judgements, litigations, and their related costs ~- ~ ...... ~ ..................... .~ 1 ....... ~ ......... ,4 .......j o ~..~°~'"n ~.~ ~.~-.-~.,:~a:":'4"~u" .~...-.~.:a~':*:~'~ An annual accounting of this fund shall be included in the Risk Manager's annual report to the Council. 11 Section 12. passage and publication. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective ten (10) days from 1996. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ day of day of , 1996. APPROVED this __ day of JOHN LAW, Council President , 1996. ATTEST: LYNN HORTON, Mayor KATHLEEN MCCLUSKEY, City Clerk 12 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING & ORDINANCE To amend three chapters of the Official Zoning Ordinance consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and to meet GMA requirements. 2. C,EA NCES U e b o if ne°essay) City Attorn~ 2~ Dir. Comm. Dev. ~~ O,e a,ion. FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: 3. EXHIBITS: ENDORSEMENT ¥ INF/O~MATION MAYOR ~' ~ -- May22.1996 DCD/Plannin~ ~. RonW. Houqh Mav 16.1996 Staff Report Ordinance Ex. "A" Chapter I *- Introduction Ex. "B" Chapter II -- Definitions Ex. "C" Chapter V -- Zoning Districts Planning Commission Minutes APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRES~IDEt~T FOR SU~BMITT~.~J~/. COUNCIL PRESIDENT 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Bremerton is reviewing and amending its development regulations to make them consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of the Growth Management Act. The ultimate objective is to bring all major regulations into a single "development code". These three chapters of the Zoning Ordinance are closely related to the Zoning Maps and are the first step in this amendment process. The Planning Commission has studied the amendments, held study sessions, and conducted a public hearing on April 16. The amendments include the introductory Chapter I, the definitions of Chapter II, and the details and minimum development standards of each zone in Chapter V. The Commission is recommending City Council adoption of these amendments. 8. RECOMMENDATION: City Council approval of the attached Ordinance on first readinQ. City Council passage of the Ordiannce on second readinq. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: Donald L. Pratt 10. hLO~ PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: AMENDED 1OA 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: Adds new def- "Street, private" requiring separate parcel rather than current easement within one or more parcels. Reduces available lots in short plat to three, where one is platted a private street 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The proposed changes include minor corrections, clarification, and removal of inconsistencies. Other changes involve adjusting setbacks or other minimum standards, adding new uses to the Land Use Tables, and making the document easier to understand and administer. Non-passage of these amendments will not result in noncompliance with the GMA nor any sedous conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan. These amendments will make our regulations better and may stimulate new development in certain areas or specific zones. They are also consistent with our intent to streamline the permitting process. To some degree, passage of these amendments will pave the way for related amendments to other zoning chapters that will come later. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: No anticipated adverse impacts. These amended Zoning chapters are easier to read and use, will eliminate some problems that exist in the current text, and will make it easier to discuss zoning issues and development options with the public, other City departments, other agencies, etc. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: STAFF REPORT ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS Prepared by: Ron W. Hough, Planning Manager --- Department of Community Development --- May 1996 The revised Bremerton Comprehensive Plan was adopted in April 1995, survived a lengthy appeal process, and was re-adopted in February 1996. With that behind us, it's time to move ahead with amendments to the development regulations that are intended to help implement the Plan. The ultimate objective is to bring at least the following regulations together into a consolidated Bremerton Development Code: Zoning Ordinance Land Divisions (subdivision, short plat and minor lot line adjustments) Street standards Shoreline Master Program Critical Lands Ordinance SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) The most urgem need is to adopt a new Zoning Map for the City, followed by amendments to those chapters of the Zoning Ordinance that are linked to the Map. This report deals with the proposed "text" amendments and it's only the first round. Proposals to improve other chapters of the Zoning Ordinance will follow later this summer and will include procedural changes mandated by ESHB 1724, the Regulatory Reform Act. STRUCTURE OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE The Zoning Ordinance consists of eleven chapters. The chapters affected by this round of amendments are highlighted. Chap. I: Chap. II: Chap. III: Chap. IV: Chap. V: Chap. VI: Chap. VII: Chap. VIII: Chap. IX: Chap. X: Chap. XI: INTRODUCTION ESTABLISHMENT OF ZONES DEFINITIONS General Provisions ZONING DISTRICTS Planned Unit Development Parking Provisions Landscaping Provisions Nonconformities Administration Enforcement 1 CHAPTER I: Proposed Amendments The "Introduction" chapter is modified to refer to the "Development Code" rather than the Zoning Ordinance. In addition to specific interpretations of the Zoning Map, a new section was added to deal with other "general" interpretations to resolve conflicts. The sections "Zoning Map Interpretations" and "Zoning Upon Annexation" may later be moved to a section that deals with procedures. Since that section isn't available yet, these sections will remain in Section 1. CHAPTER II: Proposed Amendments The "Definitions" chapter has been expanded to include a number of terms that are used often in development-related discussions, such as: Accessory Dwelling Unit $ Antenna Tower Appeal :~ Applicant Appurtenance/Appendage :g Art Gallery Building Code :g Building Envelope Caretaker $ Caretaker Residence Centers (community, senior, youth) $ Change of Use Comprehensive Plan $ Critical Areas Critical Lands Ordinance ~ Density Bonus Department store · Factory Outlet Food/Beverage Take-out :g Greenhouse Impervious Surface :g Landscaping Mobile Home $ Parcel Public Services :g Recycling (var. facilities) Rezone :g Studio Urban Growth Area :g Vesting Some other terms were corrected or updated to be current. For example, the Callow Business District was changed to "Charleston Business District", etc. CHAPTER V: Proposed Amendments The "Zoning Districts" chapter is one of the most often used and important chapters in the code. It describes each of the zones, provides minimum development standards for each, and includes the Land Use Tables which show the specific uses that are allowed in each zone. Since the last major revision of the Zoning Ordinance in 1988, staff has been compiling a list of minor problems, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement. Some of the ideas came from comprehensive planning discussions, some from study sessions or neighborhood meetings, some from discussions at the permit counter, and others are new ideas from seminars and conferences. 2 The following is a summary of proposed changes to Chapter V: Section 1: INTRODUCTION This section introduces all of the City's zones and assigns each zone to a major category. Section 2: PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY This new section is designed to better link the Zoning Ordinance to the Comprehensive Plan and remove the need for a separate process to determine Plan/Zone consistency whenever a Rezone is proposed. The table clearly shows which zones are directly consistent with each Comp. Plan designation. Rezones within the same Plan designation can be approved without a Plan Amendment. Section 3: SECONDARY ZONES This new section provides a way to approve small "secondary" zones for specific accessory or support purposes without having to process a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. It includes criteria to be considered in addition to the normal rezone criteria. Example: The developer of a large residential development may find a need for a centrally-located small convenience commercial center within the development. An area designated "Residential" on the Plan Map would normally require a Plan Amendment to allow the commercial zone. This"secondary zone" approach would make such a small zone possible without a Plan Amendment if it met the tests of being supportive and accessory to the surrounding neighborhood. Section 4: PHASING This is another new section. It describes the phased relationship between zoning (immediate regulations) and the Comprehensive Plan (20- year goals and visions). It explains that some areas will be held in their present zoning until such time as the intended zoning (as guided by the Plan) is more appropriate, or until the needed facilities and services are in place. This might be considered a more reasonable and gentle approach to Plan/Zoning consistency. It allows us to Plan for the 20-year future, but phase in the zoning over time in some unique cases. An example of this is a small area along the east side of Montgomery between Sixth and Ninth Streets. The long-range plan is to include this area in the Charleston Business District. However, since the present owners feel there is no demand (yet) for commercial, so they want to extend the life of their residential uses a while longer. The zoning was proposed to remain residential until such time as conversion to commercial is more feasible. Section 5: ZONE SUMMARY TABLE A new table (Z-3) has been added to this section to combine a general description of each zone with its minimum development standards. Since this table includes most of the information most people are looking for in the Zoning Ordinance, it can be printed separately as a public hand-out. Fo Section 6: LOT REQUIREMENTS TABLE Table Z-4 summarizes the development requirements for most zones and includes a number of changes. The most significant change is in the second column where the "Land Area per Dwelling" is proposed to be replaced by "Allowed Residential Density". The densities are directly consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's residential density levels and will help ensure Plan/Zone consistency. Other changes within this table include: 3 Setbacks: To follow through on such visionary ideas as allowing residential buildings to be closer to the street, allowing greater flexibility in the design and placement of buildings on a lot, etc., several of the setback requirements have been reduced, as shown in the following table: ZONES I Front Setbacks I Side Setbacks I Rear Setbacks SF-1 Reduced: 30ft. to20ft. Reduced: 15ft. tol0ft. Reduced: 30ft. tol5ft. SF-2 Reduced: 25 ft. to 20 ft. 10 ft. No Change Reduced: 25 ft. to 15 ft. SF-3 Reduced: 20 ft. to 15 ft. 5 ft. No Change 15 ft. -- No Change DR Reduced: 20fi. to 15ft. 5ft. NoChange 15ft.-- NoChange MF Reduced: 20 ft. to l0 ft. 5 ft. No Change Reduced: 25 lt. to 20 ft. CBR Reduced: 20ft. to 10ft. 5ft. NoChange 15ff.-- NoChange MR Reduced: 20 ft. to l0 ft. 5 ft. No Change Reduced: 25 ft. to I0 ft. HD Reduced: 20 ft. to 10 ft. 5 ft. No Change Reduced: 15 ft. to 10 ft. Minimum Lot Sizes: A variety of problems were encountered with the current minimum lot sizes. Some zones that allowed multi-unit high density development required very large lot sizes. The following changes were proposed to bring these into better alignment, to provide opportunities for small lot clustering without a Rezone, and to round off the sizes to the nearest 1,000 sq.ft, for ease of calculation. The minimum lot sizes will not determine the average lot size in a development, but must work in cooperation with the density column. Minimum Lot Width: Some lot widths were reduced to be in better proportion to the minimum lot size. For example, the width in the MI* and MR zones is currently 75 feet. The proposal is to reduce them to 30 ft. in the MI* zone and 40 ft. in the MR zone. The min. lot width in the very large-lot SF-1 zone would be reduced from 90 ft. to 60 ft., making it much easier to divide some of the very long narrow waterfront lots. Maximum Building Heieht: The only proposed change to residential height is in the HI) (Highland District) zone which currently has a height limit of 40 ft. (higher with a PUD). Since the HD zone is very similar to the MR zone and both allow the maximum density, the table shows both zones having a maximum height of 120 feet. (The Planning Commission's recommendation is to combine these two zones into one.) The building height in the Industrial Park (IP) zone would be increased from 30 ft. to 40 ft. to better accommodate light industrial buildings. Industrial General (IG) would be reduced from 80 ft. to 40 ft. with taller buildings permitted through the PUD process. Maximum Coveraee: In most cases, the lot coverage requirement will remain in the 25% to 50% range for most residential districts. However, the two highest density zones (MR and HD) are proposed to be increased from 45% and 50% respectively to 60%. 4 This slightly larger coverage allowance, along with reduced setbacks, will offer a little extra incentive to redevelopment or infill. No significant changes are proposed for commercial and industrial zones. Footnotes: This table includes several footnotes to achieve specific purposes: Footnote 1: Makes it clear that the "Allowed Residential Density" column does not include any additional dwellings that may be granted as a result of other incentives (open space, amenities, etc.). Note that the densities are in ranges. The ranges will guide both subdivisions and major developments. A project designed at a density of 6 units per acre would not be approved in the CBR zone where the minimum density is 8 units per acre. The density ranges would be applied to individual lots. Footnote 2: The "Front Setback" column has been amended to reduce the setback in most residential zones to either 10 or 15 feet. However, in all cases, the setback to a garage or carport would remain at 20 feet. This would provide sufficient driveway parking space without the car extending over the sidewalk. Footnote 3: Added wording would allow ZLL dwellings to be attached at the rear as well as the side lot lines. This is a new concept and would only be approved through the PUD process. Footnote 4: Since development within the Shopping Center (SC) zone is subject to a PUD, this footnote requires a similar setback to that required on the residential side of the lot line and also requires a doubling of the setback when a building is higher than 30 ft. or two stories. Footnote 5: This sets the building setback in all commercial (except SC) and industrial zones at 10 ft. when adjacent to any residential zone. This replaces the current requirement to match the setback on the residential side of the lot line, which doesn't always make sense or work well. Footnote 6: Requires a PUD for development within the SC zone as currently required. Footnote 7: The NB (Neighborhood Business) zone currently restricts buildings to 2,500 sq.ft, in size. We've had a number of comments that larger buildings are needed to provide for a neighborhood market or for buildings to house multiple small tenants. This footnote raises the limit to 5,000 sq.ft. Structure Size in PO zone: The PO (Professional Office) zone currently has a building size restriction of 5,000 sq.ft, with a larger building allowed through the PUD process. This size limit is not reasonable for a zone in which we are promoting office development and the PUD process is too cumbersome to use in this way. It is proposed that the building size limitation and PUD requirement be removed from the PO zone. Go Section 7: LAND USE TABLES The entire set of Land Use Tables has been reviewed and revised. Some new land uses have been added and tbe names of some adjusted for clarification. The format of this table has been revised to place the uses into 12 categories. This will make them much easier to locate and compare with similar uses. 5 Section 8: UNLISTED USES This is an existing section but revised to allow the Director to make some calls administratively that would normally go to the Planning Commission. Some simple criteria is included to assist the Director. Some decisions will still go to the Commission. I. OTHER ISSUES OF INTEREST 1. T~ District: The Zoning Ordinance has two high-density zones --- Highland District (HD) and Mixed Residential (MR). Both allow a densities up to 44 DU/Acre. When our Zoning Ordinance was revised in 1988, the MR zone was intended to be the "mixed use" zone that allowed a combination of residential, office and limited commercial uses. However, the HI3 zone actually ended up with most of these uses while the MR zone remained almost purely residential. The Highland District covers a very limited hilltop area and extends north of Eleventh Street. It is almost exclusively residential and is a very attractive older neighborhood with some very nice historic homes. The new draft placed most of the non-residential uses that were in the HD zone into the MR zone as well, as a first step in transferring the mixed use concept to that zone. What we didn't do was remove the non-residential uses from the Highland District zone. The land uses in question are: Social Service Facilities (SUP) Welfare & Other Charitible Svcs/Fac's. (SUP) Gymnasium or similar facility (SUP) Indoor Athletic/Recreation Facility (SUP) Tennis or Swim Club (SUP) Weight Control and Aerobics (SUP) Tanning Salon, Spa, and similar uses (SUP) Private Education Facilities (SUP) Religious Worship & Related Facilities (SUP) Museum -- other (SUP) Art Gallery -- larger than 2,000 sq.ft. (SUP) Restaurant/Cafe (under 2,500 sq.l~.) (SUP) Food/Beverage Take-out (SUP) Delicatessen (SUP) Books, Flowers, Gifts and Greeting Cards (SUP) Self-service Laundry (SUP) Hair Care and Personal Grooming (SUP) Photographic & Art Studio (SUP) Personal/Family Counseling Services Personal Services -- other than listed (SUP) Insurance and Investment services Real Estate, Title, Escrow and Similar Svcs. Accounting, Tax Prep, and similar services Copy, Mailing, FAX, and similar services. Office/Business Assistance Services Property Maintenance Svcs., with supply storage (SUP) Consultants (architects, planners, design, etc.) Computer assistance, training and repair services 6 General offices (other than listed above) The Planning Commission discussed the pros and cons of (1) combining the two zones into one, (2) removing most of the non-residential uses from the HD zone to preserve it as a residential district, or (3) leave both zones the way they are. The Commission liked the idea of combining the two zones into a single high-density mixed use zone that could be applied throughout the community. That recommendation was forwarded to the City Council. 2. Dealing with Nonconforming Lots: Bremerton's original platting created a number of very small lots, 25 or 30 feet wide in many cases. Early buyers bought as many lots as they needed to create their building site. If they built a very small house or didn't have much money, they may have needed only one lot. If they wanted to build a large home, they may have purchased four or five lots in a row. These were consolidated by the Assessor's office and assigned an identification number for ease of taxation and record keeping. The underlying subdivision never really disappeared and the original small lots still remain. We have continued to recognize these lots as legal building lots, provided the builder could meet the current code requirements for setbacks, off-street parking, etc. They have also been viewed as good oppommities for residential infill. Occasionally, neighbors complain that a new house on a very small lot is not consistent with the existing development pattern of the surrounding neighborhood and may bring lower property values, lower-income residents, or other results they may deem undesirable. It has been suggested that the City not issue building permits for lots that don't measure up to today's minimum lot standards. The Planning Commission discussed the possibilities of a "taking" issue if the City didn't allow some viable use of the property. By not allowing small lots to be used, we would lose infill possibilities and may have to adjust the Comprehensive Plan in other areas to make up for that loss. The Commission also considered several alternatives, such as not allowing substandard lots to develop, adjusting our zoning to match existing development patterns more closely, and allowing the development of small lots only with a Special Use Permit to ensure a public process in the design and permit process. It was determined that tagging a lot "undevelopable" will remove it's economic use, possibly trigger a takings action, and leave little reason for its owner to maintain or improve the property. The result could be an inventory of eyesores --- uumaintained vacant lots with no development potential unless they can be purchased and used by an adjacent property owner. This is contrary to our vision and the Comprehensive Plan. 7 lID The process of allowing development on any legal lot, provided the development meets all minimum requirements, has been working well in Bremerton. Ifa project doesn't fit the site and needs a Variance or Special Exception, that process opens the project to public scrutiny. If we are to grow and make the most efficient use of our existing infrastructure, we want those small lots to either be consolidated with neighboring lots or to become sites for new small houses. The Planning Commission's recommendation is to leave the existing process in place. No changes to this process have been recommended in the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Redesigning the DR zone: The Duplex Residential (DR) zone is very similar to the SF-3 zone and has the same density and other development limits. The basic difference is that the DR zone allows duplexes as well as single-unit dwellings. The revised Land Use Tables, as proposed, would open this zone up a bit to allow a greater variety of (low density) housing types. One shortcoming of our zoning districts is that we have no zone in which multi- unit developments can be constructed under the Low Density Residential (LDR) Comprehensive Plan Designation. This is a particular problem for Planned Unit Developments proposed in an LDR area. To allow multi-unit structures within a mixed-use PUD, the Comprehensive Plan must first be amended to a Medium or High Density designation. This will allow a Rezone (another process) to a medium or high-density zone that allows the type of multi-unit structure (such as a four-plex) to be built at a low density. There must be a better way. .... The Pronosal: Proposed changes to the DR zone in the Land Use Tables would ~:~i~ ]allow triplexes, multi-unit structures, or townhouses by Special Use Permit. All )such developments must be within the density range of the zone (3-8 DU/Acre). · Eventually, the name (Duplex Residential) will also be changed, along with the ' / names of other residential zones. The Impacts and Advantages of this proposal: 1. It will allow the mix of zones needed within a .[ow-density Planned Unit Development without the need to amend the Comprehensive Plan. 2. It will fill a need for a low-density residential zone that allows multi-unit structures to a maximum density of 8 units per acre. The zone could then be approved in the most appropriate locations through the Rezone process. 3. Some of the City's most deteriorated housing is currently zoned DR. A new duplex requires a 9,600 sq.ft, lot. Very few of those exist. The DR zone offers few incentives and no real oppommity for improvement. It should be to the City's and neighborhoods' advantage to offer new 8 redevelopment opportunities to encourage some of these areas to redevelop mad to replace some of the old military duplexes with new modem attractive housing. ,~. 4. Resi ential Densities: ~ The Lot Requirements Table of Chapter V includes a column entitled "Allowed Residential Density". Each residential zone has a density range within which development will be limited. The high and Iow limits are directly consistem with the Comprehensive Plan densities for the categories of Low, Medium, and High Density Residential. Example: The MF and CBR zones will require developments of at least 8 DU/acre but no more than 18 DU/acre. A proposal to build a duplex in the center ora half-acre lot in the CBR zone would not be within those parameters and couldn't be approved. We would require the Site Plan to show how at least two more units could be built on the lot at a later time to arrive at the minimum allowed density. That process will allow the phased development of the property but will not allow its future density potential to be lost through a short-sighted inappropriate development. 5. Future Amendments: Only Chapters I, II and V are being processed at this time. We're gradually working in the direction of our ultimate objective --- a "development code" to replace our scattered assortment of ordinances and procedures. During the coming months, the following new or revised sections should be coming to the Planning Commission: General Provisions (yards, setbacks, lots, etc.) Special Design Standards (new section -- easy reference) Planned Unit Development (streamlining) Parking (simplifying --- very few significant changes) Signing (simplifying --- very few changes) Landscaping (simplifying --- very few changes) Critical Lands (integrate key ingredients into this code) Nonconformities (streamlining --- very few changes) Land Division (subdivisions, short plats, and minor boundary adjustments) Procedural Requirements (applications, permits, SEPA, hearings, appeals, etc.) Enforcement 9 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Bremerton Planning Commission held several study sessions on these amendments during February, March and April, 1996. It conducted the final public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Zoning Maps and text on April 16, 1996. Following the April I6 public heating, the Commission passed the following motion unanimously: Motion by Commissioner Dingfield (seconded by Hancock) that we recommend approval to the City Council the following Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map Amendments: Exhbit "A": Official Zoning Map Exhibit "B": Revised Chapter I: Introduction Exhibit "C": Revised Chapter II: Definitions Exhibit "D": Revised Chapter V: Zoning Districts, including all of the changes that were discussed this evening and recommended to the tables and various other parts. The only approved change that has not been incorporated into the draft documents is the recommendation to combine the MR and HD zones. If the City Council agrees, this will be done later. 10 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING UNAPPROVED DRAFT April 16, 1996 The meeting began with the Secretary calling the roll: Those present were: (~hairmim Olsen. Vice-Chairman Stone. Commissioners Hancock. Dingfield. Boyd. Adams. and Robinson. Staff Present: Ron Hough. Jack Allingham. and Mary. lyn Waibel. asked if there were any additions or deletions to the Agenda? C miin r Din fi I requested that two items, Resolution 01-96 and 02-96 regarding the size of the Planning Commission and amendments to the by-laws be added to New Business. Commissioner Dingfield moved for approval of the agenda as revised. Seconded by Commissioner Boyd. Ouestion: Boyd. yes: Stone. yes: Robinson. yes: Hancock, yes: Adams. yes; Dingfield: yes. Olsen. yes. Motion passes. Chairman Olsen invited Mr. Mentor to address the Commission. Mr. Mentor presented a letter (Exhibit 1) to the Commission. Mr. Mentor wanted to inform the Commission of his intentions to be at the next Planning Commission meeting in May to discuss his appeal of the site plan review for his proposed apartment complex at 5670 Kitsap Way. Public Hearings: asked the appearance/conflict questions. No response. Hearing #1, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit: Jack Allingham presented the staff report for Dr. James T. Clemen, applicant, to consider approval of a Shoreline Permit to construct a private recreation dock (Exhibit A) on Kitsap Lake. Location of proposed project, 1289 Lakehurst Drive NW, Bremerton. Planning staff recommends approval of the application. Chairman Olsen asked if there was any written testimony. The Secretary responded no. William Palmer, Land Use Planning Consultant, representing Dr. Clemen, reiterated the project (Exhibit B) and requested Commission approval. Also, advised the Commission that they had already received Fisheries Approval. PAGE - 1- Commissioner Robinson questioned the term "Cheminite". Mr. Palmer responded that the word was misspelled and it should be "Cemonite", explaining that it is a green chemical treatment which is applied to the wood under pressure. Commissioner Adams stated her concern with regard to the accumulative effect on having docks all over Kitsap Lake. Jack Allingham stated that the City has specific standards for width and length of docks, which controls the accumulative effect. Chairman Olsen requested public input in favor -- no response; against -- no response; neutral - no response. Hearing closed to public. Commissioner Robinson called attention to the staff report, page 5, item 7 and asked if it was a ~typo~ with regard to the comment: "The proposed dock complies with maximum length restrictions and will be a hazard to navigation. Jack Allingham responded that it was incorrect and should state that not" be a hazard to navigation. / Commissioner Stone questioned if the City has a source to , water depths that are~jff/esented__ by the applicant? stated City would unless the All Hearing//2, Zoning Ordinance: Ron Hough presented that staff report to consider amendments to the Bremerton Zoning Ordinance pertaining primarily to definitions and zoning district standards. Chapter I, changing the zoning ordinance to the development code. Chapter II, definition changes and adding 40 new terms. Chapter V, zoning districts, adding new Sections 2, 3, 4, Zone Summary Table, and revising the Lot Requirements Table, revising Land Use Tables, and revising Section 8. PAGE -2- /IF-- Ron Hough presented a letter from Jon Rose. Pope Resources. outlining several comments on the changes. Commission discussion followed regarding the suggested changes. Hearing Closed. Chairman Olsen asked if there were any corrections or amendments to the minutes of March 19, 1996. Commissioner Stone moved for approval of the minutes and seconded my Commissioner Dingfield. Chairman Stone stated that the minutes are approved as presented, Call to the Public: None ~'~'- ~New Business: Ron Hough presented the staff report on Zoning Amendments Recommendation, to approve a recommendation to the City Council regarding proposed amendments to the Official Zoning Map and specific chapters of the Zoning Ordinance. Motion by Commissioner Dingfield moved that we recommend approval to the City. Council ~he following Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map Amendments: Exhibit "A": Official Zoning Map, Exhibit "B": Revised Chapter I: Introduction. Exhibit "C": Revised Chapter II: Definitions, Exhibit "D": Revised Chapter V: Zoning Districts including all of the changes that were discussed this evening and recommended to the tables and various other parts. Seconde¢ by Commissioner Hancock. Ouestion: Adams. yes: Dingfield.' Boyd. yes: Stone. yes: Robinson, yes; Hancock. yes: Olsen. yes. Motion passes. presented "Notes ~ the Schedule. Finding of regarding schedule. Commission," including the County with the Comprehensive and the progress including meeting summary 1996, Map of Exis Land Uses, Map Traffic Issues, Map of Land ty Commi_ i followed regarding the traffic issues rln~i~or caus discussed the confli)~ of interest issue, have dete e of a conflict wou}~ be financial. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE amending general provisions, definitions and zoning district regulations of the Zoning Code; and repealing Sections 21.02.010 through 21.02.080, 21.02.250, 21.02.260 and 21.02.270 through 21.02.340 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. WHEREAS, major revisions to the Official Zoning Ordinance and Map for the City of Bremerton were adopted by Ordinance No. 4172 in November 1988; and WHEREAS, the City is now amending its Zoning Ordinance and Map to be consistent with the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan and to comply with the requirements of the Growth Management Act; and WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared to cover the full range of these Zoning Code amendments and a SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on February 13, 1996; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton Planning Commission has conducted study sessions and held public heatings on February 20, March 19, and April 16, 1996, to study draft Zoning Code text amendments and to solicit public comments; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton Planning Commission, following its April 16, 1996, public hearing, voted unanimously to recommend City Council adoption of the text amendments; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton City Council conducted a public hearing on May 22, 1996, to accept public comments pertaining to the proposed Zoning Code text amendments and considered the Planning Commission's recommendation; now, therefore, THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Repeal/New Sections. Sections 21.02.010 through 21.02.040, 21.02.250 and 21.02.260 of the Bremerton Municipal code are hereby repealed and new sections 21.02.010 TITLE AND ENACTMENT, .020 PURPOSE, .030 GENERAL INTERPRETATION ,.040 BASIS FOR DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS, .250 INTERPRETATIONS OF THE ZONING MAP, and .260 ZONING UPON ANNEXATION are adopted to read as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Section 2. Repeal/New Section. BMC 21.02.050 is hereby repealed a new section 21.02.050 DEFINITIONS is hereby adopted as set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto. Section3. Repeal/New Sections. BMC sections 21.02.060-.080, and 21.02.270-.340 are hereby repealed and new sections 21.02.240 INTRODUCTION, .250 SECONDARY ZONES, ZONING,IRS - Disk 2 - 5115196 .255 PHASING, .260 ZONE SUMMARY TABLE, .2'/0 LAND USE TABLES, .060 LOT REQUIREMENT TABLE, .280 UNLISTED USES are adopted to read as set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect ten (10) days from passage and publication. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of 1996. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this __ 1996. day of APPROVED this day of JOHN E. LAW, Council President ,1996. LYNN HORTON, Mayor ATTEST: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk ZONING.IRS - Disk 2 - 5/15/96 CHAPTER 21.02 BREMERTON DEVELOPMENT CODE EXHIBIT GENERAL PROVISIONS 21.02.010 TITLE AND ENACTMENT. (a) This chapter, consisting of text, maps, illustrations and related ordinances that may be incorporated by reference, is known as the "Bremerton Development Code". (b) All provisions of this ordinance have been adopted by the Bremerton City Council pursuant to Article XI, Section 11 of the Washington Constitution. (c) This code shall regulate the use and development of all lands within the City limits of Bremerton, with the exception of federally-owned properties over which the City has no jurisdiction. 21.02.020 PURPOSE. This code has been adopted following purposes: (a) To implement the City's Comprehensive Plan; (b) To protect the community's social and economic stability, as well as the positive qualities and unique characteristics of all areas throughout the community; (c) for the To address both natural and considerations as part of the permitting processes; and man-made environmental land use and development (d) To ensure the orderly and beneficial development and use EXHIBIT "A" - PAGE 1 EX-A.JRC - Zoning Diskette - 5/17/96 (e) of all lands by: (1) Reserving, through zoning, developable land area for an adequate supply of each major category of land use and in the most appropriate locations, as directed by the Comprehensive Plan; (2) Preventing the encroachment of incompatible uses; and (3) Providing clear concise regulations and development guidelines that are consistent with City goals and visions. To protect the health, safety and welfare of the public as a whole and not to create a duty to protect any person or class of persons. 21.02.030 GENERAL INTERPRETATION. (a) Minimum Requirements. All provisions of the Development Code shall be held to be the requirements necessary to promote the public safety, morals, and general welfare. Bremerton minimum health, (b) Interpretations. The Director of Community Development shall have the authority to make written interpretations when necessary for clarification or to resolve conflicts within these regulations. (c) Conflicts. Code shall restriction regulations, EXHIBIT "A" PAGE 2 EX-A.JRC ~ Zoning Diskette - 5/17/96 The provisions of the Bremerton Development govern when this code imposes a greater than is required by other ordinances, easements, covenants, or other agreements. In the case of internal conflicts within this code, the most restrictive provision shall prevail. (d) Misinformation. The City of Bremerton shall not be liable for any misinformation regarding the Bremerton Development Code that may be presented by an official or employee. (e) Quantity. For the statements in this code, the singular includes the plural, and the plural includes the singular. (f) Construction. The Development Code shall be liberally interpreted and construed to secure the public health, safety, morals and welfare, and the rules of strict construction shall have no application. 20.02.040 BASIS FOR DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS. Goals, and objectives contained in the Bremerton Comprehensive policies Plan and other adopted documents that have been incorporated into this code by reference, shall be used for guidance by City staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council when processing applications and making discretionary land use decisions. 20.02.250 INTERPRETATIONS OF THE ZONING MAP. The following rules apply to interpretations of the official Zoning Map: (a) Where a zone boundary is indicated as approximately following a property line, the property line is the zone indicated as following a street the centerline of the street or boundary. (b) Where a zone boundary is or other right-of-way, EXHIBIT "A" - PAGE 3 EX-A.J~C - Zoning Diskette - 5/17/~6 right-of-way is the zone boundary. (c) Where a zone abuts or extends into a lake or into Puget Sound, the zone boundary extends into that body of water to the full limit and territorial extent of the jurisdiction and control of the City. (d) Where a zone boundary is not indicated to follow a property line, street, or other ROW, the boundary line is as drawn, based on the scale shown on the Zoning Map. 20.02.260 ZONING UPON ANNEXATION. If annexed property has not previously received a zoning designation as part of comprehensive planning under RCW 35.13.177 and 178, the annexed property shall be administratively assigned provisional zoning under the City designation most similar to the former County zoning. A Planning Commission hearing to review provisional zoning shall be conducted within sixty (60) days under procedures for rezone petition at no cost to the property owner. EXHIBIT '~A" - PAGE 4 EX-A.JRC - Zoning Diskette - 5/17/96 EXHIBIT "B" 21.02 BREMERTON DEVELOPMENT CODE DEFINITIONS 20.02.050 DEFINITIONS. The following terms and definitions are commonly used in the City of Bremerton in land use planning, permitting and development. If a specific term is not defined herein, nor in the Glossary of the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan or other ordinances that may be incorporated by reference, it shall have its normal and customary meaning within the context used. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU). A second dwelling unit added to or created within an existing single-unit residential structure (principal structure) or within a detached accessory structure (guest house, cottage, or as part of or above a garage) for use as a complete, independent or semi-independent living unit with provisions for cooking, eating, sanitation and sleeping, and which complies with the design standards contained in this code for ADUs. SEE, ALSO: STRUCTURE, ACCESSORY. USE, ACCESSORY. ACRE, GROSS. A measure of total land area, equal square feet. Allowed residential development densities on this figure in the City of Bremerton. ACRE, NET. streets, other to 43,560 are based A measure of land area after subtracting public rights-of-way, and other unusable or undevelopable areas. EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 1 EX-B.JRC - Zoning Disk~tt~ - 5/!7/9~ ADJOINING. Property that touches or is directly across a right-of-way, other than a limited access highway or arterial with four lanes of traffic or more, from the subject property. ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. A permit or other approval that is granted directly by the Director of Community Development or his/her authorized signatory and generally without a public hearing or approval of a committee, commission or other body. ADULT BUSINESS. A business which is either an adult theater, adult bookstore, massage parlor as defined in BMC 5.92, or adult cabaret. ADULT THEATER. An establishment which presents material relating to sexual activities and specified anatomical areas for observation and restricted to adult audiences. ADULT BOOKSTORE. An establishment that has a significant portion of its stock and trade in publications relating to specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas. ADULT CABARET. An establishment that features entertainers or attendants dressed so as to emphasize specific anatomical areas or whose performance or other activities sexual activities. ALLEY. Any public right-of-way or typical width of at least ten (10) feet, include or mimic specific thoroughfare having a but generally not more than thirty (30) feet, which has been dedicated or deeded to the public for public use and which affords only secondary means of access to abutting properties, primarily for service purposes. ALTERATION, STRUCTURAL. Any changes in the supporting members EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 2 of a structure, to the configurations of the roof or exterior walls, or repairs that would prolong the life of the supporting members of a building or structure. This definition does not include minor actions such as adding a doorway or window, or attaching architectural features, appurtenances, or adornments. decoration, etc., the exterior of a structure itself. open porches, given full or regulations. ANTENNA TOWER. The tower, mast, pole or other support structure used to hold an antenna in place or to elevate it to a higher level. The antenna itself is generally considered an architectural appurtenance, but its tower structure is often more extensive and may require additional plans and approvals. APPEAL. A formal request made during a specified period of time following a decision, asking that the decision be reconsidered by a higher authority, usually following a public hearing, in accordance with the procedures of this code. APPLICANT. A person submitting an application for any permit or approval required by the City and who is the owner of the subject property or an authorized agent of the owner. APPURTENANCE(or APPENDAGE). An architectural feature, that has been added to or extends outward from building and is not a primary component of the Such appurtenances as bay windows, low decks, awnings, chimneys, and other features are sometimes partial exemption from setback or other building ARCADE. A place of amusement consisting primarily of games of skill, such as video games, pin-ball machines, and carnival-style EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 3 An arcade may be a primary use or may be accessory to a restaurant, bowling alley, hotel, terminal, skill games. another use such as etc. ART GALLERY. For purposes of zoning, an art gallery is a business establishment or other private or public place intended primarily for art exhibitions where people may view and/or purchase paintings, sculptures, or other works. An art ~studio" is a common accessory use. BAY WINDOW. A window jutting outward from an exterior wall of a structure and forming an alcove within. BED AND BREAKFAST. A single-unit dwelling in which rooms or other overnight accommodations are rented to transient persons by the resident household. Meals may be included. This does not include group homes. BOARDING OR ROOMING HOUSE. A single-unit residential structure in which rooms without kitchens transient persons with or without meals. group homes. BUFFERING. A structural, earthy, or minimize the impacts of one land use upon are provided for non- This does not include vegetative form used to another. A buffer may include any one or a combination of shrubs, trees, or other landscaping. a form of buffering. BUILDING CODE. amended and adopted by the City of Bremerton. BUILDING ENVELOPE. The three-dimensional EXHIBIT "B" PAGE 4 fences, walls, berms, high Distance separation is also The Uniform Building Code and related codes as space within which a structure is permitted on a lot and which is defined by building height, setbacks, and lot coverage regulations. BUILDING LINE. A line on a lot, generally parallel to property lines and located a sufficient distance from the property lines to provide the minimum yard areas required by this code. The Building Line establishes the area within which buildings are permitted and does not necessarily correspond with the location of any existing structures or other improvements. A person who maintains or watches over someone CARETAKER. else's land or property on a part- or full-time schedule. The caretaker may be accommodated in a dwelling provided on the property or may live elsewhere. CARETAKER RESIDENCE. An accessory residential unit provided by the owner of a property to be used exclusively as living quarters for the caretaker(s) of that property. CAR WASH. A business engaged in washing, waxing, polishing, and general cleaning of automobiles, small trucks, light utility vehicles and small recreational vehicles, but that is not designed to handle larger commercial trucks and buses. It includes self- service, full-service, and automated car washes and auto detailing services. CENTER, COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD. A facility provided for social gatherings, special events, dinners, dances, meetings, lectures, exhibits, games, limited recreation, and other functions of interest to persons of all ages in a particular neighborhood or the community and generally owned and operated by a public agency EXHIBIT '~B" PAGE 5 or public non-profit organization. CENTER, SENIOR. A special purpose facility designed and equipped to serve the social and recreational needs and interests of senior citizens and offering the same general types of activities available in a neighborhood or community center. CENTER, YOUTH OR TEEN. A special purpose facility offering some or all of the types of activities commonly found in a community or neighborhood center but tailored specifically to provide for the needs and interests of the under-21 age group. CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD). A geographical area (not a zone), bounded: (2) (3) (4) CHANGE OF USE. A change building from one use listed in listed in those tables. CHARLESTON BUSINESS DISTRICT. On the south: Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS); On the west: Rear property lines of all properties immediately adjacent to and west of Warren Avenue; On the north: Rear property lines of all properties immediately adjacent to and north of Sixth Street; and On the east: Port Washington Narrows outer harbor line. in the occupancy of a property or the Land Use Tables to another use An area consisting of all properties that front on Callow Avenue south of Eleventh Street and north of First Street (See Figure III-4) as well as other lands as designated in the Charleston Neighborhood Plan. CHURCH/RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION. An establishment primarily intended for the conducting of organized religious services and EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 6 EX-B.JRC - Zoning Disket~ - 5/]7/96 related activities, which may include religious education, meeting halls, and kitchens or places for personal worship or meditation but do not include pre-schools, parochial schools, day care facilities, major recreational facilities, vehicle or equipment storage yards, or other functions that are not clearly a necessary or integral part of the religious institution. CITY. When capitalized and used alone, without a specifically named city, "city" shall mean the City of Bremerton, Washington. CLINIC. An establishment used for the mental and physical care of human patients, but which excludes facilities for overnight patient care. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. transportation, housing, The 20-year comprehensive land use, utilities, and capital facilities plan adopted by the City and periodically revised in accordance with the adopted schedule for review and revision, and to maintain compliance with the Growth Management Act of 1990, as amended. CONVALESCENT/NURSING HOME. An establishment licensed by the State of Washington as a facility providing full-time care for for themselves by reason of does not include hospitals, individuals who are unable to care chronic illness or infirmity. This sanitariums, or treatment centers. CRITICAL AREAS. Areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for drinking water, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, wetlands, and streams, as defined in the City's Critical Lands Ordinance. EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 7 EX-B.JRC - Zoning Disk~tte CRITICAL LANDS ORDINANCE. Bremerton Ordinance No. 4422 (as amended) which includes provisions to classify, protect, and preserve Bremerton's critical areas; provides standards to manage development in association with these areas; and designates some of these areas as environmentally sensitive in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). DAY CARE FACILITY. A facility licensed by the State of Washington and approved by the City to provide regular care for adults or children for periods of less than 24 hours. Facilities providing care for 13 or more persons are regulated by Special Use Permit. Smaller facilities are allowed but not regulated by the City. DECK. An open platform wider than 18 inches. A deck may be free-standing, cantilevered from a building, or connected to the ground with steps or ramps. A deck that is higher than 30 inches above finish grade may be referred to as a raised deck, a rooftop deck, a balcony, or other suitable term. DELICATESSEN. An establishment selling cooked or preserved foods such as meats, prepared salads, desserts, cheeses, pickles, sandwiches, soft drinks, etc., generally for consumption off the premises. DENSITY. A measure of residential concentration, usually expressed as the number of dwellings per acre of land. For example, a 100 acre area containing 300 dwellings has a "gross" density of three dwellings per acre. "Net" density is determined by using the acreage total after all undevelopable areas (streets, EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 8 EX-B.JRC ~ Zoning D,$ke~te - 5/]7/96 open space, wetlands, etc.) have been removed. The U.S. Census Bureau defines "rural density" as 200 persons per square mile or about one dwelling per ten acres. DENSITY BONUS. Additional residential dwelling units that may be approved through the Planned Unit Development process, in excess of the maximum base density allowed in that zone, when additional open space or other amenities are provided. DENSITY, MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE. The number of dwellings per gross acre as stated for each zone in the "Lot Requirements" table, plus any additional units that may be allowable as a density bonus through the Planned Unit Development process. DEPARTMENT STORE. A retail commercial store that consists of a variety of specialty departments that are interconnected within the same structure and under the same ownership, such as jewelry, clothing, shoes, automotive products, sporting goods, etc. DETOXIFICATION CENTER. A facility providing for the care and treatment of an intoxicated person during the period in which the person recovers from the transitory effects of acute intoxication. DIRECTOR. When used alone and capitalized within the Development Code, "Director" shall mean Bremerton's Director of Community Development. DISH ANTENNA. A ground-placed or structure-mounted parabolic receiver, generally of metal or fiberglass construction, designed to receive signals being broadcast for processing and display on a television or other receiver. Such dishes are available in a variety of sizes, but generally not larger than twelve feet in EXHIBIT "B" PAGE 9 EX-B.JRC - Zonin§ Diskette - 5/17/96 diameter for home use. Non-commercial dish antenna are accessory uses and subject to all site development requirements of this code. Dish antenna that are intended for commercial purposes are considered to be communications systems and may require a Special Use Permit or other approval. DRINKING PLACE. An establishment selling intoxicating beverages for consumption on the premises. DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY. An automobile-oriented facility designed primarily for drive-through trade, and which provides service and caters to patrons while in their motor vehicles. This does not include gas stations, service stations, and auto repair garages. DUPLEX. A structure containing two dwelling units on a single lot. DWELLING, CONVENTIONAL. Any building or structure that is built or assembled (in the case of a modular structure) on the site and in conformance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). DWELLING, MODULAR or FACTORY BUILT. Buildings or structures that are constructed primarily in a factory and transported to the site for assembly or installation. Ail temporary wheels, axles, and other appliances used in the transport are removed at the destination and the structure is permanently placed, unless approved as a temporary placement by the City. Such structures are constructed to the standards of either the Uniform Building Code (UBC), or the HUD Code. (Also see: Manufactured Home) EXHIBIT "B" PAGE 10 £X-B.JRC - Zoning Diskette - DWELLING, MULTI-UNIT or more dwelling units. structure.) DWELLING, dwelling unit. a "house".) DWELLING, (houses) that STRUCTURE. A structure containing three (Also referred to as "multi-family" SINGLE-UNIT STRUCTURE. A structure containing one (Also referred to as a ~'single-family" dwelling, or SINGLE-UNIT ATTACHED. Two single-unit dwellings are attached at a common side lot line with each dwelling located entirely on its own lot. This does not include row houses or other housing types having more than two attached units. DWELLING UNIT. designed to provide A living space or combination of rooms independent year-round living facilities for one family or household, constructed to the minimum standards of the UBC or HUD Code, and with provisions for sleeping, eating and sanitation. FACTORY predominantly OUTLET. A retail store that sells products from a single manufacturer. It may be within the same building or on the same site as its manufacturing facilities, or at another location. A single manufacturing business may have many factory outlet stores, often located with similar stores in '~outlet malls". When sited independently of its manufacturing facilities, a factory outlet store is permitted in the same manner as any other retail store selling similar merchandise. FENCE. A structure built to prevent escape or intrusion, or to provide privacy, screening, or buffering from noise or other EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 11 undesirable impacts or activities beyond the property line. Also includes freestanding walls. FOOD/BEVERAGE TAKE-OUT. A business establishment that specializes in fast service sales of limited food products such as sandwiches, hot dogs, packaged lunches, and hot and cold drinks, and that has no indoor customer seating. Such facilities may include pedestrian oriented or vehicular drive-through food booths, espresso stands, juice bars or similar facilities. Such facilities are located on permanent sites and should not be confused with street vendors. FOSTER HOME. A dwelling unit in which a full-time resident provides temporary care and supervision on a full-time basis to not more than six foster children, three expectant mothers, or three other adults requiring full-time care. GRADE. The lowest point of elevation of the finished surface of the ground, paving or sidewalk within the area between the building and the property line. When the property line is more than five feet from the building, grade is the lowest point of elevation of the finished surface between the building and a line five feet from the building. For structures built over water, grade shall mean the elevation of ordinary high water. GRADE, EXISTING. The grade or topography existing prior to any excavation, clearing, grading or filling. GREENHOUSE. See "Nursery and Greenhouse" GROSS FLOOR AREA. The sum of all horizontal areas of a structure when measured EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 12 of floors from the exterior faces of exterior walls; including glazed or screened porches. GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY - CLASS for children and adults who their natural homes; and/or disabilities or physical A group care residence for various reasons cannot reside in for persons who have severe chronic handicaps that cause substantial functional limitations. This facility may provide physical therapy and training in social skills. It does not include facilities to which persons are assigned as a result of criminal conviction or those where residents, individually or by their legal guardians, are not free to terminate their residency at will. (1) Class I Small: A total of six or fewer persons, including staff, whose permanent residence is the group residential facility. (2) Class I Large: A total of seven or more persons, including on-duty staff. GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY - CLASS II. A group care residence for juvenile delinquents, the mentally ill, persons serving a sentence in lieu of confinement, persons needing correctional or mental rehabilitation, or persons needing rehabilitation and treatment for social and/or family problems, drug or alcohol addiction, or abuse. This definition includes programs providing alternatives to imprisonment; transition back into the community including pre-release, work-release, and probationary programs that are under the supervision of a court, State, or Teaching of work or social skills facility but it does not include EXHIBIT ~'B" - PAGE 13 may be provided drug or alcohol local agency. in this class detoxification centers. (~) Class II - Small: A total of six or fewer persons, including staff, whose permanent residence is the group facility. (2) Class II - Large: A total of seven or more persons, including resident staff. HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. An association of homeowners that has responsibility for commonly owned property within its residential development and which enforces covenants and restrictions on commonly owned areas or private property. HOME OCCUPATION. Any non-residential use carried out for monetary gain, which is secondary to the use of the property for residential purposes, and which is operated in accordance with the Home Occupation standards of this code. HOSPITAL. A licensed institution providing primary health care services and medical or surgical care to persons, primarily inpatients, suffering from physical or mental conditions, and which related facilities as an integral part of the may include institution. HOTEL. An establishment that accommodations to the general public, related services such as restaurants, beauty shops and recreational facilities. HOTEL, RESIDENTIAL or INN. A hotel that medium-term or long-term residents, or monthly rate. Such a facility EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 14 offers transient lodging and which may provide such meeting rooms, gift shops, is oriented toward with rooms offered at a weekly might also be oriented toward seasonal residents, persons with a particular need or income level, or persons employed in the area for a short time. HOUSEHOLD. Ail persons, relationships, that reside as a for single household occupancy. regardless of age, sex, or family single unit in a dwelling intended Such group quarters facilities as dormitories, boarding houses, nursing homes or similar accommodations typically do not provide facilities for households. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. Any material which reduces or prevents absorption of stormwater into previously undeveloped land. JUNK YARD. A place where discarded or salvaged materials are bought, sold, exchanged, stored, baled, packed, disassembled, or otherwise handled. This includes automotive wrecking yards; house wrecking yards, and storage of structural steel materials and equipment, but does not include used or salvaged machinery in operable condition nor the processing of used, discarded or salvaged materials as a minor part of manufacturing operations. KENNEL. An establishment where five or more domestic animals older than six months are kept, whether for compensation or not. This does not include veterinary clinics/hospitals, pet shops or zoos. LANDSCAPING. The arrangement and planting of trees, grass, shrubs and flowers, and the placement of fountains, patios, street furniture, berms, walls, ornamental concrete or stonework and other features to achieve an aesthetically pleasing outdoor space. LOADING AREA. An area designed and intended for the temporary parking of a vehicle while loading or unloading passengers, EXHIBIT ~'B" - PAGE 15 merchandise or other materials. LOT. Any area, tract or parcel of land owned by or under the lawful control and in the lawful possession of one distinct ownership undivided by a dedicated street or alley or another ownership, and which has a minimum of twenty feet of frontage on a street. LOT AREA. The area within the boundary lines of a lot. When creating new lots through the subdivision or short plat process, the area of each new lot shall not include public and private streets, wetlands, and other areas that may be restricted from use or from the types of development allowed by the zone in which the property is located. LOT, CORNER. A lot abutting two or more streets at their intersection. LOT, FLAG. A lot with access to its street by way of a narrow strip of land having a minimum width of twenty (20) feet. A flag lot consists of two parts. (1) The '~flag" or main body of the lot; and (2) The "panhandle" or narrow access way connecting the body of the lot to the street. THROUGH. A lot, other LOT, frontage on two streets. LOT, WATERFRONT. A lot of which any LOT COVERAGE. of all structures, and low open decks. EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 16 EX-B.JRC - Zoning ~iskette - 5/]7/96 than a corner lot, that has portion abuts wetlands. That portion of a lot covered by the roof areas but not including driveways, walkways, patios LOT DEPTH. The horizontal distance between the front and rear property lines of a lot, measured along a line midway between the side property lines. The depth of an irregular lot or a lot having more or fewer than two side lots lines will be determined in the most reasonable manner, based on the lot's longest average dimension. LOT LINE, FRONT. Any property line that abuts a public street, private street, or alley (if no street frontage) is considered a frontage and shall meet the minimum lot frontage development requirements of this code, unless otherwise designated through approval of a Zoning Ordinance Special Exception. LOT LINE, REAR. The property line most opposite or most distant from the designated front lot line and that does not intersect any front lot line. Corner lots often have no rear lot line. In the case of a waterfront property, the rear lot line is that which adjoins the ordinary high water line (OHWL), unless granted a Zoning Ordinance Special Exception. Any lot line that is not a front or rear lot and any lot line that intersects a front lot LOT LINE, SIDE. line by definition, line. LOT WIDTH. The average horizontal distance between side lot lines, measured at right angles to the lot depth line. Determining the width of an irregular lot may require reasonable modifications to this procedure. MANETTE BUSINESS DISTRICT. Ail properties in the vicinity of the east end of the Manette Bridge that are included in the General EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 17 Business (GB) zone and that may be further expanded subsequent rezones. (See illustration) MANUFACTURED HOME. A residential unit on one or more through chassis for towing to the point of use to be used with a foundation as a dwelling unit. This unit shall bear an insignia issued by a State or Federal regulatory agency indicating that the manufactured home complies with all applicable construction standards of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Commercial coaches, recreational vehicles, are neither manufactured homes Home") MARINA. A facility which provides moorage or travel trailers, and motor homes nor dwelling units. (See "Mobile wet or dry storage for watercraft or float planes, and which may offer marine- related sales and services. MOBILE HOME. A residential unit similar to a Manufactured Home but constructed prior to June 15, 1976 and not in compliance with the federal Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Code (HUD Code) which was enacted at that time. Mobile Homes are accommodated within some existing mobile home parks but lots within the City of Bremerton. (See not on individual "Manufactured Home") MOTEL. A facility that offers transient lodging with at least 25 percent of all rooms having direct access to the outside without the necessity of passing through the main include in-room kitchen accommodations to the general public, EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 18 EX-B.JRC - Zoning Diskette - 5/!7/~o lobby of the building. A motel may facilities and may offer laundry exercise rooms, pool, flower and gift shops, travel banquet and convention facilities as facilities, services, restaurant, accessory functions. MUSEUM. A building, room, vessel (boat or ship), or site intended for the preservation and exhibition of artistic, historical, or scientific objects. In the interests of local historic preservation, the Land Use Tables allow the use of historically significant buildings in residential areas to be used as museums. NONCONFORMING LOT. A lawfully created lot which has characteristics that no longer conform to the applicable standards and regulations for the zone in which it is now located. NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE. constructed under the codes in comply with currently required A structure that was legally place at that time, but does not setback, height, lot coverage, or other development standards of the zone in which it is now located. NONCONFORMING USE. Any activity, development or condition that was legally established prior to the effective date of this or other applicable code requirements and which would not be permitted under today' s codes. (Such uses are often referred to a "grandfathered" and may continue to exist and operate legally.) NURSERY and GREENHOUSE. Facilities used for the propagation and sale of agricultural or ornamental plants and related products: (1) Retail Nursery/Greenhouse: Offers products to the general public including plant materials, planter boxes, fertilizer, sprays, garden tools, and related items. EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 19 EX-B.JRC - Zoning Diskett~ - 5/]7/9~ (2) (3) Wholesale Nursery/Greenhouse: sale to retail nurseries or other businesses. Greenhouse: transparent propagation Raises nursery stock for A nursery facility constructed with or translucent materials for indoor of plants. A private greenhouse with no commercial sales is considered an accessory use. OPEN SPACE. Any area which provides physical or visual relief from the developed environment. It may consist of lands that are improved or unimproved, and public or private. Within the urban environment, open space may include linear streetscapes, view corridors, shoreline areas, mini-parks, pedestrian corridors, and areas reserved or used for stormwater retention, drainage, wetland protection, etc. For zoning and development purposes, specific areas may be required for outdoor recreation, resource or sensitive areas protection, amenities, safety, or buffering. The calculations of areas designated to meet open space requirements may not include driveways, parking areas, required yard areas, land occupied by buildings or structures, nor other impervious surfaces that are not related to the open space. OUTDOOR STORAGE. See "Storage Yard". OVERLAY ZONE. A set of land use and development requirements designed to be applied over, or in addition to, the requirements of the underlying zone for a specific purpose without removing or modifying the underlying zone. Common examples are design review overlays and parking overlays. PARCEL. A continuous quantity of land in single ownership or EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 20 under single control, consisting of one or more lots, and considered a unit for purposes of development. (See ~Lot") PAVED SURFACE. A surface paved with asphalt, concrete, concrete pavers, or brick but excluding gravel, crushed rock, and similar materials. PERSONAL SERVICE BUSINESS. An establishment engaged primarily in providing services involving the care of a person or apparel, such as; shoe repairs, laundry and dry-cleaning, beauty and barber shops, clothing/costume rental, tanning, other personal grooming facilities and domestic assistance services. This does not include massage parlors, health care services, exercise establishments, nor funeral services. PIER. A fixed structure, or a permanently moored floating structure, built over tidelands or shorelands, and used for a marine landing or moorage for watercraft. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD). An area to be developed as a single entity in accordance with an approved Site Plan, in which more than one zone may be combined, flexibility of development standards may be approved, and a variety of compatible uses may be permitted through a public master-planning process. PORCH. A roofed open area attached to a building or other structure, usually at an entrance to the structure. A porch that is enclosed, glazed or screened, may lose its status as an appurtenance. PRIVATE CLUB OR LODGE. Structures, facilities and grounds owned or operated by a private or fraternal organization for use by EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 21 its members and guests. PUBLIC FACILITIES. Facilities provided for the benefit of the general public including streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, domestic water systems, storm and sanitary sewer systems, parks and recreational facilities, public schools, and other public buildings. PUBLIC SERVICES. Services provided for the benefit of the general public, including fire protection and suppression, law enforcement, public health, education, information, recreation, environmental protection, development assistance/permitting, etc. RECREATIONAL VEHICLE. A motorized or nonmotorized vehicle designed and manufactured for recreational use, including but not trailers, snowmobiles, go-carts, limited to boats, travel motorcycles, etc. RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARK. A facility designed to provide two or more sites on which to park travel trailers, motor homes or similar recreational vehicles for periods not to exceed 30 days. Accessory uses to an "RV Park" often include a swimming pool, playground equipment, convenience store, bathing and laundry facilities, and other camping/travel services. RECYCLING CENTER. A facility for the collection, storage and processing of recyclable materials including crushing, breaking, sorting, packaging and related operations. recycling center. RECYCLING COLLECTION STATION o A structures, bins, or other containers designed EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 22 EX-B.JRC - Zoning Diskette - 5/17/9~ A "junk yard" is not a facility consisting of or intended for the collection and temporary storage of recyclable materials until they are picked up and transported to another location for processing and/or packaging. RECYCLING COLLECTION STATION (LIMITED). A collection station for the collection of glass, tin cans, recycling aluminum, cardboard, newspaper, magazines, small units, but not including parts, tires, hazardous or liquid wastes, garbage (putrescible wastes). REHABILITATION. The upgrading of dilapidated or substandard condition. plastics, and other recyclables in large appliances, furniture, auto or any forms of domestic a building from a RESIDENTIAL, AS SECONDARY USE. When permitted in a non- residential zone, a residential land use is not always accessory to other uses, but is considered secondary and subordinate to the principal uses of that zone. Residential uses are locations that don't conflict with street level frontage that are reserved for retail, office and other business comprise the primary function of that zone. placed in locations uses that (See design standards) commercial use (excluding fast food sells a variety of prepared food and accommodations for consuming those products RESTAUI~ANT. A establishments) which beverages and provides on the premises. RESTAURANT, FAST business is the sale rapidly prepared food consumption either on EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 23 FOOD. An establishment whose principal of a limited variety of pre-prepared or and beverages directly to the consumer for or off premises. Food is generally not served to the customers' tables, but is more often dispensed through a walk-up counter or drive-through take-out window. REZONE. A formal amendment to the Official Zoning Map of the city of Bremerton to change the zone designation of one or more lots. (also referred to as a Zoning Map Amendment) SETBACK. The required horizontal distance to be maintained between the finished exterior wall of a structure and the lot line of the lot on which it is located. as front, side and rear setbacks. SETBACK, PERIMETER. In a required distance exterior lot lines interior lots. SCHOOLS: PUBLIC. These are commonly referred to PRIVATE. Planned Unit between the allowed building that define the PUD. Development, the envelope and the This does not apply to PAROCHIAL. EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 24 An institution of learning operated by a public school district and including colleges. Includes private colleges, Montessori schools, and other privately owned and operated schools. An institution having a curriculum substantially equivalent to that of a public school but supported and controlled by a church. These are allowed wherever "public" schools are permitted. BUSINESS & TRADE. SIDEWALK VENDOR. merchandise from a stand, device on any sidewalk, "land use") An institution providing instruction and training in a specific service, art, or trade such as secretarial, real estate, travel, auto or machinery repair, welding, etc. These fall into the category of "Private Educ. Facilities" in the zoning Land Use Tables. One who sells edible or non-edible booth, cart, basket, tray, table or other street, highway or public place. (Not a SIGN. Any communication device, structure, or fixture which is intended to identify a building, use, business, or event; or to promote the sale of products, goods or services; using graphics, letters, figures, symbols, trademarks or written copy. Painted wall designs or patterns which do not represent a product, service or registered trademark, and which do not identify the user, are not considered signs. (See "Sign Provisions" of this code) SITE PLAN. A plan, prepared to scale, showing accurately and with complete dimensions, all land uses, buildings, structures, sensitive areas, ingress and egress, and other details needed to describe and obtain City approval of a development proposal. The Site Plan must be prepared in accordance with City Site Plan guidelines and requirements. SITE PLAN REVIEW. An administrative review process to ensure that a development proposal, as described in the Site Plan and EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 25 accompanying materials, properly served with development permits. may be required to meets all applicable code requirements, is needed utilities, and can be cleared for Through this process, specific adjustments ensure that the project will not be aesthetically or functionally disruptive to surrounding properties, the neighborhood, or the community. SPECIAL USE PERMIT. A permit which must be acquired before a land use that is listed in the Land Use Tables as "SUP", and not permitted "outright", can be constructed or approved in those zones. Some uses that are not listed at all in the Land Use Tables may be approved by the Planning Commission through the SUP process. SPECIFIED ANATOMICAL AREAS. (1) Less than completely and opaquely covered areas of the human body: (a) Genitals and/or pubic region; (b) Buttocks; (c) Breast below a point immediately above the top of the areola; (2) Human male genitals in a turgid state, even if completely and opaquely covered. SPECIFIED SEXUAL ACTIVITIES. (1) Human genitals in a state of sexual stimulation or arousa 1; (2) Acts of human masturbation; sexual intercourse or sodomy; sadism and masochism; or other explicit s e x u a 1 behavior. EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 26 (3) Fondling or other erotic touching of human genitals, pubic region, buttocks or breast. STORAGE YARD. An outdoor area where vehicles, equipment, merchandise, raw materials, or other items are accumulated and stored for an indefinite period until needed. Storage yards are often used in conjunction with a warehouse, storage buildings, sheds or other structures and may be public or private. Unless a function of a government agency or public utility, storage yards are considered accessory to a business or other principal use. STORY. That portion of a building that extends from the floor surface to the surface of the floor above or, in the case of a top floor, to the ceiling or roof above. If a finished floor level is more than six feet above the finished grade for more than fifty percent of the total perimeter, the area beneath that floor shall be considered a story. STREET. The improved section of any public or private right- of-way intended primarily for motor vehicle travel and which affords the principal means of access to abutting property, together with bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and related improvements. STREET, PRIVATE. A parcel at least 20 feet in width, created specifically to provide motor vehicle access to abutting properties, the owners of which share in its ownership and maintenance responsibilities. STRUCTURE. That which is built or constructed. STRUCTURE, ACCESSORY. A structure that is incidental and subordinate to a principal structure and which is customarily found EXHIBIT "B" PAGE 27 EX-B,JRC - Zoninq Diskette - 5/]7/9~ in connection with the principal structure and located on the same lot or parcel. STRUCTURE, PRINCIPAL. A structure containing one or more principal uses, as permitted by the zone in which the property is located. STRUCTURE, TEMPORARY. A structure which does not have, nor is it required by the Uniform Building Code to have, a permanent attachment to the ground but is subject to building permits. STUDIO. A loft, room, group of rooms or building in which an artist works. This includes facilities for the production of photographic works (still or motion), painting, sculpture, dance, music or similar activities. A studio is often found in combination with a gallery or may be an business or other use. TOWNHOUSE. For purposes of this accessory use to a retail code, a townhouse is a single-unit structure in a row of at least three such units in which each unit has its own front and rear access to the outside, no unit is located over another, and each is separated from any other unit by one or more common fire resistant walls. Ownership of each unit includes ownership of an individual parcel of land beneath the unit and usually includes a privately-owned outdoor area as well (private yard or open space). The remainder of the grounds, private streets or driveways, and recreational facilities are owned in common, similar to condo ownership. TRANSIENT PERSON. A temporary lodger who stays no longer than 30 days per visit. EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 28 URBAN GROWTH AREA. An area designated by Kitsap County within which urban growth will be encouraged and supported with urban level utilities and services. The UGAs are designed to accommodate the next twenty years of urban growth and will be periodically revised as growth occurs. USE. The purpose or activity for which land or improvements are intended, occupied or maintained. USE, ACCESSORY. A use which is incidental and subordinate to a principal use, which is customarily found in connection with the principal use, and which is located on the same lot or parcel. (Examples include private garage, hobby shop, work shop, personal greenhouse, and required off-street parking.) USE, PRINCIPAL. The primary or main use conducted or allowed on a lot or parcel. Accessory uses cannot exist without a principal use on the same lot or parcel. USE, SPECIAL. A use that is not permitted "outright" but is listed in the Land Use Tables as "SUP" and approved through the Special Use Permit process. Uses that are not listed at all in the Land Use Tables may also be considered for approval through the SUP process. USE, TEMPORARY. A use which may occur on a lot on a term or seasonal basis for a prescribed period of time usually would not exceed six months duration. USE, UNLISTED. A use which is not specifically anywhere in the Land Use Tables. VARIANCE. Official permission to be relieved from EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 29 EX-B,JRC - Zoning Diskette - 5/17/96 short which listed specific development code requirements that cause an unusual or unreasonable hardship due to the physical characteristics of the site or existing improvements. VESTING. A fully completed development application is "vested" at the time it is received by development may then be processed, the zoning, land division, and effect when vesting occurred. the permitting authority. The permitted and carried out under other regulations that were in VISION TRIANGLE. A triangular shaped area at an intersection within which nothing is erected, placed, planted or allowed to grow in such a manner as to limit or obstruct the sight distance of motorists entering or leaving the intersection. WEST BREMERTON LIMITED PARKING AREA. An area of Bremerton bounded as follows but not including the Central Business District as defined herein: (1) On the west by Wycoff Avenue. (2) On the north and east by Port Washington Narrows. (3) On the south by Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. WETLANDS OR WELAND AREAS. A11 marshes, bogs, swamps, floodways, and floodplains associated with the streams, lakes and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of Bremerton's Shoreline Master Program and Critical Lands Ordinance. YARD. That portion of a lot that lies between a lot line (property line) and the building line. FRONTYARD: The yard area extending the full width of the front of a lot between the front property line (lot line) and the EXHIBIT "B" - PAGE 30 front building line. BACKYARD: A yard extending the full width of the lot between the rear property line (lot line) and the rear building line. When irregular lots, through lots, and corner lots have no rear lot lines, they will have no rear yard areas as defined. SIDEYARD: A yard between the side lot line and the side building line and extending from the front yard to the rear yard. Triangular lots, corner lots, or other irregularly-shaped lots may have only front and side yards. two front yards and two side yards, YARD, CONSTRUCTION OR STORAGE. Through lots generally have but no rear yard as defined. See "Storage Yard". ZERO LOT LINE. The location of a building on a lot in such a manner that one of its sides rests directly on a side lot line with no setback. EXHIBIT "B" PAGE 31 EX-B.JRC - Zonin§ Diskett~ - 5/]7/q6 CHAPTER 21.02 BREMERTON DEVELOPMENT CODE EXHIBIT "C" ZONING DISTRICTS 21.02.024 INTRODUCTION. Zoning is the primary implementation tool of the City's 20-year Comprehensive Plan. The Plan's land use designations provide the basis for the Zoning Map which breaks each of those designations down into more specific "zones". Each zone includes the City's standards and development requirements, most of which are contained in this Development code, for development within each of the zoning districts. The following zones are included herein: EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 1 Z- I: ZO]?xFES RESIDENTIAL: SF-1 Res. Low-density (0-3 [)U/Acre-- Single-unit) SF-2 Res. Low-density (0-4 DU/Acr¢-- Single-unit) SF-3 Res. Low-density (3-8 DU/Acre-- Single-unit) DR Res. Low-density (3-8 DU/Acre-- 1- & 2-unit) MF Res. Medium-density (3-18 DU/Acre-- Mulli-unit) CBR Res. Medium-density (3-18 DU/Acre -- Muhi-unit/mixed) MR Res. High-density (8-44 DU/Acre-- Multi-unit) HD Res. High-density (8-44 DU/Acre -- Multi-unit/mixed use) COMMERCIAL: PO Professional Office NB Neighborhood Business GB General Business SC Shopping Center BC Business Core INDUSTRIAL: BP Business Park IP Industrial Park IG Industrial General EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 2 EX-C.JRC - Zoning Diskette - 5/17/96 SPECIAL PURPOSE: MX PS FM WS URD DRO LPO Mixed Use Parks & Schools Forest Management Water Supply Urban Renewal District Design Review Overlay Limited Parking Overlay 21.02.245 PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY. Regulations used to implement the Comprehensive Plan, including zoning, must be consistent with the Plan. Each zone has a direct relationship to its parent designation on the Plan Map. Since the Comprehensive Plan is intentionally more general than the Zoning Map, more than one zone may be appropriate and necessary to implement a single Plan designation. The following table shows the relationships between each Plan designation and the primary zones that may be approved within those designations. For purposes of initial zoning and consideration of rezone requests, these primary zones are considered to be consistent with their related Plan designations. EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 3 EX-C.JRC - Zoning Diskette - 5/]7/96 Z-2: PRIMARY ZONE CONSISTENCY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PRIMARY ZONES LDR: Low-density Residential SF-I: Res. Low-density (single-unit) 3 to 8 DU/Acre SF-2: Res. Low-density (single-unit) SF-3: Res. Low-density (singLe-unit) DR: Res. Low-density (1- & 2-unit) LPO: Limited Parking Overlay PS: Parks & Schools MDR: Medium-density Residential MF: Res. Meal-density (multi-unit) 8 to 18 DU/Acre CBR: Res. Med.-density (multi-unit/mixed) LPO: Limited Parking Overlay PS: Parks & Schools HDR: High-density Residential MR: Res. High-density (multi-unit) More than 18 DU/Acre HD: Res. High-density (multi-unit/mixed) LPO: Limited Parking Overlay PS: Parks & Schools C-G: General & Highway GB: General Business Commercial SC: Shopping Center C-P: General & Professional Offices PO: Professional Office EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 4 1,5 7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PRIMARY ZONES CBD: Central Business District BC: Business Core GB: General Business PO: Professional Office MF: Res. Med.-density (multi-unit) HD: Res. Med.-density (muhi-uniffmixed) MR: Res. High-density (multi-unit) HD: Res High-density (multi-unit/mixed) URD: Urban Renewal District DRO: Design Review Overlay NC: Neighborhood Convenience NB: Neighborhood Business MU: Mixed Use/PUD MX: Mixed Use Other zones as approved through PUD process. May emphasize residential, commercial or industrial. HI: Heavy Industrial IG: Industrial General MX: Mixed Use (Industrial emphasis) IP: Industrial park IP: Industrial Park MX: Mixed Use (Light Ind. Emphasis) BP: Business Park BP: Business Park PO: Professional Office MX: Mixed Use (Business cmphasis) RE: Resource Extraction IG and IP zones preferred. Allowed in all zoncs by Special Use Pemut T: Transportation Facilities All commercial & industrial zones EXHIBIT "C" PAGE 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PRIMARY ZONES P or OS: Parks and/or Open Space PS: Parks & Schools. Privalc parks or schools may alsu be permitted in other zones and are compatible xvith most Plan designations. WS: Watershed WS: Water Supply UL: City Utility-owned Lands FM: Forest Management PS: Parks & Schools S: Schools PS: Parks & Schools Private parks or schools may also be permitted in other zones and are compatible with most Plan designations. C: Cemetery PS: Parks & Schools SF-I: SF-2: SF-3 (Low-density. Residential) H: Hospital GB: General Business PW: Public Works facilities IP: Industrial Park IG: Industrial General U: Utilities ~' Most are allowed in all zones cither outright or by Special Use Pemdt. Some major hcilities may be reslricted 1o specific zones, per the Land Use Tables. 21.02.250 SECONDARY ZONES. In unique cases, rezone requests for zones not listed in Table Z-2 as "primary" may be approved for limited application. These secondary or accessory zones will also be considered consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and may be approved, criteria #3, criteria: but only when they meet the City's standard Rezone 4, and 5, and each of the following additional EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 6 (a) The zone shall consist of no more than ten percent (10%) of the total area of the Plan designation in which it is proposed; and (b) The zone is necessary to allow a use or development that is accessory to or directly supportive of a planned or existing use in the adjacent primary zone; and (c) The rezone includes conditions of approval to cause the zoning to revert if the intended use for that zone, as approved, is not developed within a reasonable time, if the use is ceased or abandoned for a period of at least one year, or for other reason deemed appropriate at the time of approval. 21.02.255 PHASING. The zoning process helps to implement the City's 20-year Plan. In some cases, an area that is "planned" for a particular use may not be ready for that use until later in the planning period special study or neighborhood plan. appear to lag behind the Plan when, or until completion of a In such cases, zoning may in fact, the land is in a "holding zone", until such time as the intended zoning (as guided by the Plan) is more appropriate, or until such time as the needed facilities and services are in place to accommodate the level of development allowed by that zone. 21.02.260. ZONE SUMMARY TABLE. TABLE Z-3 includes a quick- reference summary of all Bremerton zones, including a brief description and intent of the zone and its minimum standards. EXHIBIT "C" PAGE 7 Z-o. ZONE SUMMARY ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards (Se :'able Z-4) SF-1 Land uses in this large-lot zone are limited primarily to Base Density: 1-3 DU/ac. single unit dwellings and related accesso~ uses (e.g., Residential social, religious, culturah or educational) commonl? Min Lot Size: 13,000 s t'. Low-density lbund in such ncigbbu~hoods This zone is intended lbr Max Co\'ct'agc 25% areas io which vel3' low urban densities are necessm3' or Min Lol Width: 60 Ii. desirable lbr such reasons as severe enviro~m~eutal Max Bldg Hr: 30 1l problems such as topography or soil stability, or due to limited access, onique views or other amenities, historic SETBACKS: character, or lack of essential urban se~wices Front: 20 fi. Side: I0 ft Real': 15 lt. EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE EX-C.JRC - Zoning Diskette - ZONES Description/Intent Min, Standards (SeeTable Z-4) SF-2 This zone allows primarily single unit Base Density: 1-8 DU/ac dwellings and related accessory uses and its Min. Lot Size: 9,000 Residential locational factors are similar to those of the s.f Low-density SF-1 zone~ The primary difference is that the Max. Coverage: 30% SF-2 zone allows a smaller minimum lot size Min. Lot Width: 50 ft. and a higher development density than does Max. Bldg. Hr: 30 fl. SF-I and is suitable for areas served by public utilities, particularly sewer. SETBACKS: Front: 20 ft Side: I0 ft. Rear: 15 ft. EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 9 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards tSee Z-4) SE-3 This zone accommodates single-unit homes in Base Density: 3-8 DU/ac. the typical urban subdivision at an average Min. Lot Size: 5,000 Residentinl density (without bonuses) of up to eight units s.f. Low-density >er acre. It offers a smaller minimum lot size Max. Coverage: 40% to enhance afFordability and encourage higher Min. Lot Width: 40 fl.. densities through creative site planning and Max. Bldg Ht: 30 ft. various zoning and density bonus incentives. This 8 DU/acre density is consistent with the SETBACKS: Comprehensive Plan's LDR designation. Front: 15 ff (20 to garage) Side: 5 ft. Rear: 15 ft. DR This zone is applied to. and intended to maintain, Base Density: 3-8 DU/ac. neighborhoods of predominantly single- and two-unit Min. Lot Size: 4,000 sf- I DU Residential structures as well as areas snitable for a mixnu'e of these 6,000 sf- Duplex Low-density ~ dwelling types. The same related accessoc,' uses that are Max. Coverage: 40% allowed in the other zones are pem~itled in this zone and Min. Lot Width: 40 fl. the allowed densiV,' is the same as the SF-3 zone but with Max. Bldg llt: BO ft. a smaller mimmnm lot size R)r single units and duplexes. SITI'BACKS: Front: 15 ft (20 to garage) Side: 5 fl. Rear: I5 fl EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 10 (¢'5 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards Z-4) MF This zone is designed to maintain existing Base Density: 8-18 DU/ac. areas of multiple-unit dwellings and to provide Min. Lot Size: 3,000 Residential for new development of needed housing Medium density within the medium-density (8-18 DU/Acre) Max. Coverage: 40% level. Such development may include small- Min. Lot Width: 30 ft.. lot single-unit clustered housing, garden and Max. Bldg. Ht: 40 ft. larger apartment complexes, condominiums, and other housing alternatives, along with SETBACKS: their customary related or accessory uses Front: 10 ft. (20 to garage) Side: 5 ft. Rear: 20 ft. EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 11 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards (see T~ble Z-4) CaR The "Central Bremerton Residential" zone is Base Density: 8-18 DU/ac. designed to maintain and improve the Min. Lot Size: 3,000 Residential character found primarily in the older central s.£ Medium density areas of Bremerton. It allows the integration Max. Coverage: 50% of small multi-unit structures with an Resid. assortment of customary accessory and 80% Non-resid compatible uses. It recognizes the historic Min. Lot Width: 30 fL development patterns characterized by small Max. Bldg. Ht: 30 ft. lots, narrow streets, minimal setbacks, accessory dwellings, and often deficient off- SETBACKS: street parking. It encourages residential in-fill Front: 10 ft. (20 to and promotes general overall neighborhood garage) improvement. Side: 5 fi. Rear: 15 ft. EXHIBIT "C" PAGE 12 EX~C.JRC - Zoning Di3kette - 5/17/~! ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards ~s¢¢ [able MR This zone provides areas that are most Base Density: 8-44 DU/ac. suitable for the highest density multiple-unit Min. Lot Size: 5,000 Residential development allowed anywhere in Bremerton s.£ High density and at the greatest allowed building heights. Max. Coverage: 50% It is intended for use in high intensity areas, Resid. areas with exceptional views or other 80% Non-resid amenities, and along or near arterial streets. Min. Lot Width: 40 ft. To take advantage oflocational advantages, Max. Bldg. Hr: 120 ft. this zone allows some mix of compatible non- residential uses~ Mixed use developments are SETBACKS; encouraged Front: 10 ft. (20 to garage) Side: 5 ft. Rear: 10 ft. EXHIBIT "C' - PAGE 13 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards ~SeeTable Z-4) aD The "Highland District" zone is very similar to Base Density: 8-44 DU/ac. "IviR' but allows a greater variety of Min. Lot Size: 5,000 Residential compatible non-residential uses, including s.f. High density offices, small cafes, personal and medical Max. Coverage: 50% services, religious and social facilities, etc. Resid. This zone also offers the highest residential 80% Non-resid. density allowed anywhere in Bremerton, the Min. Lot Width: 40 ft. highest building heights to take advantage of Max. Bldg. Hr: 120 ft. views, and the most efficient use of limited land area. This zone provides considerable SETBACKS: oppo~lunity for a variety of land use mix and Front: 10 ft. (20 to intensity. Mixed use developments are garage) encouraged Side: 5 fi. Rear: l0 fi. EXHIBIT "C' - PAGE 14 ZONES PO Professional Office NB Neighborhood Business Description/Intent The PO zone provides areas Ibr low-intensity small-scale office uses. Limitations on the size aud height of office structures will help ensure compatibility with adjacent residential neighborhoods. This zone is intended, in part, as a hull'ct zone that can be placed between neighborhoods and more intense conm~,ercial uses, ndustrial nses, a]'terial su'cets, or other incompatible land uses It may be uscd along artcrial slreets to take advantage el'mixed or limited lot sizes, or as a softer alternative to strip commercial development This zone ts particnlarly suitable lbr mchtsion in a mixed nsc PUD development. Min. Standards (SeeTab[¢ Z-4) Min Lot Size: None Max. Coverage: 45% Min. I,ot Width: None Max Bldg Hr: 30 ft. Max Bldg Size: 5,000 slk SETBACKS: Front: Same as abntling zone Side: None fi'om non-res zones 10 fl (ii'om R zones only) It. ear: 20 1t The NB zone provides areas tbr limited retail activity and personal seD. qces in or adjacenl ~o residential re'cas for the convenience of neighborhood residents. Businesses arc encout aged to locate in a tight cluster and reflect thc scale and character of the sun'ounding neighborhood. Businesses that have a commnnily-wtdc or regional market or scrvice re'ca, or that have large land, floor area, or parking requil'cments arc probably not ,.veil snited to this zone Mia Lot Size: None Max. Coverage: 50% Mia Lot Width: None Max. Bldg. }1~: 30 fl. Max Bldg. Sizc: 2,500 SETBACKS: Front: Same as abutting zone. Side: None t?orn noaq'os, zones 10 fi (from R zones only) Rem 20 IL EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 15 EX-C.JRC - Zoning Diskette 5/i7/Q6 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards (SeeTable (~-B This is Bremerton's primal3, attto-related, highxvay- Mm. Lot Size: None oricnted, high-intensity, retail and se~wicc commercial Max Coverage t00% General zone. It is designed primarily tbr locations along arterial Mtn Lot Width: None Business streets and allows a wide variety of business and office Max. Bldg uses. The City may limit driveway access and require landscaped setbacks and other impro,~'ements that S[~TBACKS: enhance the aesthetic and visual qnalilics, increase l"ront: 20 safety, encourage pedestrian aod Iransit usage, and help Side: None Ii-om non-rcs zones. ensure compatibility with less intense ac[iacent land oses. 10 lt. (fi'om R zones only) Rear: None h-om non-res, zones. 10 fi (from R zones only) SC Tbis zooc is intended to accommodate clusters of retail Mtn l,ot Size: None* activity, persona] scl'\lccs, entertainment, and office uses Max Coverage: None* Shopping Center in accessible, well-designed, and pcdcstrian-oricntcd Min. Lot Width: None* shopping centers These centers sbonld provide more Max Btdg Ht: None* desirable alternatives to strip-commercial development These centers will be larger than neighborhood business * Shoplfing Center de~'elopment cenlers in scale and use. and will osually be anchored by requires a master pbm consistent a junior departmcnt store, variety store, major with City PUD standards nnd supemmrkel, or may consist of a combination of smaller approved through the PUD stores and offices process. EXHIBIT "C" PAGE 16 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards (SeeTable Z-4) nc This zone ,,vas origimllly designed lbr Bremellon's Min. I,,,)t Size: None Central Business District aod intended to promote the Max Coverage: 100% Business Core CBD as the city's primm7 high-intensity commercial and Mtn Lol Width: None financial center. That puq~ose continues, but in Max. Bldg Hr: 120 lt. combination witlt other special pulpose zones and more specific master plans Pcdesn'ian-oriented day and SETBACKS: nighnime activities are encouraged, as arc public trausit Front: None and linkages to the multi-modal temmml, ovclA,,atel' Side: None abutting non-res zone. park, PSNS, and othcr pedestrian-accessible facilities 10 t't. (abutting R zone only) Long-term parking and olher aotomobile :'elated uses are P, ear: 10 fi. discouraged in the CBD. Residential uses are highly encooraged, particularly on upper floors and around thc periphel3' of the district, but should not displace side\valk level stnrefi-onts along key downtown streets BP This zone provides oppnrtunities for the development of Min. Lot Size: None low-irdensity commercial, office and/or mannl:acturing Max Coverage: 50% Business Park businesses Ihat are clean, quiet, Iow-traffic generators, Mia Lot Width: None and thal will be compatible with a4jacent or nearby Max Bldg ltl: 30 fl. residential neighborhoods and other sensitive uses. Business park dex'elol*mcnt should be designed as an SI~'I'IBACKS: attractive, well-landscaped, campns-likc environment Front: 20 fl. that will be an asset to its neighbolhood as well as the Side: Nonc abutling non-res zone. community l 0 ft (abuning R zone otlly) Rear: 10 fl. (abutting R zone only) EXHIBIT "C" PAGE 17 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards (See Table Ig 'l'bis zone is intended to provide arcas for a mix ol'otlice, Min. Lot Size: None wholesale, trade and distribution, bulk retailing, and light Max Coverage: 50% Industrial Park manufimtnring in a low-density, campus-like Min Lot Width: None environment. The district shall be designed to minimize Max Bldg. Hr: 40 fl. adverse elTects on adjacent areas and to present all attractive welMandscapcd appearance. IP businesses SETBACKS: should require little or no outdoor storage Gl products, Front: 201i materials or equipment, and opcrahons should, lbr thc Side: None abutting ilOtl-rcs zone. most part, be contained within enclosed structures I 0 Il. (abutting Il. zone only) l~.car: lO fl. (abutting R zone only) IG This is tile City's most mlense indnslrial zone It allows Min I.ot Size: None most ~pes of "hea,.5, indush-ial" uses, including slot age Max Coverage: ~00% Industrial and distribntion, heavy equipmcnt and vehicle sales and Min. Lot Widlh: None General selMce, general manufilcmring, wholesaling, fi~bricating, Max. Bldg. ! It: 40 II publishing, research and development, and lelalcd otlice and limited commercial uses. SETBACKS: Front: 20 fl. Side: None abatling non-rcs ?'one I 0 I't (abutting Ii. zone only) l~.cm I0 1i. (abutting R zone only) EXHIBIT "C" PAGE 18 ZONES Description/Intent MX Mixed Use This zone is intended lo allow and pronlot¢ mixed use developments that inclode higher densi~, residential, combined with small-scale, office and commcrcial uses The zone offers incentives to revitalize and maintain older peripheral areas, particularly around Ihe CBD and other imense con'anercial districls. The "MX' zone includes most uses permitted in tile l ligh-density l>,.esidential zones (MR and HD), tile Professional Ollice (PO) zone, and the Neighborhood Business (NB) zotle. Min. Standards (SeeTable Z-4) Base DcnsiLx: to 44 DU/ac. Mm Lot Size: 3,000 s 1: resid Nc) mm for other. Max. Coverage: 50% Min. Lot Width: 30 Max. Bldg. Hr: 30 S/qI'BACKS: Front: 20 fl. l 0 ft (abutting R zone only) Rear: I 0 Il. (abutlmg R zone only) EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 19 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards (SccTable Z-4) PS The puit~ose of this zonc is to protect and prescl~,'c lands Min. Lot Size: Nnne Max. Coverage: 25% that are currently developed, used. suited lbr, or phmned Min. Lot Width: None Parks & Schools Max. Bldg klt: 40 ft Ibr public and/or private park, recrcatioo, or open space SI£TI~ACKS: uses, as well as lands needcd lbr recreational and From: 30 Side: 30 educational facilities oflong-tem~ value and benefit to Rear: 30 fl. the conmmni~, and region PmTnitted Uses: 1. Passive parl.:s inclodiug, but not limited to. upon landscaped or natural areas: recreational trails systems; picnicking areas; gardens; arboretum; x icwpoints and related stl'UClttt'CS 2. Active Parks including, but uot limited to, hard and soft surface play areas; playground equipment; sports COUllS; lighted fields; communitT boildings7 and swimming pools 3. Public and private schools, including trades, rots, pre-schools and colleges, 4. Librao', museum, and similar l~acilities 5. Recreation-related non-profit group aclivilies 6. Concessions --- approved by City Council 7. Acccsso~3' uses customarily assocmtcd with parks and schools Uses Requiring a Special Use Permit: I. Golf course 2 Boat laonching and related facilitics 3. Rifle and pislol ranges, 4, Maintenance and service yards 5. Bus and other vehicle and equipment maintenance & storage fiacilities 6. Admin. offices related to the facilities. 7. Buildings and sh'uctures for nonp~ ofit gl oups on public lands EXHIBIT "C" PAGE 20 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards (SeeTable 7.-4) EM The FM zone is intended to promote best management Min. Lot Size: None. )ractices on Ibrest lands and sound utilization of forest, Max. Coverage: Least li2asiblc Forest water and other rcsonrces, consistent with State and Mm. I.ot Width: None Management Federal regnlations Max. Bldg. Hr: N,.me Pe~nmitted Uses SETBACKS: Front: 30 fl 1. Timber hapcest activities, including timber Side: 30 ft. removal, rimming, salvage, and post harvest P, ear: 30 fc clean-up 2. Roads for limber halTest access, fire breaks, Ibrest protection, and sccnrity. 3. Rct'o]-estation actixities 4. l Iydropowcr activities consistent xxill~ fi. Educational and research activities compatible with forest resources prolection. 1. Single-unit dwelling lbr caretaker, along with 2. Non-rcsidemial stlaaclures needed [hr the execulion of pennilted uses, including bnt not limited to, scaling stations, storage and maintenance facilities, processing facilities, residue dumps, and log storage areas. EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 21 174 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards (see Table Z-4) WS This zone is intended to protect the Bremerton public Min l.ot Size: None water supply by controlling activities and maintaining Max. Coverage: Least l~asiblc Water Supply high water quality at the source, consistent with State and Min Lot Width: None Federal regulations It is further intended to maintain Max. Bldg. Hr: None strict conlrol of access to and aclivities within the Union River drainage to allow the Union River water supply SETBACKS: source to continue in its unfiltered status. Front: 301l Side: 30 lt. Pe~TnittedUses: Rear: 30 ft 1. Collecting, storing, treating, conveying, pumping, se~wing and monitoring water for distribution of polable water to customers and pmweyors of the Bremertnn Water Utility. 2. Managing, growing, harvesting, and protecting l'Ol'CSt resota'ces consistcnl with protection of the public water system 3. Developing hydropo~,ver resourccs consistent with maintemmce of the public water system and environmental constraints 4. Managing wildldb to preclude degradalion of the public watcr supply. 5. Condoming educabonal and research activitics compalible with p~ election of the public water supply 6. Developing groundwater and protecting aquii'e~s fi-om contaminatinn or overdraft Accesson' Uses 1. Single-unit dwelling tbr watersbcd patrol, cm'etaker or gate guard, along with customary accessol3' uses. 2. Non-residential stroctures needed lbr thc execution et' pemmted oses, including trcalmenl and diversion he[lit[cs, maintenance rite[lit[es 3. TemperaC, crc,,,, qnaJlcrs EXHIBIT "C" PAGE 22 ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards (Sec'table z-4) URD The adopted document eotitled "Downtown Waterli'ont Specific controls and dc,,clopment Urban Renewal Plan" (DWUPd)) constitutes the entirety requirements Rn' this zone are Urban Renewal of this zone, '/he plan provides conceptual as well as contained in the Downtnwn District tectmical bmidancc and standards Ibr planning and Waterfront Urban Renewal Plan. building within tile downtown walerfi-ont district, extends from PSNS notch to FiI~h Street and includes all properties betxveen Washington Avcnue and the shoreline. The Land/Water Usc 1)haa of thc DWURP is divided into several components tbr land use and development purposes, and into seven areas lbr pml)ose of building height staodards. DRO This "overlay" zone is related to implementation of thc Specific design standards for this zone Downtown Waterfront Urban Renev,'al Phm. Thc ate contained in tile Downtown Design Review DRO establishes a specific area within which lbrmal Waterfront Urhan Renewal Plan. Overlay Design Review shall take phlce (DWURP, Exhibit -G") In addilion to thc Site Phln Review to ensnre that the design policies and standm ds el'the process, "Design Review" ina?, be plan are can'ied out. necessai? 1'oi' lID) projecl thai alters or has a significaol effect on tile visual appearance, character, ftmciion, or othcr sensol3' component of the area enclosed by file DP..O boundary Such chaoges nlay Dc as major as the construction ora new braiding, or as simple as a new sign, awning or paint. EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 23 (7O ZONES Description/Intent Min. Standards (SeeTable Z-4) LPO This zone provides lb:- the development of commercial Min. Dev Std: Must meet City's and comnmter parking lots m areas lbund to be suitable adopted parking lot Limited Parking for those uses but not pe:Tnitted by the underlying zone. development Overlay slandards Application: The provisions of this district are limited to areas shown Approval: SpcciaI Use Permit on the Bremenon Zoning Map as "Limited Parking required tbr all lots. Overlny' and are intended to supplemerd the provisions of lhe underlying zone. Allowed Lots: Permitted Uses: Class "A" lot (Special Use Permit) 1. Surfitce parking lots for off:street parking Class "C" lots may also be 2 AccessoQ' lhcilities nccessmT lbr the proper apl)roved by SUP, subject to function or design of the lot, including parking additional criteria and a rune limit of meters, ir~stmctiomll/directional signing, nc) longcr than live years Ii'om date of fencing, and landscaping, approval Applicant then has the option to: Development Standnrds: I. l.,ats shall be only for the parking of vehicles m (a) Apply Ibr time extension as an daily use and shall not include commercial amcndmetll to thc SUP; vehicles, impound lots, or other sturagc. (b) Apply it):- a SUP for a pemmncnt 2. Lots must be developed in accordance with the Class "C" paved lot; or City's Class "A" parking Icl standards, unless (c) Cease Ibc use and remove ail al)proved as a "conn'nuler parking IcC. imln uvcments ~'lom the site. 3. A Class "C" commuter lot may be approved it' (a) It is provided lbr long-tetra commute~ parking by visitors, employees, fen7 commulers, or similar commulers (b) It will nol be used lbr customer or client parking or other i~on-parking land use (c) Parking lees ,,:'ill be charged by Ibc da?.'. week. month or other period which, in no case, tony be sho~.cr than eight houls. (d) It ,.'.'ill be fenced or ethel;vise secured 4. A Class "C" lot m% be approved with a g~avd or simihu' surface only il" (a) 1'he need is temponaT and l'ol' a period not longer than live yeal's~ and/or (b) Thc proposed site is in a transilional m crt m;d ,,,.'ill [ikcly be needed for nc:,. development or a dillk:rcnt use xxithin five years 21.02.060 LOT REQUIREMENTS TABLE. Table Z-4 provides a EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 24 single-table summary of the basic lot development requirements for all major zones. This table does not include the FM, WS, URD, DRO, and LPO Special Purpose zones. Refer to Table Z-3 for information about those zones. Z-4LOT REQUIREMENTS ALLOWED 2 3 MIN, MIN ZONES RESID. I FRONT SIDE REAR LOT LOT MAX MAX Setback Sctback Setback DENSITY SIZE WIDTH HEIGHT COVERAGE se4 1-3 20 ft. 10 ft. 15 fi. 13,000 60 fi. 30 fl.. 25 % DU/Ac. s.f. sF2 1-8 20 ft. 10 ft. 15 ft. 9,000 50 fl. 30 ft. 30% DU/Ac. s.f. SF-3 3_8 1 5 ft. 2 DU/Ac. DR 3-8 15 fl. 25 ft. 15 fl. 4,000 40 ft. 30 ft. 40 % DU/Ac. s.f. MF 8-18 10 ft. 25 ft. 20 ft. 3,000 30 ft. 40 fl. 50 % DU/Ac. s.f. CBR 8-18 10 fl. 25 fi. 15 fl. 3,000 30 fi. 30 fl. 50 % DU/Ac. s.f. MR 8-44 10 ft.2 5fi. 3 10ft. 5,000 40ft. 120 ft. 60% DU/Ac. s.f. EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 25 EX-C.JRC - Z©ning Diskette - 5/!7/9, HD 8-44 10 ft. 25 ft. ~ 10 ft. 5,000 40 ft. 120 ft. 60 % DU/Ac. s.f. PO ....... 10 ft. - ......20 ft. - ............. 30 ft. 45 5 m~ ....... lOft. - ......20 ft. - ............. 30fi, 30% 5 GB ....... 20 ft. . ............. - ............. 60 5 5 SC 6 ..................... - ...... 4 ....... 6 ....... 6 ....... 6 ....... 6 4 4 BC .......................................... 120 ft. 100 % BP ....... 20 ft. - ........................... 30 ft. 50 % 5 5 n, ....... 20 ft. - ........................... 40fi. 50% 5 5 m ....... 20 ft. - ........................... 40 ft. 100 % 5 5 MX 8-44 10 ft. - ...... - ...... -~3,000 30 ft. 30 ft. 50 % DU/Ac. 5 s.f. PS ....... 30 fl. 30 ft. 30 Base density ranges do not include additional incentive "bonus" densities that ma'~ bc oWered All garages and ca~ports shall maintain a [:ront setback of 20 l~ct. Zero l~ot Line developn~ent shall add the nom~ally-)cquired side x ard to thc opposite side of lhc lot ZI.L development along a rear properly linc may be applovcd only through thc PUID process EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 26 Development is subject to the same setback that is required on the residential side of the lot line lbr any development abutting a residential zoue. Structures higher than two sto~ les or 30 ft (whichever is higher) shall double the setback when abutting any other residential zone. A 10 lt. setback is required l?om an?.' residential zone Development within this zone shall be consistem with a master plan approved through thc PUD process An individual building may not exceed 5,000 sq.ft, in this zone 21.02.270 LAND USE TABLES. Table Z-5 (Land Use Tables) includes a listing of all major zones and a list of the land uses that may be approved in each. Each box on the table indicates the type of approval required for each use, as follows: A The use is allowed outright as a principal use. SUP The use is allowed subject to approval of a Special Use Permit. PUD The use is allowed only within an approved Planned Unit Development. No Symbol The listed use is NOT PERMITTED in that zone. Z-5 LAND USE TABLES CATEGORIES: 1. Residential 2. Other Lodging 3 Entertainment / Cuhure 4. Medical & Social Services 5 Recreation & Health 6. Other Public / Quasi-public 7. Government & Utility Sc~wices 8. Eating & Drinking 9. O~hcr Retail Business 10. Personal Services I I. Business Services 1 2. Auto / Transportation 13. Construction Related 14. ludustria[ / Mamtfilcturing MEANING OF SYMBO A The use is al SUP The use is s PUD The use is al Unit Develo No Symbol The listed u EXHIBIT "C' - PAGE 27 Uses allowed SF SF SF L -- oy zone I 2 3 DR MF CBR MR HD PO NB 1. RESIDENTIAL Single-unit Dwelling --- Detached A A ,A. A A A PtJI) PUD Single-unit Dwelling --- Attached (ZLL) A A A A A A I~lJI) PUD Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) A A A A A A Duplex (Two dwelling units in one bldg.) A A A A A Triplex (Tl-a'ee dwelling units in one bldg) SUP A A A A Multiple-unit Structure (4 or more units) SUP A A A Townhouse (attached units on own Ions) SLJP A SUP A A Manufactured Home ou Individual Lot A A A A A Manufactured Home ?ark I'UI) PUl) PUD Pr,q) l'tJI) Residential --- as a seconda~ use. A A A A A Boarding/Rooming House SUP SUP SUP SUP A A A A Foster Home A A A A A A A A A A 2. OTHER LODGING Convalescent / Rest Home SUP :DUI> A SUP Day Care Facility (13 or more -- all ages) DUI~ SUP SUP DUI> DUI~ SUP SUP S1,Jl) SUP SUP Day Care Facility (12 or fcwcr -- all ages) A A A A A A A A A A Group Residential Facility --- Class I SUP SUP SlIP SUP SLJP SUP SUP SUP SUP Group Residential Facility --- Class II SUP SUP >;UP SUP Bed & Breakfast SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP A A A A Hotel or Motel Residential Hotel or llm {,weekly/monthly) SU? SUP 3. ENTERTAINMENT/ CULT URE Theater (Perfo~raing atls or motion piclttt'c) SUP Theater --- drive-in Adult Business (sec definition) EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 28 SF SF SF Uses allowed ~,~,u.~ zone I 2 3 DR MF CBR MR HD PO NB Video/Pinball Arcade t Bowling Lanes Pool / Billiard Facility Youth or Teen Center (social/recreational) SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP SIJP SUP SU? Senior Center (social/recreational) S[JP SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP A Community or Neighborhood Center SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP A SUP Dance Hall or Multi-pni~pose Hall Clubhouse, Frat. Lodge, or similar SHI> StJP S[JP SLJP SUP SUP A 4' MEDICAL & SOCIAL SVCS. Hospital Medical -- Out-patient Clinic SUP A SUP Medical Services (diagnostic, ENT, etc.) SUP A SUP Medical Laboratory SUP A Veterinarian & Animal Hospital Animal Boarding Kennel Social Smwice Facilities SUP S[JP S[JP A SUP Welfare & Other Cha itible S,,cs. / F~ c s SUP SIJP SUP A SUP Detoxification Ceutcr & similar facilities SUP SUP 5, RECREATION & HEALTH Golf Course SUP SUIT SUP Gymnasium or similm- hcility StJl> Y, UP SUP SUP A SUP ' Indoor Athletic/Recreation Facility SUP SUP SUP :SUP A SUP Tennis or Swim Club (or similar facility) SUP Sill' SUP StJP S[]P SUP SUP SLIP m Weight Control and Aerobics SUP SIJP SUP A SUP Tanning Salon, Spa, and similar uses SIIP SUP S/JP A Park, Playground, or Rec. Area & Fac's SUP SUP SUP SUP StJP NkJI~ SUP SUP A A Stadium, Athletic Field or Sports Complex StJP 5;IJP 5;[JI> S[JP 551JP SUP EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 29 SF SF SF Uses allowed -- by zone I 2 3 DR MF CBR MR HD PO NB Rifle and Pistol Range 6: OTHER PUBLIC/ QUASI-PUBLIC Public Schools (see "?S" zone) Private Educ. Facilities (see "PS" zone) SUP SUP SUP SUP SUF SUP SUP SUP A Religious Worship & Related Facilities SUI> SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP SUP Library SUI~ SUP S[JP SUP SUP A A A A Cemetery SUP SUP StJP Museum -- in designated historic building StJl> SUI> :SUP S[JV N[J}~ A A A A A duseum -- other SUI> SUP SUI) SUP SUP Put Gallery (2,000 sq.R. or smaller) A A A A A Art Gallery (larger than 2,000 sq.li.) SUP SUP SUP SUP 7. GOVERNMENT & UTILITY SERVICES Law Enforcement & Fire Facilities SUP SUP StJI~ SlJl> SU? S/Jl~ SUP SUF Equipment & Materials Storage Yard Water, Sewer, Stormdrain Facilities A A A A A A A A A A Sewage Treatment Facilities Utility Substation SU1T SUP StJP SUP StJI) SUP SUP SUP SUP StJP Cormnunication Pultenna/Relay Towcr SUP SUI) StJI> SUP SUI> StJl> SUI> NI. Jp SEJP SUP Antenna',rower (non~commercial) SI. JI~ SUP SUI) SUi> ' SUP S[Jt~ SUI> SUI> SUP SUP 8. EATING & DRINKING Restaurant/Cafe (2,500 sq.fi, or larger) S[JI> Restaurant/Cate (Under 2,500 sq.l~.) SUI~ SUP SUP SUP A Fast Food Restanrant (no drive41~u~ongh) SUP EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 30 SF SF SF Uses allowed -- Dy zone I 2 3 DR MF CBR MR lID PO NB Fast Food Restaurant (with drive-through) Food/beverage Take-out (no inside seating) SUP SU? SIJP A A Donut Shop, Baked Goods -- rctail A A Delicatessen SUP SUP SUP A A Drinking Place --- with entertainment Drinking Place --- without entertainment SUP 9, OTHER RETAIL BUSINESS Market - general (7,000 sq.R or larger) Market - convenience (Under 7,000 sq ri) A Any business with accessoi.~ gasoline sales SUP Specialty Food Sales SUP Liquor Store Drug Store/Phm'macy SUP SUF' A Furniture & Appliance Sales & Leasing Music systems, Instruments, and related Pre-recorded Movie/Music sales and remal Book store (newspapers, magazines, related) SUP S[JP SUP A Stationery, Paper Products, Office supplies SUP A Antiques and Second Hand Goods SUP SUP Sporting Goods -- sales and services Clothing (incl. shoes, hats, unilbnns..) Department Store (variety retail) Factm3, Outlet (accessol~ to on-site mfg.) Jewch'y, Clocks, Watches and related Flowers, Gifts and Greeting Cards >;UP SUP SUP A Pipes, Tobacco and related products A Toys, Hobbies, Arts and Craris A EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 31 SF SF SF Uses allowed b_v zone I 2 3 DR MF CBR MR HO PO NB Cameras and Photo Supplies and Selwices SUP A Glasses & Optical Goods and Selvices SUP A 10; PERSONAL SERVICES Laun&3, & D~y Cleaning Scl",,iccs SUP SUP Self-service LaundlT (laundromat) SUP SUP SUP A Non-auto Repair (furniture, appliances, crc) A Small Engine Repair Personal Apparel Repair/Alterations A A A A A Hair Care and Personal Grooming SUP SUP SUP A Tatooing, Body Piercing and related SUP A Photographic & ga't Studio SUP S/JP SUP A A Funeral Services SUP SUP SUP Personal/Family Counseling Sm-Aces A A A A A Personal Services --- other than listed SUP SUP SUP SUP A Home Occupations (subject to guidelines) A A A A A A A A A A 11. BUSINESS SERVICES Banking & Other Financial Services A Insurance and Investment Services A A A A A Real Estate, Title, Escrow and similm- svcs. A A A A A Accounting, Tax t rep. and similar svcs. A A A A A Copying, Mailing, FAX, and similar svcs. A A ,5 A A Office/Business Assistance Services A A A A Communications/Broadcasting Studio SUP Properly Mgmt. & Maim. Svcs Ofl'~ces A A A A A Property Main. Svcs. with supply stot age SUP SUP SUP Consultants (ga'ch., Planning, Design, etc) A A A A Computer assistance, training & repair svcs A A A A A EXHIBIT "C' - PAGE 32 SF SF SF Uses allowed -- by zone I 2 3 DR MF CBR MR HD PO NB General Olt~ces (other than listed above) A A A A SUP I2. AUTO / TRANSPORTATION Auto, Track, Trailer and RV Sales & Selx'ice Motorcycle & Bicycle Sales & Selwice Automobile, Motorcycle, Bicycle rental Truck, Trailer. RV rental Marine Craft Sales and SelMce Tires, Batteries, & related sales and se~-~'iccs Other Auto & Marine Accessories Gas Station (inct related se~wices) Automotive/Marine Painting & Detailing Car Wash (self-selwice or automated) Non-accessory Parking (also see LI~O zone) SUP Commuter Parking (also see LPO zone) SUP Parking Structure A A A Auto Impound Lot Motor Freight Transportation Facility Marine Freight or Passenger Temunal Bus Passenger Terminal SUP Bus Maintenance and/or Storage lhcility 13~ CONSTRUCTION RELATED Construction Sep~'iccs Office A A A Construction Services xvith Yard General Hardware Sales and Services SUP Lumber & other Building Materials salcs Heating, Plumbing, A/C Equip & Setwiccs Electrical Supplies and Smwices EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 33 SF SF SF Uses allowed -- by zone 1 2 3 DR MF CBR MR HD PO NB Paint, Glass, Interior Decor ~,cml~ct, drapes) Nm-sery & Garden Supplies Greenhouse (primarily retail sales) Greenhouse (primarily wholesale) 14~ INDUSTRIAL / MFG. Automotive Manufacturing/Assembly Rec. Vehicle and Trailer Manufactnring Marine Crai~ & Rela~ed Manufacturing Manufactured Homes -- Mfg. & Assembly Manufactured Home Sales Lot Wood, Lumber and Paper Milling Paper Products Manufacturing Wood Products Mfg. (furniture, cabinets..) Electrical & Electronics Products IVlfg. Wholesaling of Products Penniued in Zone Warehousing --- General Mini-warehousing (small-unit storage) Research, Development & Testing Svcs. SUP Professional / Scientific Instrument Mfg. Printing, Publishing & Related Selwices A Paints & Allied Products Mfg. or Processing Electrical Machinery & Equip. Ml'g. Apparel and other Textile Products Mfg. Drags, Chemicals & related Mfg. Soap, Cleaning Products Mfg, Food Products Mfg Machinel7 & Metal Products Mfg Machine Shop -- general pul?osc Recycling Center EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 34 SF SF SF Uses allowed -- by zone I 2 3 I)R ~ c~g ~tg ~tl) Po ~ Recycling Collection Station Recycling Collection Station (Limited) * StJP SUP SUP SUP A A Junk Yard Petrolemn bulk Storage & Tet-minals * Allow only when it meets all design standards. 21.02.280 UNLISTED USES. (a) Any land use that is NOT mentioned in Tables Z-3 or Z-5 shall be considered an "Unlisted Use". (b) If the Unlisted Use is clearly similar to a use that is listed in Tables Z-3 or Z-5, the Director may make a v/ritten administrative determination as to which zone(s) and through which approval process the Unlisted Use may be permitted. (c) If the Director finds no similar uses already listed, finds the proposed use to be sensitive or controversial, finds the use to have potentially adverse impacts, or is unable to arrive at a clear administrative determination, the requested use shall be considered for approval by the Planning Commission through the Special Use Permit process. EXHIBIT "C" - PAGE 35