HomeMy WebLinkAbout2927 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, approving the preliminary plat and
planned unit development (file No. BP03-00213).
WHEREAS, the City has received a Preliminary Plat application for 1207
Campbell Way from Tiferet LLC; and
WHEREAS, On March 16, 2004, the Administrative Hearing Examiner held an
open record heating on the application pursuant to BMC 21.02.855; and
WHEREAS, the Administrative Hearing Examiner has entered findings,
conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council dated March 26, 2004 Council's
acceptance and approval; NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the findings,
conclusions and recommendation of the Administrative Heating Examiner attached as Exhibit
"A" and approves the preliminary plat and planed unit development for 1207 Campbell Way (file
No. BP03~00213) subject to the proposed conditions contained in Exhibit "A."
SECTION2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force
immediately upon its passage.
(~.~_ PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington this~g~
day of /'~ ,2004.
(~ l~ '~~DARENNYGRE~sident
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:) //~ ~j.__~_~
U-~'J-(5~5~7Interim City Clerk
R:\LEGAL~Resolutions\Community Development\Tiferet PUDdoc
1
Tiferet Preliminary Plat and PUD
BEFORE THE HEARINGS EXAMINER !.; -=. ,? .:
FOR THE CITY OF BREMERTON :
In the Matter of the Application of NO. BP03-00213
Campbell Way Townhomes
Tiferet LLC,
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS
For Approval of a Subdivision & Planned AND RECOMMENDATION
Unit Development for Campbell Way
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION
The Hearings Examiner recommends to the Bremerton City Council that the request for approval
of a Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) to subdivide .99 acres of land into
14 individual lots in order to construct 14 townhouses at 1207 Campbell Way be GRANTED,
with conditions.
Development of this proposed project is dependent upon state Department of Ecology approval
ora shoreline conditional use permit authorizing a deviation fi'om the view con'idor requirements
under ti~e City's Shoreline Master Program. The Hearing Examiner has approved the request for
a shoreline conditional use, but this approval is not final until Ecology has an opportunity to
review the approval.
SUMMARY OF RECORD
Request
Mark Goldberg of Tiferet LLC (Applicant) requests approval of a Preliminary Plat and a Planned
Unit Development to re-plat an existing 13-lot subdivision on .99 acres into 14 residential lots
for constructing townhouses) The subject property is located at 1207 Campbell Way.
Hearing Date
The Hearings Examiner for the City of Bremerton held an open record hearing on the matter on
March 16, 2004. The City recommended approval at the hearing; the~Applicant expressed
a~eement with the recommended conditions; and, several citizens spoke in favor of the
proposed development. There was no testimony offered in opposition to the proposed
development.
Testimony
The following individuals presented testirnony under oath at the open record hearing:
1. Mr. Robert Grumbach, City of Bremerton Planner
2. Keith Maehlum, Applicant's Representative
~ The subject tax parcel (3976-028-010-0003) was platted into 13 underlying lots during the creation of the U.S.
Naval Shipyard Addition to Bremerton. Because the proposal presents a significant departure ti-om what now exists
in terms of lot layout and proposed development, it was detemfined by the City that a re-platting of the prope~Xy
should occur. Exhibit ~I, prtge 5.
3. John Lyall
4. John Cox (by letter submitted during the hem'ing)
5. Andy Kosusko, Architect & Planning Commission Member
6. Janine Haynes
7. Julie Meyers
8. Roselee Duffey, Architect
Exhibits
The following exhibits were admitted into the record at the open record hearing:
1. Staff Report
2. Application
3. SEPA Determination
4. Comprehensive Plan Designation
5. Original Lot Lines
6. Geotechnical Report
7. Shoreline Designation
8. Vie~v Corridor Tables
9. Average Lot Width Diagram
10. View Corridor Diagrams
11. Applicant Letter
12. Photographs of Adjacent Lots
13. Ecology Decision on Coutts
14. City Staff Comments from Other Departments
15. Department of Ecology Comments
16. Affidavits of Notice
Upon consideration of the testimony and exhibits admitted at the open record hearing, the
Heatings Examiner enters the following Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation:
FINDINGS
1. The Applicant requests approval of a Preliminary Plat to subdivide .99 acres into 14 lots and
approval of a Planned Unit Development to develop 14 residential townhouses on those lots.
By separate application, the Applicant also requests approval of an administrative Shoreline
Substantial Development peri, it and approval of a Shoreline Conditional Use permit, decided
in a separate Hearing Examiner decision. The subject property is located at 1207 Campbell
Way. The parcel number is recorded as Tax Account Number 3976-028-010-0003. Exhibit
], StaJfReport, page I;Exhibit 2, Application.
2. The City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan designation of the site is General & Professional
Office. Comprehensive Plan goals and policies applicable to the proposal include the
following:
Findings, Conchlsions & Recommen&~tion
Hearings Examine;' for the CitF ef Bremerton
T~£ereI LLC, No BP03-00213
Page 2 (~fl !
· Goal # I Urban Gro,a~.b: "Encourage development in urban ([leas where adequate pablic?cilitiea
and se~3,ic'e~ e¥ist or can be providec/ i, an efficient manner. '
Supporting Policy (3): Accommodate new development with care so that Breme~ton will continue
to be a well-balanced *~most livable city."
Goal ~ 2 Reduce Sprawl: "Redace the inappropriate conve~xion o~ andeveloped land into
sprawling, low<&nsiO, developmem "
Supporting Policy (5): Promote the concept of development clustering to consm~e energy, save
land, lower public costs, reduce sprawl, and provide open space.
· Goal g 4 Housing: "Encoara~e the avai&bilio' efc(#brdable housing to afl economic segments qf
the population ef thia state~ promote a var/e? ef reside,rial densities and housing 07~es. and
encourage prese~,ation ef existing hoasing stock."
Goal g 9 Oven Space and Recreation: "Encourage the retention o[open space and development eF
recreational opportunitie& conse~TCfish and wildl[{e habitat, increase access to mttta'a[ resoarce
lands and water, and develop parks."
SuppoSing Policy (3): Inco~orate into n~w development proposals the provisions of the adopted
Waterfl'ont Access Plan and other plans and regulations that call for shoreline access
improvements, pathways, or other forms of access or facilities linkage.
HOUSING ELEMENT: Goal D (2) New Housing Development: "Provid~ a variety of housing types
and densities to meet changing needs of Bremerton residents."
Suppoiting Policy (3): Stimulate the production of new housing for all income, age, t~amily Wpe
and et~ic groups.
LAND USE ELEMENT: The prop~W is located in the Wheaton Way CmTidor Specific Area Plan
(Element E. 1L E-3 (page 55)). Policies for the Wh~aton Way Con-idor that are applicable to
~mre development include fl~e following.
"Development shall provide interconnecting pedestrian wal13vavs, to the
greatest eWent possible, to encourage walking. '
"Tbe provision ofsqfe andfi'equent pedestrian crossinga ef gZheaton gkO' shall
be a prioriO' and shall not be precluded by the need to move Iwje volumes ef
"A street tree program shall be estab[&hed ? the Ci0' and applied to ali new
and expanding development through their landscape plans. "
· "New curb cats and drivewo,s shall be discouraged, F~vntage roads or
coznmon access points se~wing several ac~acent properties are pr~fetTed. "
"For tranxportation planning parposes, prioriO' shall be given to Plan
Amendments and Rezones that woald increase residential densiO' within one
.fourth mi]e qf the l~qleaton ~IkO' Corridor."
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearings Examb~er for tbe CiO' of Bremerton
Tiferet LLC, No. BP03 00213
Page 3 of11
3. The subject property is zoned Shoreline Mixed Use {SMU) and is designated "Urban
Commercial" within the City's Shoreline Master Plan. Exhibi~ J, StqffReport, page ]. The
Bremerton Shoreline Master Program contains the following goals and policies that are
relevant to a review of these applications:
B: LANDS ADJACENT TO SHORELINES:
Goal: "Encourage uses, densities and development patte~ws that are compatible with
shoreline uses and resom'ce values and that remfbrce the policies pf the Shoreline
Policy B-l: Consider the compatibility of proposed upland uses with those allowed in
each adjacent shoreline environment and with the put-pose and intent of the environment
designation.
Policy B-2: Minimize shoreline impacts from residential development on upland "view"
property, i.e. storm water mn-off, septic drath field seepage, intensification of risks from
geological instability, etc.
Policy B-3: "Adjacent lands" policies shall be implemented tlxrough zoning, subdivision,
short-plat and other land use ordinances, and through mechanisms such as the Capital
Facilities Plan and budget.
Goal: "Protect both the economic viabi]iO, mid resource values pf ltrban shorelines."
Policy C- 1: Protect and presepee natural and/or critical areas through the developed urban
environment and recognize that Shoreline of Statewide Significance priorities also apply
within our urban area.
Policy C-6: Promote aesthetic and view protection through sign control regulations,
appropriate siting and screening requirements, protection of view con'idors, and the use
of architectural standards.
D: PUBLIC ACCESS:
Goal: "Protect and enhance the rights qf the general public to enjq~ the physical and
aexthetic qualities qf the shoreline, n'hile allowing controlled developmen! consistent
with the public interest."
Goal: "Protect and enhance shoreline visual and physical access consistent with
Shm'eline Management Act and Public Trust Doctrine principles. '
Policy D-3: Assure fl~at development, uses and activities on or near the shoreline do not
impair or detract fram the public's access to the water or shoreline.
Policy D-4: Enhance and preselwe public views.
Policy D-6: Prese~x,e. maintain and enhance public access and views afforded by
shoreline st2'eet ends, public utilities, and rights-of-way whenever feasible.
Hearings Eraminer for the CiO' qf'Bremerton
Tiferet LLC, ;Vo BP03-00213
Page 4 of] !
G: HOUSING:
Goal: "Permit residential development in shore/me area,~ and in the vicini~ o~
other critical or sensitive land~ only at denvitiex that can he proper~Y serYed
needed utilities and road~'cO'~ and on~ when within the "carrying cal~acio
the site or general location"
Policy G-4: Encourage the use of Planned Unit Developments and clust~ring.of
development to help protect na~ral t~a~res, prcselA'e opeE space,
physical impacts, and reduce the costs of'utilities and roads
Policy G 5: Require adequate setbacks, buffers, and open spaces as needed for
shoreline development to protect vegetation, na~ra] features, views, and other
aesthetic characteristics
4. The proposed subdivision would contain 14 lots ranging in area from 1,080.8 square feet to
2,522.3 square feet. Setbacks would range tkom 0/bet to 12 feet, with most at a "0" foot
setback. Exhibit 1, Appendix A, Application. The Applicant proposes to construct 14
townhouses on the lots, and provide a public access way from the street to the top of the
bluft2 A "tow~ouse" in the Breme~on Municipal Code means a single-unit structure in a
row of at least t~ee units, each with its own front and rear outside access. Ownership of the
unit includes ownership of the land beneath the unit. The Applicant is proposing a Planned
Unit Development (PUD) of tbu~een townhouses to allow for a reduction in the zoning side
yard setbacks othe~ise required in the SMU zone. However, the BremeOon Municipal
Code does have specific standards/bt a PUD, which are set/b~h in Chapter 21.02. These
requirements address perimeter and interior setbacks; height restrictions; open space
requirements: minimum lot size requirements; and parking requirements. The development,
as proposed, meets the bulk and setback requirements tbr a PUD established in the
BremeOon Municipal Code. There is no density standard in the SMU zone. Exhibit l, page
9: Testimony qf Mr. Grumbach.
5. The subject propeOy is cu~ently undeveloped and contains deciduous trees, shrubs, and
sass. Su6ounding land uses include a neighborhood center and professional building to the
noOh; a duplex to the east; Sheridan City Park to the west; and water to the south. Exhibit 1,
Appendix B. Environmental Checklist.
6. The subject prope~y is cu~ently sewed with electricity, natural gas, re~se se~ice,
telephone, water and sanita~ sewer. Access to the site is available from Campbell
Way/Lebo Boulevard. Exhibit ], Appendix B. En¥ironmenta[ Checldist, Appendix E.
Cert(ficate el' Water Availabilio'.
7. The subject propeOy slopes gently from Campbell Way toward the top of a high b~k m~ne
bluff. The prope~y comains slopes exceeding 100% and qualifies as a Landslide Hazard
Area, Steep Slope and an Erosion Hazardous Area as defined in BMC Section
21.22. 100(b)(3)(v), (4)(ii) and 21.22.100(b)(2). Landslide Hazard Areas and Steep Slopes
require a 50-foot buffer. These areas may not be disturbed unless a geotec~ical repoo is
prepared to assess the consequences cfa reduction in the buffer. The Applicant retained
Consolidated Engineering to prepare a geotec~ical repoO. A repoO was submitted to the
Findings, Conc]usio~ls ~ Recommendation
Healings Examinerjbr the CiO' e[ Bremerton
T~eret LZC. No. BP03-00213
Page 5
City dated August 14, 1998. with supplements dated October 24, 2003 and March 1, 2004.
The geotechnical analysis states that a 25-foot setback for the structures from the top of the
slope is "adequate" for the proposed project. This opinion was based on site visits.
excavations, soil types and a slope stability history. The supplements provide additional
detail as to what may be appropriate within the 25-foot setback. The report states that patio
areas and vegetation are appropriate within the setback area. The report also notes that trees
on the site should be retained as they add to slope stability. Exhibit 6, Geotechnica! Report
and &~£plements.
8. The subject property is covered by the Bremerton Shoreline Master Program. The Master
Program contains a number of site development standards, including height restrictions to
preserve view corridors. The proposed development does not impair views of the water fi-om
upland residential properties, as properties upland are zoned tbr and contained commercial
uses. However, there is no administrative waiver process from the view corridor
requirements, so the proposed development must meet those standards even if there is no
interference with views from other properties.2 The Applicant is requesting a Shoreline
Conditional Use permit to obtain some relief from the view corridor requirements. A
decision on the application will be issued by the Hearing Examiner in a separate document.
The Department of Ecology must review all Shoreline Conditional Use Permits as required
by the Shoreline Management Act, RCW 90.58. The Department of Ecology corm-nented
that it may deny the permit requested for this development proposal. Exhibit 15, Ecolog3,
Letter. However, since the time of the comment the Applicant has elected to expand public
access to the bluft~ The proposed development meets all other requirements of the Shoreline
Master Progrmn, and will meet the view corridor requirements if a Shoreline Conditional Use
permit is approved. See, Shoreline Conditional Use Decision.
9. The City of Bremerton Department of Community Development submitted the proposal to
other City departments for review and comment. The Department of Public Works &
Utilities submitted extensive comments dated December 10, 2003. addressing road
improvements; stonnwater plans; water and sewer availability; and street lighting. The
department noted that water and sewer were available to the site, but that improvements
would be needed to the roads to access the site. The roads have sufficient capacity to provide
for all increased traffic, but road improvements are needed for safe access and for pedestrian
safety. The recommendations of the public works staffwere agreed to by the Applicant as
appropriate conditions to mitigate the impacts from the proposed developrnent. Exhibit 14,
Staff Comments: Testimo~(v 2~ Mr. Maehlum.
10. Several citizens presented testimony at the hearing in support of the proposed project and
approval of the proposed permits. The citizen testimony noted the consistency of this type of
development proposal with the vision expressed in the proposed amendments to the City's
Comprehensive Plan; lauded the availability of affordable housing near a health care facility;
2 Two protbssional architects presented testimony at the hearing suggesting that the Plalming Commission and City
Council review the view con-idor requirements for possible revisions to the Shoreline Master Program. The concern
is that the requirements may act as a barrier to good development proposals because the requirements are difficult to
meet and often do not seem to directly benefit any other properties. Testimony Of Mr Jk~osuko and Ms.
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearings E.¥aminer for the CiO qf Bremerton
Tiferet LLC, No. BP03-00213
Page 6 oil ]
and generally expressed delight at the prospect of additional housing near the downtown
area. Testintony qf 31r. L) all, Mr. Cox, Mr. Kosusko, 3~Is. Haynes, Ms. M<vers and Ms.
D~![t~ '.
11. The City of Breme~xon was designated lead agency for review of enviromnental impacts
caused by the proposal. The City considered an environmental checklist and the
requirements of City ordinances prior to issuance of its threshold determination. The City
Responsible Official determined that the proposal would not have probable significant
enviromnental impacts and issued a Deterlnination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on March 1,
2004. Exhibit 3. SEP~ DNS.
12. Notice of the open record hearing was posted on site on March 1, 2003, mailed to adjoining
property owners on February 27, 2004 and published in The Sun on December, 23 & 30,
2003 in accordance with City of Breme~on notice requirements (BMC 21.02.895). Exhibit
16, Legal Notice Aft~ctavits.
CONCLUSIONS
Jurisdiction
Pursuant to Sections 2.13.070, 2.13.080 and 21.02.855 of the Bremerton Municipal Code
(BMC), the Hearings Examiner of the City of Bremerton has jurisdiction to hold open record
pre-decision hearings on Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development applications and
recommend action to the City Council. The recommendation may be to approve, approve with
conditions, or deny the application. BMC 2.13.110.
Criteria for Review - Preliminary Plat
To recommend approval of a Preliminary Plat, the Hearing Examiner must find that the
application satisfies the criteria for a Preliminary Plat; is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan; and confon~ns to all applicable City development regulations, minimum standards, and
design guidelines. BMC 21.02.885. The criteria for approval of a Preliminary Plat are found in
Chapter 58.17 of the Revised Code of Washington. Pursuant to RCW 58.17.110(2), a
Preliminary Plat application may not be approved unless:
(a) appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and
for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways,
transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation,
playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including
sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for
students who only walk to and frorn school; and
(b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and
dedication.
Hearings £xaminer /br the CiO' qf B~'emerton
Tiferet LLC, No. BP03-00213
Page 7 qf 1 ]
Criteria for Review - Planned Unit Development
1. BMC Section 21.02.480 requires a PUD to conform to the ibllowing general criteria:
(a) The location, design, and uses q~ the PUD shall be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, Bremerton Shoreline Management Program, and with other
applicable plans and ordinances adopted by the CiO'.
(b) 2"he PUD shall be integrated with its surroundings and designed to harmonize
nith existing or proposed development in the neighborhood, h~ the case e£ a
departure in character.fi'om the surrounding land uses, the scale, intensiO: and
design shall adequately reduce the impac! el'the development in such a way that
the project will not be detrimental to the neighborhood
(c) The trc!fflc generated t~ the PUD shall be accommodated sqfely and within the
adopted Levels of Scm'ice.for q(fected streets.
(d) All development will be adequatel3 served by existing or planned facilities and
scm'ices.
(e) The PUD will resuh in an attractive, healtl~fid, efficient and stable environment
for living, shopping, working, and leisare activities.
(t~ The development plan shall make adequate and appropriate provision for the
prese~'ation of the environment, both natural and man-made, and the
conservation of energy.
Conclusions Based on Findings Preliminary Plat
1. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal will provide
additional housing for the City of Bremerton in a location where city services already exist.
The proposed development appears consistent with Bremerton's desire to continue to be a
"most livable city". Findings of Facts Nos. i, 2, 3, 4, 6, lO.
2. The proposal is consistent with identified zoning standards. The proposed subdivision
will create fourteen lots or one for each towr&ouse proposed. The project, as proposed,
meets the bulk and setback requirements of the city code. Findings qfFacts Nos. 1, 4.
3. With conditions, appropriate provision will be made for the public health, safe~ and
general welfare and for all other relevant facts. Conditions of approval will mitigate
traffic impact by requiring frontage improvements. The City conducted enviromnental
review of the proposal and deten~ined that it would not result in significant adverse
envirom~nental impacts. Water, sewer, garbage service, natural gas, electricity and telephone
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearings Examiner for the CiO' of Bremerton
Tiferet LLC No. BP03-00213
Page 8 efl ]
are available to each of the tbur lots. The Applicant will preserve existing vegetation where
possible and will take measures prior to clearing and construction that will mitigate erosion.
The Applicant will provide public access to a shoreline overlook that will enhance access to
the shoreline area. Conditions of approval are necessary to ensure future frontage
improvements are installed, the public access is constructed, and that the concerns of the
public works department are addressed. Findings ef Facts Nos. l, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, lO.
4. The public use and interest will be served by the creation of fora' single-family
residential lots complying with CiO' of Bremerton zoning standards. The proposed plat
will provide increased housing opportunities for residents of Bremenon in a manner
consistent with the criteria for approval of preliminary plats. Findings q£Faet Nos. 1-I l.
Conclusions Based on Findings - Planned Unit Development
1. With conditions of approval, the location, design, and uses of the PUD will be consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan, Bremerton Shoreline Management Program, and with
other applicable plans and ordinances adopted by the City.. Clustering medium-density
residential townhouses is consistent with several goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan
and Shoreline Management Program referenced previously in this report. The land use tables
in the zoning code allow townhouses in the Shoreline Mixed Use Zoning designation; and the
Shoreline Use/Activity Matrix allow residential uses landward of the Ordinary High Water
Mark in the Commercial Shoreline designation. A condition of approval is necessary to ensure
adequate public access is provided. Fiudiugs of Facts Nbs. l, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.
2. The proposed PUl) will be integrated with its surroundings and designed to harmonize
with existing development in the neighborhood. The preservation of open space and the
design of the townhouses integrate well with the mixture of commercial residential
development found in the sun'ounding area. Findings e£Facts Nos. 1, 4, 10.
3. The traffic generated by the PUD can be accommodated safely and within the adopted
Levels of Service for affected streets. Campbell Way and Lebo Boulevard are each well
below capacity tbr traffic flow. The proposed PUD will have only a minor impact on traffic in
the area. Findings of Facts Nos. 9,11.
4. The proposed development will be adequately served by existing facilities and services.
The subject property has City of Bremerton sewer and water available to it. Police and fire
protection is also available. There is a city park ilmnediately adjacent to the subject property.
Thus, any residents of the proposed PUD will have more than adequate services available to
them. Findings ~f'Facts Nos. 5, 6.
5. The PUD will result in an attractive, healthful, efficient and stable environment for living,
shopping, working, and leisure activities. One of the primary benefits of the proposed PUD
is its proximity to shopping and recreation areas. The type of development proposed is highly
desired by a number of citizens due to its proposed attractive nature and proximity to urban
amenities. Findings qfiFacts Nos. 5, 6, 10.
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearings Examiner for the CiO' qf Bremerton
Tiferet LLC, No. BP03-00213
?age 9 ell]
6. The development plan will make adequate and appropriate provision for the
preservation of the environment, both natural and man-made, and the conservation of
energy. One of the challenges of the proposed development is protection of the steep bluff
overlooking the water. The Applicant retained a geotechnical engineer to assess the stability of
the slope and to ascertain if a building could be placed on it without harm to it. The report
found that it would be possible to building without damage to the bluff~ The consultant who
prepared that report now bears responsibility fbr that assessment. In addition to retention of
trees, the careful removal of water from the project area over the bluff will be essential to the
protection of the bluff. The Applicant's proposal to pipe the water over the bluff will help
protect the bluff. With conditions of approval, adverse visual impacts of the pipe could be
avoided. Compliance with the state energy code will help ensure an energy efficient
development. Fimtit~gs p£Facts Nos. 1, 4, 7. 8, 9.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the preceding Findings and Conclusions, the Hearings Examiner recommends
approval of a Preliminahw Plat and Planned Unit Development to subdivide .99 acres into
fourteen lots for the purpose of construction townhomes as described in the application (Exhibit
2, Application & Site Plan), subject to the following conditions:
1. The Planned Unit Developnrent shall constitute a limitation on the use and design of the site
to those uses, desigm and standards that are specifically included in the Planned Unit
Development. Such lirnitation shall remain in effect until the Planned Unit Development is
constructed, or until the preliminary approval expires in which case the previous zoning
automatically returns.
2. Approval of the Planned Unit Development is subject to the Depart~nent of Ecology's final
approval of the conditional use permit. Any conditions set forth in the conditional use permit
shall be deemed conditions for approving the Planned Unit Development.
3. An open space guarantee, which ensures the retention of the open spaces and provides tbr
permanent maintenance of the open space (active and passive), is required per BMC Section
21.02.510 prior to finalizing the Planned Unit Development.
4. Two off-street parking spaces per each dwelling unit shall be provided.
5. A geotechnical engineer is required to inspect the site when excavation for the footings
occurs to determine if the footing designs are adequate. Evidence of the geotechnical
inspection shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development prior to
finalizing building permits.
6. A dedication to the City of approximately 1,083.5 square feet of frontage along Campbell
Way/Lebo Boulevard is required as set forth in the revised site plan received January 26,
2004. A title report is required to accompany the final plat pursuant to RCW 58.17.165.
Hearings Examiner.for the Ci0' qfBremerton
Tiferet LLC, ~¥o. BP03-00213
Page lO o. flI
7. A 5-foot public access easement is required fbr the sidewalk along Campbell Way/Lebo
Boulevard. The City Engineer shall approve the language fbr the easement prior to finalizing
the plat.
8. The private street may be developed according to the City standards fbr a driveway. The
street shall be installed or bonded for prior to finalizing the plat.
9. A public main extension for water services meeting City standards is required to be installed
or bonded for prior to finalizing the plat.
10. The development must meet the Ci~' standards for storm water drainage. Ston~ water
facilities shall be installed or bonded for prior to finalizing the plat. The 8-inch pipe used for
disposing of ston*nwater over the bluff shall be installed in a mariner that reduces visual
impacts of a pipe "hanging" over the bluff'. Methods used may include hiding in vegetation,
painting to blend with the background or ditching to make it less visible.
11. A final Planned Unit Development and plat meeting applicable development standards and
conditions shall be submitted to the City for approval within two years of the date of
preliminary plat approval pursuant to BMC Section 21.02.520(a).
12. Six copies of the Plmmed Unit Development and plat (not Mylar) shall be submitted to the
Department of Community Development for final compliance review.
13. The Director of Community Development shall approve the final Planned Unit Development
prior to finalizing the plat.
14. The Applicant will obtain addresses from Public Works, which will be indicated on the final
plat.
15. A copy of the recorded Planned Unit Development and plat shall be provided to the
Department of Community Development before building peri, nits can be issued.
Decided this ~2_~'day of March 2004.
Theodore Paul Hunter
Hearings Examiner for the City of Bremerton
Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation
Hearings Examiner for the City p/ Bremerto~
Tiferet 2LC No. BP03-00213
Page Il qflll